Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bringing over post #986 by Estelle in the Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26
, italics by me (if I did this wrong please let me know!):

I have some very speculative theories which most people do not want to accept as they have been brainwashed since 3/5/2007 to believe otherwise by the McCanns, the Tapas7 and the media.

But I have been posting on this case since June 2007 when I was in Granada, Spain and happened to watch the McCanns on SkyNews that night.

When I had arrived at the airport that day from China (as I was an Australian on a world trip), I noticed a photo of Madeleine at the airport that she was missing and I felt so sorry for her parents.

But when I saw them on SkyNews, my attitude to them changed as I used to teach body language. My gut feeling was instantly that they were lying.

When I got back to Australia, I did a google search and joined the Mirror Forum to see if anyone else thought they were guilty as most parents are the first suspects and a few of us thought she was dead and not abducted.

I have been posting on this case ever since but not here. However, I post on other cases here. The reason is that what I and others think is so controversial that they have been banned. But I have never been banned from any forum and have been a lurker for a few years. This is because the case is solved as far as I am concerned.

I am not interested in anything that happened on the night of May 3, 2007 except that in my opinion and that of many others, Gerry faked an abduction that night hoping to be seen but not recognised in the dark of the night. IMO Gerry carried a sedated Amelie down those stairs to give his abduction scenario some credence. But later Jane Tanner came up with her version so he went along with that as Martin Smith took some time to go to the PJ with his version of events.

Because of this early speculation in 2007, some of us speculated on an earlier death scenario of Maddie. We then started examining the statements and the discrepancies, the possibility of forged signatures on the creche records and the mobile phone records once the files were released in 2008.

This took several years to work out to put the pieces of the jigsaw together.

I cannot take credit myself for what was found out but the bottom line is that Maddie died earlier that week and a Maddie blonde lookalike substitute also called Madalene (but spelt differently to Madeleine) was already there to take her place at the creche every day of that week. This must be, therefore, a premeditated murder. Gerry took the lookalike to the creche every day with her best friend and forged her father's signature to sign the friend in and signed the lookalike in as his own daughter.

This person who is an expert with mobile phones has been able to prove this but it took him about two years to do so. He is on twitter.com these days as he has been banned on several forums for his research. However he has given all his information and research to the PJ this year.

Lets hope this leads us to the truth!
__________________
Justice for Reeva Steenkamp!
____________________________________________
Unless I have included a link, it is my opinion and only my opinion that I am expressing
Thanks

**********************************************************

VERY intriguing theory! But I have many questions, here are a few:


- If this theory is true, the Tapas 7 would have to have known, wouldn't they? And they all agreed to go along with it?

-Who were the parents of the "look-alike" Maddie? Were they in on it?

- How does one explain the photos of the "real" Madeleine that were taken that week?

- Why wait until the LAST DAY to carry out the fake abduction? If a fake Maddie were being signed into the creche for only a day or two, I can see maybe the staff not getting to know her well enough to know the difference once photos of the real Maddie were released to the public. But nearly a week? Surely someone would have noticed they weren't the same child?

-How did the McCanns explain Maddie's absence during the off-creche hours? I guess if the Tapas 7 were involved there would be no need for this explanation. BUT... if the Tapas 7 were involved, why would they need to fake Maddie going to the creche in the first place? If the Tapas 7 were going to cover for them anyways, why not just claim that they decided to keep Maddie with them the whole time, and decided to only put the twins in the creche?

All my observations and IMO only. I don't see how this theory could possibly be true... is there somewhere I can read more about this? I didn't find anything in the MCCann files.
 
Is there some suggestion that Amaral has falsified evidence in Madeleine's case?
 
haden said:
Yes he was charged in Portugal, first he was arguido, then charged with crime and then found guilty.
So, he is a criminal, known for fiddling with the evidence, this is what he is found guilty of in his own country.
Click to expand...

Amaral was found guilty of giving a false statement, not of tampering with the evidence. These are two different things.
So no, he is not known for fiddling with the evidence.

