|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 22:40:41 GMT
Another thing got me. If this bloke doing the checking on their kids noticed a window was open and heard a noise in the room, why didn't he go into the room to see and close the window? I also don't buy this "we checked on them every twenty minutes" business. When the drink is flowing? And what state would the people checking be in if they did? It's neglect at the very least, and would have been if it was Sharon and Steve from a council estate. Spot on Tricky ! The absolute minimum they should both have been charged with was neglect. I just don't get how these pair have continually managed to evade any charges whatsoever and are still acting the part of victims.
|
|
|
Post by rickyfullerbeer on Mar 21, 2019 22:56:39 GMT
And despite all the shouting and screaming and banging of doors and general mayhem when they found Madeleine 'had gone'...which continued for hours..the twins NEVER woke up. That suggests they were sedated. Kate is a trained anaethnitist. Doctors have access to 'controlled' drugs. And the photo of Madeleine which both parents claim was the last ever taken of her on the 3/5/2007..the day she was 'abducted'...shows bright sunlight and blue skies. In Prai da Luiz on 3/5/2007 every weather report shows low lying cloud throughout the day. And this Netfix series is a crock of absolute shit...Not only does it tell us nothing knew it features false leads and obfuscation. Tripe. I've just finished episode 4. It's absolutely garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 3:12:35 GMT
I'm on Ep 5 now. The film makers are coming to the same conclusions. The same conclusions of the conspiracy film makers. Gerry was scared shitless when he heard that sniffer dogs were being used. Actually watching the video is so much different than listening to that Geordie drone. I actually thank the guy that did that "drone" he did a wonderful job. We must all somehow have imagined how we would have reacted - if this happened to us. I can tell you that my wife wouldn't have been able to walk at all. Grief would have rendered her walkless. I wouldn't have been much better either. I know that they are doctors, but I really find it so hard to understand how they appear so "cool". That doesn't make them guilty but bloody hell, the both of them have some balls.
This may are may not be relevant. Over the years we have seen many children abducted and killed. The usual TV interviews, you know, the ones where the parents appeal for any information ..... The woman always does the talking. The father just sits there (presumably grief stricken, and is unable to actually speak). Just goes to show that women are in fact far stronger than us men. In this case Gerry has the whole situation under control.
Why do the men (the stronger of the sexes apparently) just sit there saying nothing? Well it is because our reaction is more of a physical one. Just let me get my hands on him!
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 6:56:15 GMT
I don't know how anyone can come to a definitive answer after watching that. The "evidence" on both sides is at best "sketchy" and hardly damming either way. Yes, I've always thought the parents know more about this than they've let on but some of the theories on here are equally utterly ridiculous
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 7:01:36 GMT
I don't know how anyone can come to a definitive answer after watching that. The "evidence" on both sides is at best "sketchy" and hardly damming either way. Yes, I've always thought the parents know more about this than they've let on but some of the theories on here are equally utterly ridiculous Nearly as ridiculous as an evidence free abduction
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 7:35:34 GMT
I don't know how anyone can come to a definitive answer after watching that. The "evidence" on both sides is at best "sketchy" and hardly damming either way. Yes, I've always thought the parents know more about this than they've let on but some of the theories on here are equally utterly ridiculous Nearly as ridiculous as an evidence free abduction As I've said, from whatever angle you look at it there's always an element of 'something doesn't add up here' about it.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 7:48:58 GMT
'When you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth'
Sir Arthur Connan Doyle.
There is NO evidence or motive for abduction.
