Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Madeleine McCann: Vector Addition.

page: 2
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Having looked at this case for some time now and gone back and forth over it, in my mind, and knowing what I have learned about the case, I would be very tempted, if I were in the Leicestershire Police Department, I would be very tempted to put a tail on the McCanns, very discretely, for a period of a couple of months, or over the summer. Just to take note of where they go, on solitary walks, etc., or with the children, on special days.

I would then contact Martin Grime, the dog handler, and ask him to take his cadaver dog, Eddy, along some of those same walks, particularly if the McCanns had demonstrated an unusual interest in any particular place, where a body might be buried and not disturbed.

It is the political dimension of this story which makes me think that it might be possible that British government services arranged for the clandestine repatriation of Madeleine McCann and that she might be buried in or near Rothsley, Leicestershire.

If the McCanns are responsible for concealing their daughter's body, . . . if . . . , I don't think they could have done it without help. If the helper was the government, then there is hardly a limit to the kind of help that could have been given.
edit on 4-4-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 8 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I just want to bump this thread a little by elaborating on a couple of items

I used to know a young man who was interested in motorcycles. He had a nice motorcycle himself and was full of everything that youth is famous for. He was good looking, had pretty girlfriends and lots of fun.

Talking to me one day about motorcycles, he mentioned that he was fascinated by biker gangs, the outlaw image and the fun and adventures they had. I didn't say he was an intellectual giant.

I was alarmed when I heard about this unsuspected interest of his. I cautioned him in a very serious way. Here is what I said.

Don't associate with criminals.

Even if you have no intention of committing a crime yourself, you could easily become an accessory to a crime that you didn't even know had occurred. You could be asked to hold a package for a friend, or to deliver something for someone, or to say something to someone, or to do a small innocuous seeming favor that would put you into a chain of criminal events. Once in, you could never get out . . . without a great deal of difficulty.

I'm not sure if these sorts of cautions are delivered at Eton. Probably not. Who at Eton would be likely to associate with criminals? I mean overtly.

The Foreign Office, on the other hand, has communications, at the very least, with a very large number of people, great and small, whose activities beg for and most often receive, careful scrutiny.

There is very little chance of the Foreign Office being duped into the role of "accessory after the fact" of a crime.

www.telegraph.co.uk...


A Foreign Office spokesman said that he understood the girl's parents had gone to have dinner once their children were asleep last night, but returned to check on them only to find the girl had gone missing.

"They reported it straight away," he said, adding that consular assistance was being offered.


Suppose the above quoted statement were not in fact true? Suppose it were a lie from start to finish. What would be the effect of a lie like that? What purpose would it serve to tell such a lie, or have it told by an authoritative source like the Foreign Office?

Any criminal who could enlist an authoritative institution like the FO to endorse his own mendacious version of events, at the outset of a criminal investigation, would create an avenue of support down which it would be possible for a parade of the great and good and rich, to rally to his aid, confident that such support was founded on an accurate assessment of the facts of the case by the Foreign Office.

I think the effect of such a lie would also be comprehensively damaging to any criminal investigation of a child's disappearance. A criminal, who could succeed in having such a lie told, would be well advanced in throwing the authorities off his trail.

How so?

Well, most people don't like being told they are wrong. I know I don't like it. But it happens from time to time. It's humiliating, but I console myself with my overall batting average on "being right". I don't do too badly, but it really doesn't matter much, because nobody really cares much about what I think or what I say.

It's different for the Foreign Office, though. It's different for anyone with a public profile and reputation, whose business depends very greatly on whether or not they are perceived as being right all the time or very nearly all the time.

If a criminal could succeed in getting the support of very prominent members of a society, in significant numbers, and also have the imprimature of the British Foreign Office on his version of events, the efforts of police agencies to swim against this tide of approval, might be overpowered.

By what?

Overpowered by the instinct for self preservation not just of one criminal, but of a significant number of powerful members of society and important members of one of the most powerful and deadly institutions ever created on this planet, the British Foreign Office.