Making millions out of Madeleine's case was his next step.
<modsnip>
Click to expand...

McCanns also made a nice bit of money out of Madeleine case...
 
Donjeta said:
Is there some suggestion that Amaral has falsified evidence in Madeleine's case?
Click to expand...

No. Only in the case of another missing girl before Madeleine.
Currently, McCanns are suing him for defamation.
But there is another thing, under his lead:
As was the case with the Madeleine investigation, the hunt for Joana was hindered because police failed to seal off the house where she was last seen.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-evidence-separate-missing-child-case.html
 
haden said:
Yes he was charged in Portugal, first he was arguido, then charged with crime and then found guilty.
So, he is a criminal, known for fiddling with the evidence, this is what he is found guilty of in his own country.
As you know, he is very manipulative and vocal, he can say this or that but the fact is that he has been convicted and for me that is enough to move away from anything to do with him.
Making millions out of Madeleine's case was his next step.
<modsnip>
Click to expand...

I didn't see where it said he fiddled with the evidence but could have missed it. Is there another link available Id like to know how, when and where he "fiddled" with the evidence in that other case. There is no evidence he did in this case though correct?
 
~n/t~ said:
I didn't see where it said he fiddled with the evidence but could have missed it. Is there another link available Id like to know how, when and where he "fiddled" with the evidence in that other case. There is no evidence he did in this case though correct?
Click to expand...

falsifying evidence in my books is same as fiddling with evidence

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-evidence-separate-missing-child-case.html

he also failed to do many things in Madeleine's case. one very important currently being the checking the cctvs near the smiths sightings.
if he did this, we would have the cctv of person seen carrying the child.
another thing is he never properly sealed Madeleines apartment, never interviewed the parents using creche that night, if he did he could back then disqualify the Jane Tanner sighting. Also never sent Madeleine's bedsheet to forensics, he failed to investigate many leads, the same ones the Scotland Yard is looking for now.
Why he didn't do it, it reminds questionable!
 
Mystery Girl said:
Bringing over post #986 by Estelle in the Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26
, italics by me (if I did this wrong please let me know!):

I have some very speculative theories which most people do not want to accept as they have been brainwashed since 3/5/2007 to believe otherwise by the McCanns, the Tapas7 and the media.

But I have been posting on this case since June 2007 when I was in Granada, Spain and happened to watch the McCanns on SkyNews that night.

When I had arrived at the airport that day from China (as I was an Australian on a world trip), I noticed a photo of Madeleine at the airport that she was missing and I felt so sorry for her parents.

But when I saw them on SkyNews, my attitude to them changed as I used to teach body language. My gut feeling was instantly that they were lying.

When I got back to Australia, I did a google search and joined the Mirror Forum to see if anyone else thought they were guilty as most parents are the first suspects and a few of us thought she was dead and not abducted.

I have been posting on this case ever since but not here. However, I post on other cases here. The reason is that what I and others think is so controversial that they have been banned. But I have never been banned from any forum and have been a lurker for a few years. This is because the case is solved as far as I am concerned.

I am not interested in anything that happened on the night of May 3, 2007 except that in my opinion and that of many others, Gerry faked an abduction that night hoping to be seen but not recognised in the dark of the night. IMO Gerry carried a sedated Amelie down those stairs to give his abduction scenario some credence. But later Jane Tanner came up with her version so he went along with that as Martin Smith took some time to go to the PJ with his version of events.

Because of this early speculation in 2007, some of us speculated on an earlier death scenario of Maddie. We then started examining the statements and the discrepancies, the possibility of forged signatures on the creche records and the mobile phone records once the files were released in 2008.

This took several years to work out to put the pieces of the jigsaw together.

I cannot take credit myself for what was found out but the bottom line is that Maddie died earlier that week and a Maddie blonde lookalike substitute also called Madalene (but spelt differently to Madeleine) was already there to take her place at the creche every day of that week. This must be, therefore, a premeditated murder. Gerry took the lookalike to the creche every day with her best friend and forged her father's signature to sign the friend in and signed the lookalike in as his own daughter.