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 8:18:18 GMT
'When you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth' Sir Arthur Connan Doyle. There is NO evidence or motive for abduction. Just to play devils advocate, is there a motive for her death at the hands of her parents?.. or are we now down the line of an accidental murder and they've covered it up? which, if you look at the evidence, would've been very fucking hard to have done in the way the Portuguese police suggested.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Mar 22, 2019 8:29:07 GMT
'When you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth' Sir Arthur Connan Doyle. There is NO evidence or motive for abduction. Just to play devils advocate, is there a motive for her death at the hands of her parents?.. or are we now down the line of an accidental murder and they've covered it up? which, if you look at the evidence, would've been very fucking hard to have done in the way the Portuguese police suggested. Why did the police say covering up an accidental death as opposed to other reasons, would have been V hard to do...
|
|
|
Post by murphthesurf on Mar 22, 2019 8:48:08 GMT
Another thing got me. If this bloke doing the checking on their kids noticed a window was open and heard a noise in the room, why didn't he go into the room to see and close the window? I also don't buy this "we checked on them every twenty minutes" business. When the drink is flowing? And what state would the people checking be in if they did? It's neglect at the very least, and would have been if it was Sharon and Steve from a council estate. Makes you wonder, doesn't it? Has it ever been made public to what extent the other couples holidaying in the group were brought in by police and questioned, both in Portugal and the UK? I think they were all doctors, weren't they? So they'll presumably all be used to sickness/death/loss etc. in their everyday professional lives and trained to deal with it, but this situation is something else altogether and I just don't see how such (let's call it) 'usual detachment from sorrow' could possibly carry over into their private lives, but they're all so bloody cool & calm all the time. You'd think that adults who knew that their close friends' child had gone missing would have been distraught…… surely anyone with normal emotions would be deeply shocked and terribly upset? Were any of them? When Maddie first disappeared - and since then, for that matter - have they all remained as completely devoid of emotion as the McCanns have always seemed to be? Should the police have them all back in for a lot of long, hard questioning? I'd have them all back in and wire them up to lie detectors, and if they didn't like it - tough. If they're innocent they shouldn't mind - they should be keen to help. On the other hand, it's quite possible that they've all had very cosy lives (as many have said, not on a council estate) for the last 12 years while something unspeakably evil in their circle has been covered up. Somebody's made a good job of the whole thing, and I don't know if the truth will ever come out. Above all, it's always been totally beyond my comprehension how we've never seen either Gerry or Kate so much as literally shed a single tear over their beautiful little daughter's disappearance. Incredible. It might also be worth mentioning that it's this month or next that the last £ grant the police were given last year --- (a further £150,000 last November) to cover the investigation for another 6 months --- expires.
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 8:54:39 GMT
Just to play devils advocate, is there a motive for her death at the hands of her parents?.. or are we now down the line of an accidental murder and they've covered it up? which, if you look at the evidence, would've been very fucking hard to have done in the way the Portuguese police suggested. You need to look at the facts..it would have been very simple to do. Incidentally, there's no such thing as 'accidental murder' it's called manslaughter. Aye slam down the technicalities Was just asking the question. And very easy? What, to store a body for 20 odd days? Which was what the police said they did? Doesn't sound very plausible to me.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 8:56:40 GMT
Just to play devils advocate, is there a motive for her death at the hands of her parents?.. or are we now down the line of an accidental murder and they've covered it up? which, if you look at the evidence, would've been very fucking hard to have done in the way the Portuguese police suggested. You need to look at the facts..it would have been very simple to do. Incidentally, there's no such thing as 'accidental murder' it's called manslaughter. Let’s just ignore neglecting your kids, take any sinister theories out and it was completely accidental death. I don’t know banged head or bad reaction to calpol. I can see the argument that banging these parents up serves no purpose. I don’t necessarily agree but can see the argument. Hence the coverup Forget the fact that the McCanns have been as un-cooperative as they can too many high profile people at top levels got involved Who the fuck gives up a top top civil service position with all the benefits to handle PR for a family who expect their child back with in a small matter of time. When you see the hysterics etc of other cases at press conferences it’s normal behaviour for this type of event. This case is missing this normal behaviour Nothing in this case is normal. Government involvement, operation grange, pr, media, neglect, red herrings. Nothing As you say bin the improbable you are left with the probable
|
|
|
Post by Frogger Theft Auto on Mar 22, 2019 8:57:07 GMT
I’ve gone back and forth but having read that Portuguese detective’s book, that Notts detective’s blog, a few conspiracy pages and seen the documentary. I’m leaning towards they’re either criminal masterminds, pulling off the hardest cover-up in history in front of the world’s eyes or they’re just innocent and she was abducted.