If a criminal were to ride the wave of such support and parley it into the support of hundreds of thousands of people who contributed millions of pounds based on a conviction of the criminal's innocence, a conviction endorsed by statements of the British Foreign Office, a veritable Gordian knot of self interest would be constructed against the efforts of criminal investigators. It would be impossible for them to prevail.

Now, speaking of the case of Madeleine McCann, I quote an earlier post:


10:XX - 11:00PM: Information and a request for assistance in the matter of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann moved from Portugal to a ministerial level in the UK where discussions took place and a decision was made to issue an alert to the press, with Foreign Office attribution, for a child who had been reported missing less than an hour before.


This can't be far wrong. A lot must have happened in that time period.

Just speculating here, but, it is likely that one of the Tapas 9, phoned the UK from Portugal and spoke to a friend with a strong connection to the the Labour Party.

A chain of communications, of indeterminate length, but probably of not more than two or three links, would have extended itself to the upper levels of the Labour Party.

To what level exactly?

This is a tricky area. It's almost like a trick shot in snooker.

Exercising caution, I would say that communication, the cue ball, travelled until it knocked one or two balls along, to a point where an important ball was struck.

The important ball would be one that had a potential, if stroked properly, of coming together with a ball in Government. Now these balls in Government can go in any number of directions, so they have to be stroked carefully with knowledge of just which ball is likely to meet a ball or balls with enough weight to influence what the Foreign Office does. What level is that?

But enough of snooker.

I'm saying that it would be a time consuming and complex task for a citizen of the UK, on the ground in Portugal, to get Foreign Office approval for a press release of any kind.

To do it in less than an hour, on subject matter of which the Foreign Office is in complete ignorance, is impossible.

Surely that is the case.

If it is not the case and it was actually done, how was it done? I'd like to know that.

If it was not done, the appearance is that Labour Party members, must have had knowledge of and discussed the disappearance of Madeleine McCann hours, perhaps as many as twenty-four hours prior to the frantic declaration by Kate McCann on May 3, 07, that Madeleine was missing.



edit on 8-4-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I'm still working on things I want to put into this thread, but while they simmer, I thought I would throw in a blogger-style post.

One of the most irritating phenomena associated with the quest to solve the mystery of what happened to Madeleine McCann, is the presence in the public discussion of this case of reporters and commentators from the mainstream media who resolutely avoid mentioning established facts of the case that cast doubt on the version of events related by Kate and Gerry McCann.

The most important of these facts is the detection of the scent of death in Ocean Club 5A by highly trained sniffer dogs brought in by English police cooperating with their Portugese counterparts in Prahia da Luz.

When Gerry McCann repeats, as he does over and over again, that there is no evidence that Madeleine is not still alive, somewhere, he is actually speaking legalspeak. Sniffer dog indications are not accepted as evidence in court in most legal jurisdictions, so to that extent, that is, the context of rules of evidence in court procedures, Gerry is telling the truth.

However, for people who don't speak legalspeak, the sniffer dog indications are that someone died in Ocean Club 5A. Inquiries have determined that the only incident that has occurred in that apartment, involving the unexpected subtraction of a human being from the scene, by any means whatever, is the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Commentators from the mainstream media, who revile the "haters" and the "sick" among us internet commentators, ought to educate themselves with respect to the careful way that Gerry McCann pronounces on the "evidence" in this case.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Madeleine McCann is alive.

There is very little "evidence" of any kind in this case.

The entire discussion of this case in the mainstream media is taking place outside the bounds of what the courts recognize as evidence. Nothing uttered or reported there comes up to the standard of evidence. Nothing.

The mainstream media does not want anyone to think about anything.

What the mainstream media attempts to do is to get the public to feel.

Kate and Gerry's feelings are very important to the mainstream media. In the mainstream media coverage of this case, feelings rule. This is the thing about us haters and thinkers on the internet that infuriates commentators from the mainstream media. We internet commentators are refusing to ignore what our thought processes tell us about this case, in favor of the feelings it arouses.