This person who is an expert with mobile phones has been able to prove this but it took him about two years to do so. He is on twitter.com these days as he has been banned on several forums for his research. However he has given all his information and research to the PJ this year.

Lets hope this leads us to the truth!
__________________
Justice for Reeva Steenkamp!
____________________________________________
Unless I have included a link, it is my opinion and only my opinion that I am expressing
Thanks

**********************************************************

VERY intriguing theory! But I have many questions, here are a few:


- If this theory is true, the Tapas 7 would have to have known, wouldn't they? And they all agreed to go along with it?

-Who were the parents of the "look-alike" Maddie? Were they in on it?

- How does one explain the photos of the "real" Madeleine that were taken that week?

- Why wait until the LAST DAY to carry out the fake abduction? If a fake Maddie were being signed into the creche for only a day or two, I can see maybe the staff not getting to know her well enough to know the difference once photos of the real Maddie were released to the public. But nearly a week? Surely someone would have noticed they weren't the same child?

-How did the McCanns explain Maddie's absence during the off-creche hours? I guess if the Tapas 7 were involved there would be no need for this explanation. BUT... if the Tapas 7 were involved, why would they need to fake Maddie going to the creche in the first place? If the Tapas 7 were going to cover for them anyways, why not just claim that they decided to keep Maddie with them the whole time, and decided to only put the twins in the creche?

All my observations and IMO only. I don't see how this theory could possibly be true... is there somewhere I can read more about this? I didn't find anything in the MCCann files.
Click to expand...

That theory makes no sense to me. KISS theory applies here. I don't think it was soooo elaborate to produce a fake Madeleine IMO. No offensive to the poster
 
haden said:
No. Only in the case of another missing girl before Madeleine.
Currently, McCanns are suing him for defamation.
But there is another thing, under his lead:
As was the case with the Madeleine investigation, the hunt for Joana was hindered because police failed to seal off the house where she was last seen.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-evidence-separate-missing-child-case.html
Click to expand...

There was zero evidence of a break in. They had a panicked mother claiming "they took her" ... the hotel room was sealed soon enough.
IMO

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
haden said:
falsifying evidence in my books is same as fiddling with evidence

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-evidence-separate-missing-child-case.html

he also failed to do many things in Madeleine's case. one very important currently being the checking the cctvs near the smiths sightings.
if he did this, we would have the cctv of person seen carrying the child.
another thing is he never properly sealed Madeleines apartment, never interviewed the parents using creche that night, if he did he could back then disqualify the Jane Tanner sighting. Also never sent Madeleine's bedsheet to forensics, he failed to investigate many leads, the same ones the Scotland Yard is looking for now.
Why he didn't do it, it reminds questionable!
Click to expand...


evidence to cover up the beating by his colleagues nothing to do with the crime scene. No doubt there were a lot of mistakes done in this case but this is not the first case I've followed where we wished more could have been done by LE. Doesn't necessarily mean what was done should be disregarded.
 
Linda7NJ said:
There was zero evidence of a break in. They had a panicked mother claiming "they took her" ... the hotel room was sealed soon enough.
IMO

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Click to expand...

What hotel room?
There were in the resort, they rented an apartment, not in a hotel.
And no, the room was not sealed, GNR officers walked in there for days, nothing was sent to forensics and they allowed resort cleaners to clean the apartment before they took DNA evidence from the room
 
haden said:
What hotel room?
There were in the resort, they rented an apartment, not in a hotel.
And no, the room was not sealed, GNR officers walked in there for days, nothing was sent to forensics and they allowed resort cleaners to clean the apartment before they took DNA evidence from the room
Click to expand...

I hate doing this but I'd like a link to your claim if possible. For my own knowledge. TIA
 
haden said:
My god what kind of a mind set one should be in to believe there was a Madeleine lookalike who played Madeleine while McCanns were on holiday and every single of their friends and relatives and anyone seeing Madeleines photos from back home would lie for the parents..