A lot of really stupid people on my social media seem convinced that they’re guilty, and obviously the real conspiracy theory crazies are on board too, so I’m leaning the other way. INNOCENT. Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 8:57:59 GMT
You need to look at the facts..it would have been very simple to do. Incidentally, there's no such thing as 'accidental murder' it's called manslaughter. Aye slam down the technicalities Was just asking the question. And very easy? What, to store a body for 20 odd days? Which was what the police said they did? Doesn't sound very plausible to me. There is a theory that any cover up happened before the tapas night so sorted
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 8:59:36 GMT
Aye slam down the technicalities Was just asking the question. And very easy? What, to store a body for 20 odd days? Which was what the police said they did? Doesn't sound very plausible to me. There is a theory that any cover up happened before the tapas night so sorted How does the blood get into the back of a rental car they hired 20 odd days later though?..
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 9:00:28 GMT
There is a theory that any cover up happened before the tapas night so sorted How does the blood get into the back of a rental car they hired 20 odd days later though?.. It was a scent. Cross contamination?
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Mar 22, 2019 9:03:44 GMT
How does the blood get into the back of a rental car they hired 20 odd days later though?.. It was a scent. Cross contamination? Possibly, but that's my point. The whole case is complete guess work. I'll be honest, I had them 100% guilty before watching it but now I'm 50/50 and think "theories" on both sides just don't add up. It's not a popular opinion by the looks of the responses I'm getting on here but that's where I am.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 9:31:58 GMT
You need to look at the facts..it would have been very simple to do. Incidentally, there's no such thing as 'accidental murder' it's called manslaughter. Let’s just ignore neglecting your kids, take any sinister theories out and it was completely accidental death. I don’t know banged head or bad reaction to calpol. I can see the argument that banging these parents up serves no purpose. I don’t necessarily agree but can see the argument. Hence the coverup Forget the fact that the McCanns have been as un-cooperative as they can too many high profile people at top levels got involved Who the fuck gives up a top top civil service position with all the benefits to handle PR for a family who expect their child back with in a small matter of time. When you see the hysterics etc of other cases at press conferences it’s normal behaviour for this type of event. This case is missing this normal behaviour Nothing in this case is normal. Government involvement, operation grange, pr, media, neglect, red herrings. Nothing As you say bin the improbable you are left with the probable The photograph of Madeleine said by parents to be the last one ever taken on the 3/5/2007..shows her sitting around the swimming pool in bright sunlight. On 3/5/2007 in that resort all weather reports show a cloudy day. That suggests she didn't go missing that day & the McCanns lied about it. Why? Most independent observers believe that the McCanns sedated their children when they went out drinking..sometimes until the early hours of the morning. They were doctors so would access & knowledge of prescribed sedatives. Madeleine awoke while they were out..climbed on the sofa next to the windows..in a semi sedated state..tried to open the curtains..and fell off..straight onto the floor..onto her head...and she had a brain haemorrhage and died. (The spot where the sniffer dogs found cadaver & blood scent.) Parents came in early hours..pissed..went straight to bed. Kate McCann didn't discover Madeleine until she got up..became hysterical when she found the body..now leaking cadaverine and other bodily fluids. Picked up Madeleine and hugged her..got cadaverine on her clothes..hugged cuddle cat..transferring cadaverine onto that..picked up Sean and hugged him..getting cadaverine on his red T shirt. Thats why she washed cuddle cat & Seans T shirt. Gerry put Madeleines body in his big blue tennis bag (never been found) and they forensically cleaned the apartment. They then sat down and hatched the 'abduction' plan..which happened either the next day or day later. Madeleine did not go missing on the 3/5/2007. That removes Robert Murats alibi..(which is important) What happened to Gerrys tennis bag? Why was blood and cadaverine and Madeleines DNA group found in a car the McCanns had hired 10 days AFTER she went missing? So many questions unanwsered and as you say Salop...WHY?
