McMINUTES: McCanns CHANGED story because SHUTTERS were NOT 'jemmied'!

HidiHo



The reason they left the Patio Doors open was so they would not have to WALK up the road and around the corner to the front door. Be careful what you say because Gerry was talking to Jez across the road having just left the apartment and he had used the Patio Door and used the gate which is where he crossed to talk to him . Jane Tanner supposedly walked past them without either seeing her.

HiDeHo wrote:From day one I have never believed the patio doors were left open.

May 4th statement, Gerry claims the door was locked.

Subsequent statements/interviews he claims the patio door was left open.

The 'PLAN' originally was the jemmied shutters (and locked door), but that didn't happen (maybe JW prevented it)

Regardless, they went ahead with telling that to friends/relatives

Once it was established the shutters were NOT jemmied, they needed to 'allow' the abductor a means of entry and so the unlocked patio door became the alternative.

Too late to take back what they had told the relatives...KEEPING IN MIND that they had NO IDEA the media frenzy and scrutiny they were about to be faced with.

My opinion is that is why they kept the open window 'issue' but not the jemmied shutters. The open window allowed for the abductor to pass across the top of the road as Gerry was standing at the gate so he couldn't exit through the gate.

It then became a CONFUSION issue, which I have every intention of highlighting and exposing with the videos.

NOONE in their right mind would leave those doors open with passports etc laying in the open.

This to me is the reason they have 'got away with it'

The focus IMMEDIATELY went to blaming them for leaving the patio doors open (and the presumption that the children were left alone) and they must have found this a great trade off for the truth. But then...nothing is known for sure......but I would rather put 'normal 'human behaviour' over their contrived statements and the subsequent damage control.

I ABSOLUTEY believe that (and always have) with all my heart and I have found NOTHING to suggest, yet, to prove myself incorrect.

Exactly. You have hit every nail on the head.

Panda wrote:HidiHo



The reason they left the Patio Doors open was so they would not have to WALK up the road and around the corner to the front door. Be careful what you say because Gerry was talking to Jez across the road having just left the apartment and he had used the Patio Door and used the gate which is where he crossed to talk to him . Jane Tanner supposedly walked past them without either seeing her.

This is what we have been led to believe.

Goncalo claims the T9 DID NOT use the road...they all used the walkway. (making Jane seeing the aductor ring 'hollow' according to GA)

Jez does NOT confirm the time as being 9.10p

If, as I believe, Madeleine was dead, she was NOT in the apartment.....that 'ngiht' was contrived.

Gerry had, maybe, visited the apartment to attempt to 'jemmy' the shutters as planned. Maybe, once he told ROB, the HE went to try and upon his return was Kate's cue to ' act out the plan'.

We know nothing...only what they say and I believe it is a VERY DIFFERENT scenario to what we have been privy to.

We have gone round in circles using the same puzzle pieces that make no sense....

There are puzzle pieces that the PJ and Goncalo know about which is ENOUGH to 'confirm' Madeleine died in the apartment (we do not have that info in the files)

There are also the details that actually happened and NOONE knows...

I think its time to start to look at the scenario with open eyes, thats where the truth will be found. Just my opinion though.

Keep in mind....the neglect issue ONLY happened because they changed their original statement claiming the doors were locked to leaving the patio doors open (to allow for an abductor)

There is nothing else to suggest they were left alone in an unlocked apartment.

On your wavelength Hideho

Too late to take back what they had told the relatives...KEEPING IN MIND that they had NO IDEA the media frenzy and scrutiny they were about to be faced with

.

This explains why the PJ went against their usual protocol of a reconstruction & went ahead with the abduction investigation much longer than needed to...hindsight would of course made them do the recon asap

Panda...you said,be careful what you say...sorry i dont understand that?

matthew wrote:On your wavelength Hideho

Too late to take back what they had told the relatives...KEEPING IN MIND that they had NO IDEA the media frenzy and scrutiny they were about to be faced with

.

This explains why the PJ went against their usual protocol of a reconstruction & went ahead with the abduction investigation much longer than needed to...hindsight would of course made them do the recon asap

Panda...you said,be careful what you say...sorry i dont understand that?

Bearing in mind the McCanns penchant for suing anybody , we know they read the internet blogs and forums, since HiDiho makes videos which capture a wider audience , whatever is said has to be accurate. Look how quickly amazon , on the sayso of the McCanns, withdrew Pat Browns' book .

