VIDEO - Documentary BANNED by the McCanns (Overturned) Truth of the Lie - Gonçalo Amaral

I have just added the full version video of the documentary to (hopefully) help it reach as many people as possible.

Documentary BANNED by the McCanns (Overturned) Truth of the Lie - Gonçalo Amaral

Amazing, no wonder the Mccanns wanted it banned. Thanks HiDeHo.

Upon being informed that Madeleine was missing, GM said he returned to the apartment by 'his usual route'.

Now why didn't he use 'his usual route' when he was doing his earlier check on Madeleine? Did he actually use the shorter patio door route when he did his earlier check but afterwards say he used the longer front door route to cover up the amount of time he had been in the apartment attempting to cover up something far more sinister?

I know I have asked this question before, but it still bothers me. GM, it seems, took quite a while to carry out his check for a variety of reasons, amongst them claiming to have taken the longer route and use the toilet. One cannot help but think he was time wasting really. Some people think they did not use the patio doors at all and just fabricated a story, a few days later, that they were unlocked on the night and were their usual route, to give a reason for the abductor gaining access to the property.

On the other hand, it was a much shorter route and it made no sense to use the front door at all, as Mr Amaral points out in this video.

It seems to me Gerry has completely made this up in order, for some reason, to give the front door significance.

I'm trying to think though now, if an abductor had entered through the patio doors and then exited out through the front window, as the McCanns claim happened, would he have the courtesy to close the patio doors behind him on entering or would he leave them slid half way open? Surely he would have slid the patio doors along wide enough to gain access and just left them like that. After all, he would have been in a hurry, no time to waste for him. I am thinking he would rush in, sliding the doors along to almost the half way position, and then hurry on inside. Therefore, if Gerry did use the patio doors following on from the abductor (who Gerry claims was by now hiding inside the apartment) surely Gerry would have noticed they were open a considerable way and surely he would think that was strange. However, no mention seems to be made of anything unusual to do with the patio doors, other than they claim to have left them unlocked. Hmm. Even if the McCanns & Co had left them only slightly ajar, it still means pulling them so far to open and pulling again so far to close behind you and I doubt the abductor would have bothered to do this, too inconvenient for him I think.

So, is this why Gerry claims to have gone in through the front door. The front door gives him another reason for why he took so long and, if asked, he could then claim ignorance over the open/closed position of the patio doors. Kate claims to have used the patio doors at 10pm and does not say she noticed anything untoward with them.

But I believe this is not how an abductor would have left them and I believe this seems to be an omission on their part and, to my mind, is proof that there was no abductor at all, for even though they try to con us by saying the patio doors were left unlocked and that is how he gained access, they omit to think closely enough about what position an eager abductor would, in reality, actually leave the patio doors in. I am sure he would not have drawn them closed behind him.

Just a thought, why is there a shot of Kate looking through an open window for Madeleine when the PJ had established that the shutter hadn't been
opened.?

Because she herself opened it from the inside?

She must have slid the front window open herself, flung her head out and called for Madeleine, and then left it that way. By doing so, perhaps she hoped to be seen screaming for her child out of an open front window, thereby claiming an independent witness. After all, if you find your child missing and if the window were actually closed, you would just run to the front door and scream into the street. However, putting your head out of an open window and screaming sort of reinforces what you yourself are trying to claim, that the window was left open by the abductor.

I think the McCanns thought about how an abductor might leave the position of the front window but not how an abductor would leave the position of the back patio windows if he came in that way, and, to my mind, that is a major flaw in their theory.

LJC wrote:Upon being informed that Madeleine was missing, GM said he returned to the apartment by 'his usual route'.

Now why didn't he use 'his usual route' when he was doing his earlier check on Madeleine? Did he actually use the shorter patio door route when he did his earlier check but afterwards say he used the longer front door route to cover up the amount of time he had been in the apartment attempting to cover up something far more sinister?

I know I have asked this question before, but it still bothers me. GM, it seems, took quite a while to carry out his check for a variety of reasons, amongst them claiming to have taken the longer route and use the toilet. One cannot help but think he was time wasting really. Some people think they did not use the patio doors at all and just fabricated a story, a few days later, that they were unlocked on the night and were their usual route, to give a reason for the abductor gaining access to the property.

On the other hand, it was a much shorter route and it made no sense to use the front door at all, as Mr Amaral points out in this video.

It seems to me Gerry has completely made this up in order, for some reason, to give the front door significance.