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Mar 22, 2019 9:44:36 GMT
The biggest issue the McCann's had was not knowing the PJ investigation files would be released to the public once the case was archived per Portuguese legal requirements. What they reported to have said in the beginning (jemmied shutters, beds used, doors locked/unlocked etc) had to 'crafted' to suit the new narrative. The link is to the English translations which makes the reading less smooth but the salient points remain the same.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 10:22:24 GMT
Anyone see Jane Hills interview with Kate McCann on YouTube?
'Despite some of the people round here having a week off work to search for Madeleine..you and Gerry didn't actually get involved in the search..Why?'
'Because we were exhausted'
If my 3 year old daughter went missing I'd be out searching for her until I collapsed.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 10:32:51 GMT
Anyone see Jane Hills interview with Kate McCann on YouTube? 'Despite some of the people round here having a week off work to search for Madeleine..you and Gerry didn't actually get involved in the search..Why?' 'Because we were exhausted' If my 3 year old daughter went missing I'd be out searching for her until I collapsed. Nothing normal about this case
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Mar 22, 2019 10:41:19 GMT
Let’s just ignore neglecting your kids, take any sinister theories out and it was completely accidental death. I don’t know banged head or bad reaction to calpol. I can see the argument that banging these parents up serves no purpose. I don’t necessarily agree but can see the argument. Hence the coverup Forget the fact that the McCanns have been as un-cooperative as they can too many high profile people at top levels got involved Who the fuck gives up a top top civil service position with all the benefits to handle PR for a family who expect their child back with in a small matter of time. When you see the hysterics etc of other cases at press conferences it’s normal behaviour for this type of event. This case is missing this normal behaviour Nothing in this case is normal. Government involvement, operation grange, pr, media, neglect, red herrings. Nothing As you say bin the improbable you are left with the probable The photograph of Madeleine said by parents to be the last one ever taken on the 3/5/2007..shows her sitting around the swimming pool in bright sunlight. On 3/5/2007 in that resort all weather reports show a cloudy day. That suggests she didn't go missing that day & the McCanns lied about it. Why? Most independent observers believe that the McCanns sedated their children when they went out drinking..sometimes until the early hours of the morning. They were doctors so would access & knowledge of prescribed sedatives. Madeleine awoke while they were out..climbed on the sofa next to the windows..in a semi sedated state..tried to open the curtains..and fell off..straight onto the floor..onto her head...and she had a brain haemorrhage and died. (The spot where the sniffer dogs found cadaver & blood scent.) Parents came in early hours..pissed..went straight to bed. Kate McCann didn't discover Madeleine until she got up..became hysterical when she found the body..now leaking cadaverine and other bodily fluids. Picked up Madeleine and hugged her..got cadaverine on her clothes..hugged cuddle cat..transferring cadaverine onto that..picked up Sean and hugged him..getting cadaverine on his red T shirt. Thats why she washed cuddle cat & Seans T shirt. Gerry put Madeleines body in his big blue tennis bag (never been found) and they forensically cleaned the apartment. They then sat down and hatched the 'abduction' plan..which happened either the next day or day later. Madeleine did not go missing on the 3/5/2007. That removes Robert Murats alibi..