In case I haven't made myself clear...

The basics of what MAY have happened.

Madeleine, at some point died in the apartment for reasons unknown.

The decision was made to create an 'abduction' using jemmied shutters as the means of entry.

During that night there was only approx FIVE MINUTES (using their timeline...which may of course be totally different) where ALL of the T9 were at the table.

There was a failed attempt to 'jemmy' the shutters.

Kate went ahead with her part of the plan.

They informed relatives and meda to ESTABLISH the abduction before public started to qustion anything. It is a known fact that once an opinion is formed it is a very personal affront to admit to forming the incorrect opinion...very few people are able to admit to being wrong. (hence the UK unable to admit to the possibility of the truth)

They claimed the doors were locked (as I believe they were) in their statement May 4th.

THEN...it was CONFIRMED the shutters were not damaged.

PROBLEM!...How could the abduction happened?..Ahhh....OPEN PATIO DOOR!

THEN...the mantra started and it worked in their favour and they have NEVER tried to stop it to this day....'Left the children alone while they dined yards away'

Once the suggestion that they were negligent and left the children alone was established it allowed people to BLAME them and focus on the lies.

Along with that...the subliminal effect of saying they left the children alone creates the scenario of an abductor and they are therefore guity of why Madeleine was abducted...

Madeleine is missing for VERY DIFFERENT REASONS to that....

Ok...i think Hideho is out of reach in those Canadian mountains

Yes i believe they do read us nasties but surely we can purport theories about this case...especially when their daughter was reported taken with the smell of cadaverine all over the place...disclaimer-im sure ive got a ghost in the house who posts in my name

matthew wrote:Ok...i think Hideho is out of reach in those Canadian mountains

Yes i believe they do read us nasties but surely we can purport theories about this case...especially when their daughter was reported taken with the smell of cadaverine all over the place...disclaimer-im sure ive got a ghost in the house who posts in my name

Lol @ Canadian mountains....I have a man made ski hill in the park next to me...which is next to a big mall...

All I am guilty of is trying to establish the truth without using conspiracy theories or being disrespectful to anyone.

Whatever I post is from the heart and what I truly believe is possible.

Guilty as charged Hideho

Goncalo claims the T9 DID NOT use the road...they all used the walkway. (making Jane seeing the aductor ring 'hollow' according to GA)

Jeremy Wilkins statement, 11th May 2007
As he approached the corner of the McCanns apartment, he saw Gerry appear from the area of the gate. He crossed the road and engaged in general conversation with Gerry. At this time they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate and Jeremy facing him. Rua Dr Agostino was about 10-15 meters to his right and the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks about 5 meters to his left.....Yet he did not see the mccann shutters being raised/jemmied?

If, as I believe, Madeleine was dead, she was NOT in the apartment.....that 'ngiht' was contrived.

Never in a million years did Maddie die on May 3rd. No way could they have created let alone even thought of the abduction story and getting all the ones who got involved in a hour! Would any parent on finding their child dead really be able to create such a story within an hour? This took days of planning

Gerry had, maybe, visited the apartment to attempt to 'jemmy' the shutters as planned. Maybe, once he told ROB, the HE went to try and upon his return was Kate's cue to ' act out the plan'.

I agree

We know nothing...only what they say and I believe it is a VERY DIFFERENT scenario to what we have been privy to.

The only ones it seems who actually saw the shutters raised/jemmied are...the mccanns!!! Not even their friends saw the shutters raised/jemmied....It is only the mccann word that they were raised/jemmied together without a single shred of evidence

There are also the details that actually happened and NOONE knows...

I totally agree, the PJ have held back certain informations which is logical they would do. You have to read between the lines of what they have released. For example, why were the PJ asking all the T9 if they knew the Irwins (who were at the restaurant that night). they've withheld their statements for a reason and are very keen to know if any T9 knew them

I think its time to start to look at the scenario with open eyes, thats where the truth will be found. Just my opinion though.

Yes. Take out the actors and look at it in black and white...Things makes much more sense & becomes clearer

Keep in mind....the neglect issue ONLY happened because they changed their original statement claiming the doors were locked to leaving the patio doors open (to allow for an abductor)

By taking the neglect, this takes away any responsibility off Mark Warner/Symingtons

Another major flaw in their "story" is the raised/jemmied had to be remained open between 9.15-10pm. During this time period 3 members of the T9 walked past this very opened raised/jemmied shutter at least 4 times...yet none of them noticed it despite walking past it a few centimetres away!!

tigger wrote:
Yet wasn't there a remark from JT that Gerry was staying away rather long from the table because he might be watching footie?