I'm trying to think though now, if an abductor had entered through the patio doors and then exited out through the front window, as the McCanns claim happened, would he have the courtesy to close the patio doors behind him on entering or would he leave them slid half way open? Surely he would have slid the patio doors along wide enough to gain access and just left them like that. After all, he would have been in a hurry, no time to waste for him. I am thinking he would rush in, sliding the doors along to almost the half way position, and then hurry on inside. Therefore, if Gerry did use the patio doors following on from the abductor (who Gerry claims was by now hiding inside the apartment) surely Gerry would have noticed they were open a considerable way and surely he would think that was strange. However, no mention seems to be made of anything unusual to do with the patio doors, other than they claim to have left them unlocked. Hmm. Even if the McCanns & Co had left them only slightly ajar, it still means pulling them so far to open and pulling again so far to close behind you and I doubt the abductor would have bothered to do this, too inconvenient for him I think.

So, is this why Gerry claims to have gone in through the front door. The front door gives him another reason for why he took so long and, if asked, he could then claim ignorance over the open/closed position of the patio doors. Kate claims to have used the patio doors at 10pm and does not say she noticed anything untoward with them.

But I believe this is not how an abductor would have left them and I believe this seems to be an omission on their part and, to my mind, is proof that there was no abductor at all, for even though they try to con us by saying the patio doors were left unlocked and that is how he gained access, they omit to think closely enough about what position an eager abductor would, in reality, actually leave the patio doors in. I am sure he would not have drawn them closed behind him.

IMO if an abductor entered a strange apartment which he/she had been casing (as the McCanns maintain) via the unlocked patio doors, it is because he/she felt that it was safe to do so without being detected. Having entered by that route undetected it would then become the obvious route by which to leave, having already proven to be 'safe' whereas jumping out of the window or leaving by the front door would be a 'leap' into the unknown.

T4two wrote:

LJC wrote:Upon being informed that Madeleine was missing, GM said he returned to the apartment by 'his usual route'.

Now why didn't he use 'his usual route' when he was doing his earlier check on Madeleine? Did he actually use the shorter patio door route when he did his earlier check but afterwards say he used the longer front door route to cover up the amount of time he had been in the apartment attempting to cover up something far more sinister?

I know I have asked this question before, but it still bothers me. GM, it seems, took quite a while to carry out his check for a variety of reasons, amongst them claiming to have taken the longer route and use the toilet. One cannot help but think he was time wasting really. Some people think they did not use the patio doors at all and just fabricated a story, a few days later, that they were unlocked on the night and were their usual route, to give a reason for the abductor gaining access to the property.

On the other hand, it was a much shorter route and it made no sense to use the front door at all, as Mr Amaral points out in this video.

It seems to me Gerry has completely made this up in order, for some reason, to give the front door significance.

I'm trying to think though now, if an abductor had entered through the patio doors and then exited out through the front window, as the McCanns claim happened, would he have the courtesy to close the patio doors behind him on entering or would he leave them slid half way open? Surely he would have slid the patio doors along wide enough to gain access and just left them like that. After all, he would have been in a hurry, no time to waste for him. I am thinking he would rush in, sliding the doors along to almost the half way position, and then hurry on inside. Therefore, if Gerry did use the patio doors following on from the abductor (who Gerry claims was by now hiding inside the apartment) surely Gerry would have noticed they were open a considerable way and surely he would think that was strange. However, no mention seems to be made of anything unusual to do with the patio doors, other than they claim to have left them unlocked. Hmm. Even if the McCanns & Co had left them only slightly ajar, it still means pulling them so far to open and pulling again so far to close behind you and I doubt the abductor would have bothered to do this, too inconvenient for him I think.

So, is this why Gerry claims to have gone in through the front door. The front door gives him another reason for why he took so long and, if asked, he could then claim ignorance over the open/closed position of the patio doors. Kate claims to have used the patio doors at 10pm and does not say she noticed anything untoward with them.

But I believe this is not how an abductor would have left them and I believe this seems to be an omission on their part and, to my mind, is proof that there was no abductor at all, for even though they try to con us by saying the patio doors were left unlocked and that is how he gained access, they omit to think closely enough about what position an eager abductor would, in reality, actually leave the patio doors in. I am sure he would not have drawn them closed behind him.

IMO if an abductor entered a strange apartment which he/she had been casing (as the McCanns maintain) via the unlocked patio doors, it is because he/she felt that it was safe to do so without being detected. Having entered by that route undetected it would then become the obvious route by which to leave, having already proven to be 'safe' whereas jumping out of the window or leaving by the front door would be a 'leap' into the unknown.

And, what position would you think the abductor would leave the rear patio doors in? I certainly feel he would not be bothered as to their position and would have likely left them in a different position to what he found them in. He would have slid them half way across to gain entry and then would have run off the same way with a child in his arms so he would be unlikely to have closed them behind him. So how come, if this was their usual route and they left the doors unlocked, how come they didn't notice anything abnormal with these patio doors?