(which is important) What happened to Gerrys tennis bag? Why was blood and cadaverine and Madeleines DNA group found in a car the McCanns had hired 10 days AFTER she went missing? So many questions unanwsered and as you say Salop...WHY? Compelling, very compelling. Just on the topic of DNA (I work with it) and the presence of Madeline's DNA group it's absolutely no surprise 50-80% matches can occur because everyone in that hire car shares DNA. Some genes will be more differentiated than others, depending on which alleles (basically, Gerry's version of a gene or Kate's version of a gene passed down) Madeline expressed. The DNA in the car these days could probably be better sequenced and analysed but back 12 years ago I'm not really surprised it came out as a relatively inconclusive jumble of McCann DNA. Especially when it was found at such a low yield, and the lower yield you have the less accurate your DNA replication and the more likely the case of artefact entering the sample. A method of amplifying DNA in investigations such as this is the Polymerase Chain Reaction, which effectively takes a piece of template DNA, separates it into two strands then replicates the original strand to an exponential level. If the sample was contaminated to begin with, when amplified this mistake is compounded as many times as replication occurs, making identification very difficult. DNA is all too often used as a smoking gun in Police Procedural dramas, in reality the ubiquitous nature of DNA means utmost interpretation must be used when collating it as evidence. Even a match as high as 80% isn't enough to differentiate between two family members, never mind anyone else who may have been at the scene/car. Though I concur, this doesn't explain the cadaverine nor the blood detected by the dogs.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 11:05:35 GMT
The photograph of Madeleine said by parents to be the last one ever taken on the 3/5/2007..shows her sitting around the swimming pool in bright sunlight. On 3/5/2007 in that resort all weather reports show a cloudy day. That suggests she didn't go missing that day & the McCanns lied about it. Why? Most independent observers believe that the McCanns sedated their children when they went out drinking..sometimes until the early hours of the morning. They were doctors so would access & knowledge of prescribed sedatives. Madeleine awoke while they were out..climbed on the sofa next to the windows..in a semi sedated state..tried to open the curtains..and fell off..straight onto the floor..onto her head...and she had a brain haemorrhage and died. (The spot where the sniffer dogs found cadaver & blood scent.) Parents came in early hours..pissed..went straight to bed. Kate McCann didn't discover Madeleine until she got up..became hysterical when she found the body..now leaking cadaverine and other bodily fluids. Picked up Madeleine and hugged her..got cadaverine on her clothes..hugged cuddle cat..transferring cadaverine onto that..picked up Sean and hugged him..getting cadaverine on his red T shirt. Thats why she washed cuddle cat & Seans T shirt. Gerry put Madeleines body in his big blue tennis bag (never been found) and they forensically cleaned the apartment. They then sat down and hatched the 'abduction' plan..which happened either the next day or day later. Madeleine did not go missing on the 3/5/2007. That removes Robert Murats alibi..(which is important) What happened to Gerrys tennis bag? Why was blood and cadaverine and Madeleines DNA group found in a car the McCanns had hired 10 days AFTER she went missing? So many questions unanwsered and as you say Salop...WHY? Compelling, very compelling. Just on the topic of DNA (I work with it) and the presence of Madeline's DNA group it's absolutely no surprise 50-80% matches can occur because everyone in that hire car shares DNA. Some genes will be more differentiated than others, depending on which alleles (basically, Gerry's version of a gene or Kate's version of a gene passed down) Madeline expressed. The DNA in the car these days could probably be better sequenced and analysed but back 12 years ago I'm not really surprised it came out as a relatively inconclusive jumble of McCann DNA. Especially when it was found at such a low yield, and the lower yield you have the less accurate your DNA replication and the more likely the case of artefact entering the sample. A method of amplifying DNA in investigations such as this is the Polymerase Chain Reaction, which effectively takes a piece of template DNA, separates it into two strands then replicates the original strand to an exponential level. If the sample was contaminated to begin with, when amplified this mistake is compounded as many times as replication occurs, making identification very difficult. DNA is all too often used as a smoking gun in Police Procedural dramas, in reality the ubiquitous nature of DNA means utmost interpretation must be used when collating it as evidence. Even a match as high as 80% isn't enough to differentiate between two family members, never mind anyone else who may have been at the scene/car. Though I concur, this doesn't explain the cadaverine nor the blood detected by the dogs. Excellent technical analysis mate.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 11:11:12 GMT