This is a big problem for the mainstream media. They dare not resort to thinking about this case themselves, because they would have to alter their opinions on it if they did. They are forced to pile the contumely higher and higher on anyone who refuses to subordinate the rational thought process to irrational emotional responses in this case.

Thinkers are bad people. They are ignoring the suffering of Kate and Gerry. It's high time to move beyond thinking and get on with the job of feeling good again. Surely it's time to move on.

Hello Aldous Huxley.

Hello Brave New World.
edit on 10-5-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
too bad no one will ever get the permission to dig on the anglican church grounds they have burried her. the poor girl never left aldeia da luz.

after dying from a sleeping pill overdose and being taken in the rental car that was rented after the supposed kidnapping.

i remember on how the mccanns basically put on a show daily in portuguese tvs trying to gather public support, the fact is they overexposed themselves and the public here quickly came to the conclusion those were not grieving parents.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Reply to post by AnotherYOU
 


and as soon as they felt the public change of opinion and started being called murderers by the locals, they fled the country and we all got to see the liasons and cover the mccanns got from some higher ups on the british end.

then the english police pretty much stalled the investigation, and the mccanns kept milking maddie's tit for money, goin as far as that pitiful apearance on oprah...

the lesson to be learned is you can get away with negligent murder if you have the right connections.

RIP maddie


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnotherYOU
too bad no one will ever get the permission to dig on the anglican church grounds they have burried her. the poor girl never left aldeia da luz.

after dying from a sleeping pill overdose and being taken in the rental car that was rented after the supposed kidnapping.


The following post is made with the caveat that applies really, to all posts in this thread. It is speculation only. It is not an accusation. It is not put forward as fact. Not all the facts of this case are known. The police themselves, withhold facts from the public to help prevent the innocent from being convicted unjustly.

If the parents of Madeleine McCann are hypothesized to have been responsible for her disappearance, how might facts known about the case be put into a cohesive, plausible scenario explaining how they disposed of her body.

Starting from first principles:

The sniffer dog indications are assumed to completely negate the pursuits of the "Find Madeleine" campaign.

Madeleine will have died in Ocean Club 5A. No-one else has died there. No-one else from that apartment has ever died there or has ever gone missing from there. The scent of death is there. There is no other reasonable explanation for its presence.

Concealing the body, under the circumstances, is probably, in the "scenario" being considered, an attempt to conceal the cause of death.

Death by misadventure in the apartment would simply be an accident that would not require the concealment of the body.

Concealment of the body is required in the event that there are other contributing or causal factors in the death of the victim. Factors for which the parents might be found responsible and for which they might have to be penalized under the law.

If Madeleine died by simple misadventure, due to parental neglect, her body could be left somewhere out of the apartment where it could be easily discovered. The blame for her death could be laid at the feet of a fictitious kidnapper and penalties for child neglect might be avoided.

The same applies if Madeleine died from assault by one of her parents, her body could be left somewhere to be discovered, with the same resort to a fictitious kidnapper as scapegoat.

This way of dealing with the body would be very hazardous to do, but might be possible, with luck.

If Madeleine died from a drug overdose or adverse reaction to a drug, the situation would be very dangerous for her parents. In order to prevent drastic consequences to them, in every way, including professionally, her body would, absolutely, have to be concealed to prevent, for the longest period possible, her discovery by authorities, who would certainly be able to determine the cause of death if they were in posession of her body.

Her body would have to be disposed of in two stages because, at the time of her death, her parents did not have the use of a vehicle to transport it.

The vehicle is a necessity because it allows access to distance and hence to "plausibility" in a fake kidnap scenario. Also, a vehicle provides comparative anonymity to the one transporting the body for disposal.

The indications of the scent of death on the vehicle, rented more than 20 days after Madeleine disappeared, support the notion of a two stage movement of her body. An initial stage to hide it and then a second and final stage to dispose of it permanently.