LJC wrote:Because she herself opened it from the inside?

Hi LJC.....how could she see outside if the shutter was down?

LJC wrote:She must have slid the front window open herself, flung her head out and called for Madeleine, and then left it that way. By doing so, perhaps she hoped to be seen screaming for her child out of an open front window, thereby claiming an independent witness. After all, if you find your child missing and if the window were actually closed, you would just run to the front door and scream into the street. However, putting your head out of an open window and screaming sort of reinforces what you yourself are trying to claim, that the window was left open by the abductor.

I think the McCanns thought about how an abductor might leave the position of the front window but not how an abductor would leave the position of the back patio windows if he came in that way, and, to my mind, that is a major flaw in their theory.

Kate McCann was asked why she didn't shout from the window, when she discovered Madeleine was missing, after all she could see the bar from her apartment. She was also asked why she left the twins alone in the apartment, because the abductor could have returned and took them as well as Madeleine.

It's a pity the interviewer didn't ask Kate, why she and her husband never looked for Madeleine.

HiDeHo wrote:I have just added the full version video of the documentary to (hopefully) help it reach as many people as possible.

Documentary BANNED by the McCanns (Overturned) Truth of the Lie - Gonçalo Amaral

Thank you and well done HiDeHo.

I hope the Scotland Yard homicide detectives, who are involved with this review, have seen this video.

LJC :And, what position would you think the abductor would leave the rear patio doors in? I certainly feel he would not be bothered as to their position and would have likely left them in a different position to what he found them in. He would have slid them half way across to gain entry and then would have run off the same way with a child in his arms so he would be unlikely to have closed them behind him. So how come, if this was their usual route and they left the doors unlocked, how come they didn't notice anything abnormal with these patio doors?

I completely agree with you LJC. Indeed I used to know someone in the security business who said that if a security man or indeed a burglar enters a building they always close and lock the door to avoid being surprised by someone coming in behind them. Whichever way you look at it - your point about them not noticing anything different about the position of the patio door is a very good one. So it would have been more convincing if KM had said at the beginning that she found the patio door closed and locked and ran around to the front of the apartment only to find the shutter up and the window open, but of course their first story was that the shutter had been jemmied and the abductor had entered through the window. The patio door story only evolved later when the police could find no sign of a break in.

Perhaps they closed the Patio doors behind them and opened the front door to carry Madeleine, isn't that where Jane Tanner said she saw the Guy carrying a child , across the road from the front door entrance.

Thanks HiDeHo,
This has to be hurting them.

Panda wrote:

Perhaps they closed the Patio doors behind them and opened the front door to carry Madeleine, isn't that where Jane Tanner said she saw the Guy carrying a child , across the road from the front door entrance.

Am I right in thinking, if you close the patio doors, they are automatically locked from the outside? In which case, how could Kate have come in from those doors to do her 10pm check?

kathybelle wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:I have just added the full version video of the documentary to (hopefully) help it reach as many people as possible.

Documentary BANNED by the McCanns (Overturned) Truth of the Lie - Gonçalo Amaral

Thank you and well done HiDeHo.

I hope the Scotland Yard homicide detectives, who are involved with this review, have seen this video.

kathybelle I'm sure they will have there own copy, maybe they asked for a copy when they started with this "review" if not maybe HiDeHo will send them one

So interesting to watch, thank you HiDeHo

Panda wrote:

LJC wrote:Because she herself opened it from the inside?

Hi LJC.....how could she see outside if the shutter was down?

There is some confusion over this shutter, whether it was up or down. I am sure I read that Gerry, on arriving back at the apartment following being informed that Madeleine was missing, went to the shutter and fiddled with it and, as a result of that, that he declared it had been previously tampered with, or jemmied. I am sure he said he found it broken. I am sure, after Gerry's examination of the shutter, that he left it in the shut position, but cannot be certain without going over all the info again

.

Gerry said: When he arrived at the bedroom he first noticed that the door was completely open, the window was also open to one side, the shutters almost fully raised, the curtains drawn back, MADELEINE's bed was empty but the twins continued sleeping in their cots. He clarifies that according to what KATE told him, that was the scenario that she found when she entered the apartment.

Then he closed the shutters, made his way to the outside and tried to open them, which he managed to do, much to his surprise given that he thought that that was only possible from the inside. They continued with searches outside, around the various apartment blocks, the deponent having asked MATHEW to go to the secondary reception in order to communicate the fact to the local police, since he had no doubt that his daughter had been abducted. He refutes, peremptorily, the possibility that MADELEINE could have left the apartment by her own means.