Oh, give me a break! What kind of medication can make you believe in this!
Click to expand...

This is a crime message board.posters write about all kinds of theories. No need to absorb it all..jmo and,since this is an unsolved case at this moment, all theories are wide open. moo jmo Including the one which has an intruder coming in and taking MM.... just some thoughts,jmo moo
 
liz b. said:
This is a crime message board.posters write about all kinds of theories. No need to absorb it all..jmo and,since this is an unsolved case at this moment, all theories are wide open. moo jmo Including the one which has an intruder coming in and taking MM.... just some thoughts,jmo moo
Click to expand...

I agree. IMO, as outlandish and even ridiculous as some theories may sound, I still like to investigate all of them... you never know what insight may come from them!
 
haden said:
What hotel room?
There were in the resort, they rented an apartment, not in a hotel.
And no, the room was not sealed, GNR officers walked in there for days, nothing was sent to forensics and they allowed resort cleaners to clean the apartment before they took DNA evidence from the room
Click to expand...

That is not true. Here, under this link you can see the photos, showing the forensic technicians, working at the apartment 5a, fourth of May 2007.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html

Here: http://www.mccannfiles.com/id155.html you have the statement of the PJ officer, responsible for taking the photos. I'll quote a bit of it.

After the arrival of the witness and his colleague Vitor Martins the scene was isolated and the inspection began, namely the collection of statements and inspection of the scene, the respective reports that were subsequently attached to the process documents.

The witness carried out finger print testing on the inside of the bedroom window, where the girl had been sleeping, leaving other examinations for the following day given that on that occasion these tests could not be carried out in the best technical conditions. For this reason, the apartments and the surrounding area were sealed off, watched over by the GNR officers who remained on site.
Click to expand...

Bolded by me. It was sealed and forensically examined.
 
Mystery Girl said:
I agree. IMO, as outlandish and even ridiculous as some theories may sound, I still like to investigate all of them... you never know what insight may come from them!
Click to expand...

Agree but who is this friend who so happened to be available with a daughter with the same name to cover up for Gerry. Also children are not stupid. I seriously doubt the fake child would pretend to be Madeleine without a slip up. IMO
 
Hexe said:
That is not true. Here, under this link you can see the photos, showing the forensic technicians, working at the apartment 5a, fourth of May 2007.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html

Here: http://www.mccannfiles.com/id155.html you have the statement of the PJ officer, responsible for taking the photos. I'll quote a bit of it.



Bolded by me. It was sealed and forensically examined.
Click to expand...

5th May is more than 24 hours later.
Bedsheets were not sent for forensic testing but washed by the cleaners, apartment cleaned by cleaners.
Officers did not wear protective clothing so could contaminate the crime scene. Which they did, an officer finger print was found on the window, while the Scotland Yard searched the whole world database to find out to whom this mysterious fingerprint belongs. I remember this report, they were saying it belonged to a man from Northen Europe :floorlaugh:
Also there was a mention in media about blood stained footprint, later shown to be by an officer. Not sure if the British media made the blood stained footprint up, I personally would not believe in that.
Even later, 'protecting by GNR officers' meant they could walk in apartment without protective clothing.
Here one link
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-police-ruined-forensic-evidence-bedroom.html

Officers in protective clothing are not from this crime scene and not from May 4. IMO.
A woman officer taking fingerprints without protective clothing is the only scene from 5A.
Can you give a proof that the officers in white are from 4th May and from 5A?
 
haden;9909262
No, he was not ONLY accused, he was CHARGED and found guilty
Still completely irrelevent to the McCann's guilt or innocence. He is hardly the only person who believes the McCann's know exactly what happened to Madeleine and exactly what happened to her body.

You can completely discredit him any way you want, it hardly makes them innocent.
 
Mystery Girl said:
Bringing over post #986 by Estelle in the Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26
, italics by me (if I did this wrong please let me know!):

I have some very speculative theories which most people do not want to accept as they have been brainwashed since 3/5/2007 to believe otherwise by the McCanns, the Tapas7 and the media.