It is likely that this operation was originally viewed as a one stage operation. The first stage would, at the time, have been considered the single best, and probably the only chance to escape legal sanction for Madeleine's death.

At this stage, in this hypothetical scenario, an incredible piece of "good fortune" occurs.

The body is not discovered in its first hiding place.

Either it is hidden somewhere that is not properly checked during the search for Madeleine, or, the perpetrators have had help in concealing the body where it would not be found. This situation, the body not being discovered nearly three weeks after it "disappeared", opens the possiblilty of moving it to a place of permanent disposal, where it might never be found.

The scent indications on the rental car support this scenario.

I don't think the body is buried in the church grounds in Prahia da Luz. It must, however, first have been hidden somewhere near there. We know that, thanks to the sighting by the Smith family, of someone carrying the inert body of a small blonde child, in that neighborhood, at about 21:50 hours, on May 3, 07.

In the scenario that unfolds in the description above, Madeleine's body is probably driven in the rental car to some remote spot, outside Prahia da Luz and either left in an abandoned well on disused land or dropped over a steep oceanside cliff, where boats would not be likely to come ashore.

The biggest questions in such a scenario are, where would the body have been hidden first and did someone else help, perhaps unwittingly, to hide it?

Is there a way to eliminate the above scenario as a possiblity? There might be.

Of the Smith family, Aoife Smith, the young daughter of the family is unique in that she is the only family member who actually got a look at the face of the man the family saw carrying a blonde child on the night Madeleine disappeared. Has she done an "E-Fit" of the man she saw, for the police? I haven't heard of it, if she has.

Jane Tanner's "eggman" has been publicized around the world. Then came her "mustache man". Then came her Robert Murat. The mainstream media takes Jane Tanner very seriously.

The way this case has been and continues to be handled, beggars belief.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Strange that the McCanns have never been charged with child neglect.... especially as the child
is suspected kidnapped presumed dead or murdered.

This is the most worrying aspect of this case, the sympathy and attention afforded the McCanns
in the British Press, as a society we are sick in the head.


www.guardian.co.uk...

Mother left four children home alone for 24 hours

Blackburn woman shut sons and daughters aged three months to four years in house while she went on drink and drug binge

Press Association
guardian.co.uk, Monday 16 November 2009 19.06 GMT
Article history

A mother who abandoned her four young children to go on a 24-hour drink and drug binge was given a suspended jail sentence today.

Rebecca Stevenson, 22, of Blackburn, Lancashire, left her two sons and two daughters, aged between three months and four years, home alone.

.....Sentencing her to a 20-week jail term, suspended for two years, Judge Norman Wright said it was "an appalling state of affairs" that she had preferred to satisfy her own personal gratification rather than care for her children.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


Honestly, I have to say thank you for your posts. I had a feeling from the very first day the story broke that the parents had a hand in their daughter's death and that their actions were very suspicious. Imagine to my utter horror that not only do the media and public call people who disbelieve the "official" line we're fed that they're not responsible and that she may still be alive lunatics or morons (to put it mildly), I also have to open the daily papers and see severla pages dedicated to extracts from Kate McCann's upcoming book (released later in the year apparently).

Then I remembered, if she's allowed to release a book with her version of events,w hy did they fight to get the Portuguese detective's book pulled from publication several years ago, citing "non-factual and crazy theories purely written to defame and demonize"?



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by AnotherYOU
 


Yeah it's funny how they "ran out of funds" to remain in Portugal. Even funnier how gullible people in this country can be to give them money to find her. Didn't do much looking when they were blessed by the Pope or traveling across the world making tv appearances did they?

Funny also how someone else copied the McCann tactic and pretended her daughter had been kidnapped, the McCanns were quick to distance themselves from her when she was found out to be a fraud doing it for the money while a relative had her daughter.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I believe the parents sedated her.