Nah, he closed them from inside, I think after Kate claimed she had bunged her head through the window and looked out and called for Madeleine, but the rest is rubbish about being able to go outside and open them. Nah, he closed the shutters and when the PJ arrived the shutters were indeed closed and they had probably never been opened for when he said he closed the shutters I believe he is telling porkys.

LJC wrote:

Panda wrote:

LJC wrote:Because she herself opened it from the inside?

Hi LJC.....how could she see outside if the shutter was down?

There is some confusion over this shutter, whether it was up or down. I am sure I read that Gerry, on arriving back at the apartment following being informed that Madeleine was missing, went to the shutter and fiddled with it and, as a result of that, that he declared it had been previously tampered with, or jemmied. I am sure he said he found it broken. I am sure, after Gerry's examination of the shutter, that he left it in the shut position, but cannot be certain without going over all the info again.

According to the police, Kate McCann said the shutter was jemmied and this is how the abductor exited and entered the apartment. The shutter was examined and found to be intact. Not broken, not jemmied, just intact.

The McCanns had previously been asked if they'd left their apartment locked when they went out and they said yes. After the shutter was found to be intact, they were asked again if they'd left their apartment locked and they said no.

When you tell the truth you have ONE answer which stays consistent, not say one thing one minute and completely change it the next.

wjk wrote:

Panda wrote:

Perhaps they closed the Patio doors behind them and opened the front door to carry Madeleine, isn't that where Jane Tanner said she saw the Guy carrying a child , across the road from the front door entrance.

Am I right in thinking, if you close the patio doors, they are automatically locked from the outside? In which case, how could Kate have come in from those doors to do her 10pm check?

IIRC these patio doors could only be locked from the inside.

Well done HiDeHo.

I've only just spotted this but have tweeted it and I'm sure many will be able to see it.

http://tinyurl.com/7wnma9n

Fern wrote:

wjk wrote:

Panda wrote:

Perhaps they closed the Patio doors behind them and opened the front door to carry Madeleine, isn't that where Jane Tanner said she saw the Guy carrying a child , across the road from the front door entrance.

Am I right in thinking, if you close the patio doors, they are automatically locked from the outside? In which case, how could Kate have come in from those doors to do her 10pm check?

IIRC these patio doors could only be locked from the inside.

Hi Fern, right, so Kate would still be able to get in to do her 10pm check even if the 'abductor' slid the door shut behind them?

Gerry said: When he arrived at the bedroom he first noticed that the door was completely open, the window was also open to one side, the shutters almost fully raised, the curtains drawn back, MADELEINE's bed was empty but the twins continued sleeping in their cots. He clarifies that according to what KATE told him, that was the scenario that she found when she entered the apartment.

Then he closed the shutters, made his way to the outside and tried to open them, which he managed to do, much to his surprise given that he thought that that was only possible from the inside. They continued with searches outside, around the various apartment blocks, the deponent having asked MATHEW to go to the secondary reception in order to communicate the fact to the local police, since he had no doubt that his daughter had been abducted. He refutes, peremptorily, the possibility that MADELEINE could have left the apartment by her own means.


Nah, he closed them from inside, I think after Kate claimed she had bunged her head through the window and looked out and called for Madeleine, but the rest is rubbish about being able to go outside and open them. Nah, he closed the shutters and when the PJ arrived the shutters were indeed closed and they had probably never been opened for when he said he closed the shutters I believe he is telling porkys.

wjk wrote:

Fern wrote:

wjk wrote:

Panda wrote:

Perhaps they closed the Patio doors behind them and opened the front door to carry Madeleine, isn't that where Jane Tanner said she saw the Guy carrying a child , across the road from the front door entrance.

Am I right in thinking, if you close the patio doors, they are automatically locked from the outside? In which case, how could Kate have come in from those doors to do her 10pm check?

IIRC these patio doors could only be locked from the inside.

Hi Fern, right, so Kate would still be able to get in to do her 10pm check even if the 'abductor' slid the door shut behind them?

And yet according to Jane Tanner, eggman/bundleman abductor carrying child, walked across the top of the road as though after exiting the window or front door..... Sorry! This is all too confusing. Too many versions of the story flying around - I think we ought to have a reconstruction as soon as possible.

I think you will be waiting a long time for that! a reconstruction should be ordered by SY -
it would be a farce as well they know and would expose for all to see the rubbish that mccanns and
their mates have come up with. They know they cant do a reconstruction cos the world will see
what they have said can in no way be true. It would show quite clearly that the truth has not been told which is why they didnt do one when asked. Have you ever heard of parents and mates of parents refusing to do a reconstruction - No! Anyone in that situation would be bending over backwards to assist the Police just as they would be searching until they were dead on their feet!

Madeleine deserves better..... but what do they care!