This was made from JT in the 'Maddie was Here' mockumentary (I think it later turned up in the bewk too). This to me was very revealing of gerry mccanns true character. When the always 'ever so helpful' JT tried to help by saying she thought mccann had gone to watch the footie...The dagger look he gave her and the way he cut her straight off was very much of a controlling aggressive nature. For the record, matches on that night were 2 Europa Cup semi finals (2nd legs) matches...starting at 7.45pm Portuguese time. One match was Espanyol v Werder Bremen, and the other match was Osasuna v Sevilla. Thats 3 Spanish teams and a German team...no British teams (nor Arsenal) so why would he be remotely interested in watching it....Wouldn't putting the TV on woken the kids up? The Mccanns did not turn the light on so not to disturb kids but mccann puts the TV on which gives off light and sound? Yet again...what the mccanns/T9 say does not make any sense

jd16 wrote:

tigger wrote:
Yet wasn't there a remark from JT that Gerry was staying away rather long from the table because he might be watching footie?

This was made from JT in the 'Maddie was Here' mockumentary (I think it later turned up in the bewk too). This to me was very revealing of gerry mccanns true character. When the always 'ever so helpful' JT tried to help by saying she thought mccann had gone to watch the footie...The dagger look he gave her and the way he cut her straight off was very much of a controlling aggressive nature. For the record, matches on that night were 2 Europa Cup semi finals (2nd legs) matches...starting at 7.45pm Portuguese time. One match was Espanyol v Werder Bremen, and the other match was Osasuna v Sevilla. Thats 3 Spanish teams and a German team...no British teams (nor Arsenal) so why would he be remotely interested in watching it....Wouldn't putting the TV on woken the kids up? The Mccanns did not turn the light on so not to disturb kids but mccann puts the TV on which gives off light and sound? Yet again...what the mccanns/T9 say does not make any sense

Correct. My husband likes football and watches even when his own team isn't playing/being televised but even he wouldn't stop and watch 2 foreign teams.

Keela wrote:

Correct. My husband likes football and watches even when his own team isn't playing/being televised but even he wouldn't stop and watch 2 foreign teams.

Mccann made such an effort to book the Tapas table every night thus leaving the kids alone totally vulnerable so he could booze it up with his adult friends....But then just leaves the table to go back to the apartment to watch the footie.....Defies logic!

I feel its important to establish that the 'evening' was a contrived effort to create a fake abduction.

Whether negligence is involved regarding the rest of the week or not (which I don't personally believe) the 'little more than an hour' was all about creating a 'believable' scenario. (Mostly for the police as they had no idea of the media monster that would ensue)

It's pretty obvious to those that are aware of the contents of the files that ANYTHING they said was to HIDE the truth. I cannot see any doubt about that (if one believes Madeleine was dead)

The Irwins statement (although not available to us) appears to, maybe suggest that they were sat at the table, as the T9 were asked if they were at the table and they denied it.

THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING IF CORRECT

Two extra people at the table allows for two females from T9 to be AWAY from the table....maybe....without seeing the 'number of people' at the table decline

What implications does that have?

What do the PJ know from the tapas guests statements that they havent released?

The waiters claim ONLY THE MEN left the table.

The only person I would vaguely trust to answer truthfully about whether the Irwins were at the table would be Dianne Webster but she doesn't appear to have been asked. (if someone could confirm that) OR Maybe she WAS asked and they didn't release the answer in the files. Why ask everyone else and not Dianne?

The mind boggles at what that night may have actually 'looked' like, and how much the PJ know but cannot say.

jd16 wrote:

Keela wrote:

Correct. My husband likes football and watches even when his own team isn't playing/being televised but even he wouldn't stop and watch 2 foreign teams.

Mccann made such an effort to book the Tapas table every night thus leaving the kids alone totally vulnerable so he could booze it up with his adult friends....But then just leaves the table to go back to the apartment to watch the footie.....Defies logic!

Thats the point I was trying to make in the post above...

There was no logic because that night (imo) wasn't about going to the tapas for a meal and checking on the children..

It was about setting up the simulated abduction and had nothing to do with checking the children. imo

Madeleine was dead (according to the dogs and PJ)....