It is common knowledge how easy medics find it to dish out medication to 'cure' things.
Their whole industry is based upon the 'curing of symptoms with drugs. The symptom maddy was presenting was getting out of bed so taking that into context with what we have now noticed as the parents externalisation attributional style and we know that they would have never for one minute thought about addressing the cause of the problem of her getting up - which as supernanny might happily tell them is some aspect of their parenting style however nothing is their fault is it, so it must of been maddy and how do they deal with it? by chemically controlling her behaviour and the twins. For the 'greater good' i imagine aka them getting to work in the morning and maddy getting sleep but they screwed up this time royally. Lots of docs play hard and fast with the bnf but this time the mccans lost. Hence the fellowship of the tapas as they would have felt it could happen to any of them, why waste their careers now a mistake has been made. We all know how much kate wanted these children as evidenced by the IVF. Further evidence for sedation hypothesis includes Kate claiming worry the twins had been sedated and checking their breathing, the youtube video when gerry scratches and squirms when claiming they didn't sedate their children and the fact that maddy was known to get out of bed in the night and the fact that they had a behaviour reward chart for rewarding her not to do so. I believe that she got out of bed whilst the parents were off on the piss and tried to reach for something off the shelf (im guessing tea hence the 'brown stain' that kate has talked about in the recent newspaper articles) and smashed her head on the floor.

The parents got back tried to revive her and failed. As evidence by the droplets of blood on the door frame and as evidenced by the DNA result. In portugal the judicial standard for 'proof' from dna is 19 markers
Yet in the USA it is a magic 13 however generally to be conclusive you only need 5.
The dna found matched maddy to 15 markers however due to the portugese standard which needs 19,
they were not able to say that it was Maddy legally in that country.



If on an analysis of DNA, 15 markers out of 19 belong to a person "x", can we conclude that this is this person?
SA: If the profile is complete and quality, and that the markers are analyzed information then no doubt! The result is discriminatory. This result is very reliable. The order of error is 1 for 1 billion! It is almost impossible it otherwise. For a conclusive DNA profile, it takes a minimum of 7 markers. In case you are presenting, 15 markers on 19 leave no doubt. This result is quite reliable and usable in court. The error rate for a one billion is so unlikely that the result is recognized by judges without lawyers can not bring them into doubt
taken from: frommybigdesk.blogspot.com... and an expert in dna.


Further evidence would be by the dogs signalling and in Gerrys original blog posts making one of his many claims to enable to have an answer for the future claiming that the twins tried sea bass (Which contains the same enzyme as in cadaver)

I believe that it was Gerry's idea to cover it up as it was Kate that sedated them (thanks to her speciality)
In the news paper articles detailing extracts from Kates book it states that when the police started pointing the finger at them Gerry broke down on his knees with his head bowed repeating over and over again, "We're finished, our lives our over" which is not the typical reaction of someone innocent! moreover in the same article it states that kate relaxed a little after watching the video of the dogs as she thought it wasn't very scientific, however what about the dogs would have made her tense if she was innocent? (Moreover, they never say they are innocent, they always say "There is no evidence that we are involved" which is a totally different statement)

I believe that they did it due to having much more to lose. They would have lost their careers and their other children folllowing post-mortem which would have picked up the sedatives so they had everything to lose if they told they truth. From reading the Rotary interviews I believe the police think that Maddy was put into a big sports bag which appears in a wardrobe in crime scene photos but the mccans claim never to have, however in rotary interviews certain tapas remember it and others don't. I think she was buried out to sea as evidenced by the mystery man seen carrying a child down to the sea, The mccans repeated runs along the cliffs and also in another extract from the book this week Kate claims she had sucide thoughts of running into the ocean and swimming until she was too tired to carry on. This says to me that the ocean was on her mind and if she really had suicidal ideation it would have been more concrete ways to kill herself rather than a slow death out to sea.

I believe that certain members of the tapas were in on it (although not the Kaspers, as their statements which are translated on the Maddy files make references to concerns that David Payne was a pedophille; which I am also sure is part of a superinjunction so the british press can't publish the details but the police released their rotary statements and it is the words of K.Gaspar and she had real concerns..... )

How... did they get away with it?