But I have been posting on this case since June 2007 when I was in Granada, Spain and happened to watch the McCanns on SkyNews that night.

When I had arrived at the airport that day from China (as I was an Australian on a world trip), I noticed a photo of Madeleine at the airport that she was missing and I felt so sorry for her parents.

But when I saw them on SkyNews, my attitude to them changed as I used to teach body language. My gut feeling was instantly that they were lying.

When I got back to Australia, I did a google search and joined the Mirror Forum to see if anyone else thought they were guilty as most parents are the first suspects and a few of us thought she was dead and not abducted.

I have been posting on this case ever since but not here. However, I post on other cases here. The reason is that what I and others think is so controversial that they have been banned. But I have never been banned from any forum and have been a lurker for a few years. This is because the case is solved as far as I am concerned.

I am not interested in anything that happened on the night of May 3, 2007 except that in my opinion and that of many others, Gerry faked an abduction that night hoping to be seen but not recognised in the dark of the night. IMO Gerry carried a sedated Amelie down those stairs to give his abduction scenario some credence. But later Jane Tanner came up with her version so he went along with that as Martin Smith took some time to go to the PJ with his version of events.

Because of this early speculation in 2007, some of us speculated on an earlier death scenario of Maddie. We then started examining the statements and the discrepancies, the possibility of forged signatures on the creche records and the mobile phone records once the files were released in 2008.

This took several years to work out to put the pieces of the jigsaw together.

I cannot take credit myself for what was found out but the bottom line is that Maddie died earlier that week and a Maddie blonde lookalike substitute also called Madalene (but spelt differently to Madeleine) was already there to take her place at the creche every day of that week. This must be, therefore, a premeditated murder. Gerry took the lookalike to the creche every day with her best friend and forged her father's signature to sign the friend in and signed the lookalike in as his own daughter.

This person who is an expert with mobile phones has been able to prove this but it took him about two years to do so. He is on twitter.com these days as he has been banned on several forums for his research. However he has given all his information and research to the PJ this year.

Lets hope this leads us to the truth!
__________________
Justice for Reeva Steenkamp!
____________________________________________
Unless I have included a link, it is my opinion and only my opinion that I am expressing
Thanks

**********************************************************

VERY intriguing theory! But I have many questions, here are a few:


- If this theory is true, the Tapas 7 would have to have known, wouldn't they? And they all agreed to go along with it?

-Who were the parents of the "look-alike" Maddie? Were they in on it?

- How does one explain the photos of the "real" Madeleine that were taken that week?

- Why wait until the LAST DAY to carry out the fake abduction? If a fake Maddie were being signed into the creche for only a day or two, I can see maybe the staff not getting to know her well enough to know the difference once photos of the real Maddie were released to the public. But nearly a week? Surely someone would have noticed they weren't the same child?

-How did the McCanns explain Maddie's absence during the off-creche hours? I guess if the Tapas 7 were involved there would be no need for this explanation. BUT... if the Tapas 7 were involved, why would they need to fake Maddie going to the creche in the first place? If the Tapas 7 were going to cover for them anyways, why not just claim that they decided to keep Maddie with them the whole time, and decided to only put the twins in the creche?

All my observations and IMO only. I don't see how this theory could possibly be true... is there somewhere I can read more about this? I didn't find anything in the MCCann files.
Click to expand...

Oh, that is so interesting! But then what did they do with the "fake Maddie" after the real Maddie's disappearance?

It could also be that only one or a few of the Tapas are involved. For example, Dave. I don't think they would take the chance of all 7 being involved, that is way too risky.

I think at least one of the 7 have to be involved. If it's true that they kept Maddie in a freezer, possibly in an empty apartment somewhere, that would have had to have been arranged beforehand.

I am thinking that it's Kate, Gerry, and Dave.

MOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 154 more.
Total: 3,313 (members: 155, guests: 3,158)

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
3,158
Total visitors
3,313
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,295
Messages
17,966,825
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top