What did they do that night to try to hide what had happened? THATS the important question imo

Mccann made such an effort to book the Tapas table every night thus leaving the kids alone totally vulnerable so he could booze it up with his adult friends....But then just leaves the table to go back to the apartment to watch the footie.....Defies logic!

ahh but Gerry said they nearly never went to the tapas that night,they were going to go to the millenium but the kids were tired as he reminded Kate(if he was pinnochio at the time of this quote it would still be growing now)-'Madeliene was here'

When talking of the crying incident the McCanns go into acting mode which to me suggests that they had to speak as Maddie would as she was not there at that time to say it herself,they both deleted calls/texts pre May 3rd with some motive as Kate left a call from an innocent wrong number in her phone records.

Jez Wilkins seems like he was just another fly in their ointment...along with those pesky dogs,which ironically rhymes with Blogs...which Gerry failed to mention of their imminent arrival but made claims of Shaun's liking for a particular fish & strongly believing Madeleine was alive when abducted...hmmmm

jd16 wrote:

To the best of my knowledge, there is no recorded statement by the parents in the police files or indeed elsewhere actually stating that the shutters had been jemmied

gerry mccann statement, 4th May 2007:
"At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key and saw immediately that the door to the children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the blinds were raised and the curtains were drawn open."

kate mccann statement, 4th May 2007:
"At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did. "

The back of Maddies sticker book was ripped off where they wrote a timeline. Why would they make a point of stating that "all shutters down" at 9pm if they were still down at 10pm?

The point remains that neither GM nor KM are on record stating that the shutters had been jemmied. As tigger correctly pointed out, the use of the word jemmied was introduced into the media narrative by members of the McCann family and friends reporting what GM had said and not directly by the parents themselves. The fact that family members and friends who had been contacted during the night were all singing from the same hymnsheet the next day, suggests that GM or KM had told them all the same story about the shutters being jemmied. But the point remains that neither GM or KM stated to the police that the shutters had been jemmied. Indeed, the shutters had not been jemmied as the police were easily able to establish and as recorded by the police in the files - there was no sign of a forced entry. I therefore stay with my opinion that family members and friends were fed the jemmied shutters story by GM/KM and Tapas to convince them that it could only be an abduction and nothing else, because it was vital that the abduction story be out in the media the next day.

I agree. They have been very 'clever' to not be caught out on a blatant lie by using specific words.

The statement the following morning reflects the door being locked.

I compiled a timetable of the police response and their statements...

Police Timetable.
http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Police/Police-timetable-2-plus-PJ-1-1087205.html

Random clips from statements....

11.00-11.45pm

gnr NPAfter hearing about the circumstances of the disappearance (from the father with the help of translation) he does not remember whether the word abduction was mentioned, and he went in his police car, to the apartment, accompanied by the father, the friend and the translator. When he arrived at the apartment he saw that the wooden door, now referred to as the main door, was closed and he thinks someone who he cannot identify opened it. When he entered, there were other individual apart from the mother, he does not know how many but there was at least another couple present.

Then, with his colleague, he searched the apartment. He opened all the cupboards of the bedrooms, living room and kitchen and he checked under the beds and in the fridge. He did not see the washing machine. He did not see anything strange during the search and there was no sign of a break in. As regards the bed clothes of the child’s bed, he found it to have a normal disposition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr JR
remembers that the window in the girl’s bedroom was closed with the blind raised up the space of the width of a hand. He does not remember the existence of curtains. The father indicated, through the translator, alleging that when the disappearance was discovered, the windows and blinds were open.

He found the parents to be nervous and anxious, he did not see any tears from either of them although they produced noises identical to crying. He did not feel that this was an abduction, although this was the line indicated by the father

PJ
Antonio Henrique da Duarte Conceição
Together with employee Silvia (service manager of the OC and who also acted as translator, the father (Gerald McCann) and the friend they went inside the apartment from which Madeleine McCann had disappeared. After Roque checked that the child was not in the apartment, he gathered information from the mother and father. He was told by the patrol, that the father had put forward a theory saying that it could have been an abduction. He was also told that there was a shutter that had been “raised”.

gnrMP- At reaching the location, the two elements that made up the patrol , the current witness and his colleague, Nelson Costas, proceeded into the interior of the apartment, with the goal of investigating the contours which eventually surrounded the disappearance of that minor;
. In this sentiment, the deponent states that they searched al the dependencies of the residence and all the pieces of furniture, in order to confirm the disappearance -- effectively confirming that that she was not in the interior;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr chiefJRJosé Maria Batista Roque- During the search he did not find anything strange apart from the bedclothes on Madeleine’s bed, which were too tidy, it appeared that she had been picked up of had left the bed with great care.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnrADAntonio Henrique de Conceiçâo Duarte - he arrived at the site of the disappearance of the young girl on 3rd May of this year, about 25 to 30 minutes after the patrol.