I believe there were connections between the Mccans and the UK government which put pressure onto the portugese to shelf the case and I believe it is these connections which have kept them safe so far.

The connection is a man called ALEX WOOLFALL


Alex Woolfall is the man that is friends with Gerry's and which following the disappearance Gerry boasted that Alex taught him everything he knew about the manipulation of the media.

According to the telegraph (www.telegraph.co.uk...) "he is crisis management public relations expert, who works for Lord Bell, the public relations expert who masterminded Margaret Thatcher's three election victories"

He currently works for Bell Pottinger, but his page is down Luckily Google 'cache' brings it all up.
66.102.9.132...:HDXmsVXmuXsJ:www.bell-pottinger.co.uk/people_awoolfall.html+alex+woolfall&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk



Alex Woolfall
Head of Issues & Crisis Management
Tel: 020 7861 2424
Email: AWoolfall@Bell-Pottinger.co.uk
He has 20 years experience of public relations and specialises in helping companies in multiple sectors prepare for and respond to difficult or controversial issues, as well as manage actual crises.

Alex’s experience covers deliberate sabotage and accidental contamination of products (from food to pharmaceuticals); accident, injury and death in the workplace; allegations of corporate manslaughter; product recalls; corporate fraud and theft; court cases on the grounds of sex, race and age discrimination; redundancy and closure announcements; the use of illegal and/or child labour; regulatory breaches; mislabelling of products; abduction and robberies and terrorist related activities


(an interview with him from the Times if anyone is interested www.timesonline.co.uk... )

The thing I find most interesting is the quote next to his name

Our people are leaders in their field, working together to reach every audience, in any circumstance, through any medium


Other clients of Bell Pottinger include new labour and Gordon Brown
Unfortunately bell pottinger has changed its website now but it used to list all the things it would do to help clients which included cognitive infiltration of forums! (which was the idea instigated by Cass Sunstein, Obamas chief of staff who I am sure a lot of you people are familiar with but for recap Heres the original paper he wrote for a journal papers.ssrn.com...)


“Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.


There was previously a lot of manipulation of comments sections of newspapers and it was noted that in other forums how members would join and only post in Madeline Mccan threads in a really forceful way! You would also notice them 'clocking on' and 'clocking off' in a sort of tag team affect going on. Each 'user' appeared to be an expert of every inch of the Mccan files whilst also being an expert in many many spheres of research.... which they didn't actually understand completely and it would take various actual experts to pull them up on their mistakes.

Woolfall used to work for Weber Shandwick and was head of the department which specialises in digital media management

In their own words:



Our expertise

Blog creation
Blog monitoring
Blog relations consultancy
Podcast creation
Podcast monitoring
Podcaster relations consultancy
Social network consultancy
Website creation
Wiki creation/consultancy
Intranet/extranet creation/consultancy
Online media centre creation/consultancy
Viral campaign creation/consultancy
Online crisis management and response



Which highlights the lengths the Mccans went in the days and weeks following their daughters 'disappearance'

I'm really happy she has written the book as I read this week an interview with Goncarlo Amaral which stated that he will be keeping a close eye on the book....and the police have told Martin Grimes not to comment on the 'case' which may suggest more secret evidence which is still being worked on. I'm sure the book will finally trap them as there are so many contradictions already!
edit on 11-5-2011 by Loopdaloop because: tidy up



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Loopdaloop
 

Thanks for your post. It is very informative.

I'm not sure if you've read through the entire thread, but in one post I tried to put a timeline together showing what would have to happen for someone in trouble on the ground in Portugal to get a news story released to the Telegraph by the British Foreign Office, no less, as the McCanns or a friend of theirs apparently did, within 120 minutes of Kate's announcement that Madeleine was missing.

The first known story about this case was on the Telegraph website at 12:01 AM, May 4, 2007, sourced to the Foreign Office.