Compelling, very compelling. Just on the topic of DNA (I work with it) and the presence of Madeline's DNA group it's absolutely no surprise 50-80% matches can occur because everyone in that hire car shares DNA. Some genes will be more differentiated than others, depending on which alleles (basically, Gerry's version of a gene or Kate's version of a gene passed down) Madeline expressed. The DNA in the car these days could probably be better sequenced and analysed but back 12 years ago I'm not really surprised it came out as a relatively inconclusive jumble of McCann DNA. Especially when it was found at such a low yield, and the lower yield you have the less accurate your DNA replication and the more likely the case of artefact entering the sample. A method of amplifying DNA in investigations such as this is the Polymerase Chain Reaction, which effectively takes a piece of template DNA, separates it into two strands then replicates the original strand to an exponential level. If the sample was contaminated to begin with, when amplified this mistake is compounded as many times as replication occurs, making identification very difficult. DNA is all too often used as a smoking gun in Police Procedural dramas, in reality the ubiquitous nature of DNA means utmost interpretation must be used when collating it as evidence. Even a match as high as 80% isn't enough to differentiate between two family members, never mind anyone else who may have been at the scene/car. Though I concur, this doesn't explain the cadaverine nor the blood detected by the dogs. Excellent technical analysis mate. I imagine half the met has the same theories as us. I’m very surprised they have not been put under any official uk scrutiny
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 11:13:58 GMT
Excellent technical analysis mate. I imagine half the met has the same theories as us. I’m very surprised they have not been put under any official uk scrutiny My thoughts exactly Salop.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 22, 2019 11:30:47 GMT
I imagine half the met has the same theories as us. I’m very surprised they have not been put under any official uk scrutiny My thoughts exactly Salop. Look at all the missing/murdered kids over the last 20 years. Time and time again it’s a family member or someone known to the family/child I also believe the lie is so big it has to be kept out there.
|
|
|
Post by kelw on Mar 22, 2019 11:53:18 GMT
Excellent technical analysis mate. I imagine half the met has the same theories as us. I’m very surprised they have not been put under any official uk scrutiny An ex senior Officer has given his opinion on it recently and points the finger at the McCanns What baffles me is why are Scotland Yard only treating the latest investigation as an abduction when 10 years later is no evidence that an abduction took place. Is the McCann's theory only
|
|
|
Post by Frogger Theft Auto on Mar 22, 2019 13:43:42 GMT
And despite all the shouting and screaming and banging of doors and general mayhem when they found Madeleine 'had gone'...which continued for hours..the twins NEVER woke up. That suggests they were sedated. Kate is a trained anaethnitist. Doctors have access to 'controlled' drugs. And the photo of Madeleine which both parents claim was the last ever taken of her on the 3/5/2007..the day she was 'abducted'...shows bright sunlight and blue skies. In Prai da Luiz on 3/5/2007 every weather report shows low lying cloud throughout the day. And this Netfix series is a crock of absolute shit...Not only does it tell us nothing knew it features false leads and obfuscation. Tripe. So they drugged and killed Maddie one night, and then drugged the twins the following night regardless? Nah.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Mar 22, 2019 14:57:19 GMT
My thoughts exactly Salop. Look at all the missing/murdered kids over the last 20 years. Time and time again it’s a family member or someone known to the family/child I also believe the lie is so big it has to be kept out there. And 99.9% of very young children are found within 24 hours when abducted by strangers.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 22, 2019 15:13:12 GMT
I didn't think they did it before I watched the Netflix series. Now I'm sure they didn't do it.
The bile on this thread is vile. Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.
|
|