Personally, I don't think that it could be done, even with insider help, which makes me believe that Madeleine's death had to have occurred and been discovered hours earlier than reported, perhaps even a day earlier.

In a scenario like that, the blue kit bag could have been used to hide her, in the closet, from the view of the twins for as many hours as it took to decide what to do or to get a plan together with the help of friends.

The deleted phone records from the two or three days prior to the 3rd of May could conceal the identities of helpers in the UK or in Portugal. I wonder if any attempt was made to look at phone records of likely friends in the Labour Party for the same period. I doubt it, but some smart copper in Britain might know a lot about this case that has not come to light.

This case is a real sociological and political study.
edit on 11-5-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator
 

You make a good point. How about this case?

www.mauritiushot.com...


A 13-month baby drowned when he was left in the bathtub unattended by his mother who was too busy playing Facebook games. On Friday, April 15th, the mother, 34-year-old Shannon Johnson from Fort Lupton, Colorado, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for child neglect in the death of her son. The charges left open the possibility of a lighter sentence, including no prison time, but authorities said that they were not going to allow for a minimum sentence as they did not want to minimize the seriousness of the situation.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Didn't the McCanns also admit to sedating their children at one point around the time of the initial investigation/interviews?

Apologies if I overlooked it if already stated in the thread.


ETA - So apparently they've written an open letter to David Cameron asking him to open the files and bring about an "independent, transparent and comprehensive review of all information in relation to Madeleine's disappearance".
edit on 11/5/2011 by curious7 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by curious7
 


I don't believe they themselves have ever admitted giving a sedative to their children, but I believe it was reported that Kate's father may have said something like that regarding the use of a drug called Calpol.

gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com...


Brian Healy, the father of Kate McCann, admitted she “may have used Calpol” to help Madeleine to sleep, but said it was “just outrageous to think of anything else." Gerry and Kate strongly denied, on August 16, using any kind of drugs on their children to stop them waking up at night. Calpol is a common painkiller that is used, in UK, to to calm them down or help children to sleep. Twelve million bottles and packets of Calpol are sold every year, in UK.


Apparently Calpol is not a sedative, but there is a version of it sold as "Calpol Night" which contains an anti-histamine which can cause drowsiness. Apparently it is used in the UK by some parents to make young children fall asleep more easily.

Here is Gerry McCann denying using sedatives on the children:



Here he is wondering, in retrospect, if sedatives had been used on the children on the night of the disappearance.


edit on 11-5-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
"The biggest questions in such a scenario are, where would the body have been hidden first and did someone else help, perhaps unwittingly, to hide it?"

I believe the body was stored for some time in the fridge that Gerry Mccann took out of the apartment. In one of his blogs he said that the fridge was broken and he took it to a local dump. All references to the fridge on his blog were soon removed. As we all know if an appliance in a rented holiday apartment breaks, we will carry and transport it to a local dump and pay for a new one ourselves instead of asking the landlord to replace it


I'm not sure if the police ever followed up on the fridge incident but it is highly suspicious, from what Goncalo Amaral has said, it sounds like the portuguese police have evidence that they have kept back until they could prove it at a later date.

I think the priest Father Pacheco, also fits into the fridge scenario. He says he was 'decieved' by the couple. He also let the Kate and Gerry have the keys to the church so that they could 'pray' whenever they wanted to around the clock.

Could there be any other reason the Mccann's wanted 24 hour access to the church? Could it be linked to the cadaver scent detected in their hire car, the same hire car that a witness saw with it's boot and doors open for days, to 'air out' in the days before it was investigated by the dogs?




I was deceived' says the Portuguese priest who comforted Gerry and Kate McCann Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

.......In the days after Madeleine vanished on May 3, the McCanns, both 39 and devout Catholics, frequently sought refuge at the priest's church.

They became so close to Father Pacheco, he gave them the keys to the tiny building so they could go in to pray whenever they liked.

However, his friendship with the couple appeared to spectacularly backfire after police became convinced Kate had told him she had killed her daughter during confession.

But he has vowed to take whatever she had said to the grave, despite being quizzed by detectives.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... ...........



Personally I suspect the body was stored in a fridge at the church and then transported somewhere to be disposed of. If the priest was aware of this did the Mccann's confess to him that Madeleine had died in an accident ? Is he then bound by his vows to keep quiet? I'm appalled that religious rules would stop someone reporting the potential killing of a child and concealment of the body. Can the police really not push it any further?

Hopefully with the news today that Scotland yard will be reviewing the case we might actually see this go in the opposite way that the Mccann's want.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Why are they so confident that Scotland yard won't find evidence against them? Either they are extremely 'well connected' and know they can't be touched or are so arrogant that they think that the body will never be found or that very little evidence will remain when it is. Well I certainly hope the Mccann's get the justice they deserve.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
The news conference yesterday was weird, Kate McCann says "The abduction happened in Portugal and the abductor was in Portugal" Yeah no stick Sherlock.. She didn't follow it up with anything related to what she said apart from THE BOOK THE BOOK BUY THE BOOK.... sheesh. can you imagine explaining this to someone who had never heard of this case before.
A kid went missing...
Where??
Portugal...
Damn were where the parents?
A few meters away getting drunk..
WOW Why didn't they hear her scream??
Because the parents drugged the kids to make sure they slept through the night
WHAT!? REALLY!!?!
Yup
Did they check on the kids?
Yeah every 15 minutes
Oh well atleast that was OK
But not one of them noticed the window on their GROUND FLOOR APARTMENT WAS OPEN
**Blow brains out with anger/rage at the McCanns"



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Actually I feel nauseous that the McCann publicity machine is rolling out once again.They want a 'review' of the investigation. Oh wait - there's a book coming out!
Max Clifford was on TV talking as if nothing was done first time around. I must have imagined it all then. While some people like to criticise the Portuguese police, it seems to me they threw a load of resources at it that they probably couldn't afford. Not to forget the massive involvement of the UK government and police.
The worst thing is, imo, that they just seem to click their fingers and for some reason our government bends over and says pretty please. It's certainly not comparable to the resources given to other similar cases. What's going on?
edit on 13-5-2011 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   
They medicated their kids to get them asleep like "normal" parents and Gerry messed the doses up or the wrong batch was sent. It backfired and Maddie OD'd. Their story is being unraveled before our very eyes, I'll buy that book and find any inconsistencies then post them up here.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by starchild10
Actually I feel nauseous that the McCann publicity machine is rolling out once again.Thry want a 'review' of the investigation. Oh wait - there's a book coming out!
Max Clifford was on TV talking as if nothing was done first time around. I must have imagined it all then. While some people like to criticise the Portuguese police, it seems to me they threw a load of resources at it that they probably couldn't afford. Not to forget the massive involvement of the UK government and police.
The worst thing is, imo, that they just seem to click their fingers and for some reason our government bends over and says pretty please. It's certainly not comparable to the resources given to other similar cases. What's going on?


Well I really hope their latest publicity backfires on them, my only worry is that the Mccann's have friends in high places that will protect them.

As for the government bending over backwards I think David Cameron has to take action or he will seem cold in the eyes of the public, it's all about appearances and PR.

I must say I found Gerry's using the death of Cameron's child as an emotional bargaining tool to be sickening. It's not surprising though as the pair of them come across as sociopaths. Saying 'he must know what we went through' is not really a good comparison, as I don't think Cameron's child died through being left on his own whilst his parents went out boozing, did he Gerry?



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHammondStoat

my only worry is that the Mccann's have friends in high places that will protect them.


That was evident from the start and still is so. What really, really annoyed me at the time was their assertion that it was 'just like dining in your garden'. I'd like to see some working class couple over here nipping across to the boozer several nights in a row and getting away with that excuse!
We are talking two babies and a toddler ffs.
edit on 13-5-2011 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-5-2011 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join