Upon arriving at the site he was told that this was a case of abduction, this information being transmitted, he thinks, by the girl’s father. He was also informed by Silvia (head of maintenance at the resort) that the parents and friends said it was an abduction, their intention being to inform the media, and that they were in fact making phone calls to this effect.

he remembers that the blinds of the window of the child’s room were open, but inclined (the lower part, at about a hand’s width). He does not remember if the window was open or what the state of the curtains was. He did not enter the room because he was told, he does not remember by whom, that the twins were sleeping.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr JR
He then went to the apartment, accompanied by his colleague, the father and friend as well as the translator. When he arrived at the apartment he saw the mother there, who opened the wooden door, now referred to as the main door. When he entered, apart from the mother, there were three individuals, one female and two male, whom he cannot identify.

Then, while his colleague remained in the hall, and the others were in the living room, the witness went through the entire apartment. He opened all the cupboards in the bedrooms, living room and kitchen and checked under the beds and inside the washing machine. He did not see the fridge.


During the search he did not find anything strange apart from the bedclothes on Madeleine’s bed, which were too tidy, it appeared that she had been picked up from or had left the bed with great care

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr JR
After the search, he noticed a situation that seemed unusual to him, when at a determined moment, the girl’s parents kneeled down on the floor of their bedroom and placed their heads on the bed, crying. He did not notice any comments or expression from them, just crying. He says that at the main reception the father also knelt down, placing his head on the floor and crying. He did not hear the father say anything

NP gnr
After the search of the interior, his colleague went to check the area around the apartments and the Tapas Bar, while the witness remained next the apartment, just outside it. At that moment a female individual, he does not know whether she was a member of the group of friends, who was in the neighbouring apartment, said that she saw an individual carrying a child, running, and that because of the pyjamas she was wearing it could have been Madeleine. It was in these circumstances that abduction began to be talked about.
This sighting did not seem to him to be very credible, because when he asked her about the physical characteristics of the individual, she said it was very dark, however she saw the pyjamas clearly.

When asked, he said that at that time he also saw a lot of local people, who were searching for the missing girl.

Whilst he was outside he talked to the witness mentioned previously and to some residents who had not seen anything. He exchanged some words with the mother, who was crying and only asked for more police officers

When questioned about the bedroom windows, he only remembers that blinds of the window of the girl’s bedroom were not totally closed. He does not remember about the existence of curtains or whether the window itself was closed.

He says that in the apartment there were two beds and two cots placed in Madeleine’s room, he does not remember their position. The children never woke up, he is sure, not knowing what position they were in, however he found this situation to be very strange, as a lot of noise was made.

As regards the parents, he says they were nervous and anxious, emotional. He adds that upon observing the scene it did not appear to him to be an abduction, but rather a normal disappearance where the child had left by her own means.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr JR
After the search he told his colleague to wait by the door while he went to the area around the apartments and the Tapas Restaurant. Whilst he was doing this he noticed the presence of many local people who were searching for the girl.

He also refers to a situation when he was searching outside, near the pool, that someone from the OC whom he cannot identify, passed him a mobile phone, as a British Consulate employee who spoke in Portuguese, wanted to talk to the authorities. Upon speaking to him, he told him that the investigation and subsequent actions were under the responsibility of the PJ


11.45pm

gnrMP- After the search, he noticed a situation that seemed unusual to him, when at a determined moment, the girl’s parents kneeled down on the floor of their bedroom and placed their heads on the bed, crying. He did not notice any comments or expression from them, just crying. Upon leaving from the main reception the father also knelt down, placing his head on the floor and crying. He did not hear the father say anything.
He found the parents to be nervous and anxious, he did not see any tears from either of them although they produced noises identical to crying. He did not feel that this was an abduction, although this was the line indicated by the father.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gnr ADAntonio Henrique da Duarte Conceição
He arrived alone, in his own car at about 23.50 and went to the apartment (to the entrance hall) by means of the front door (opposite the parking area) where he found the girl’s parents, a couple and Silvia. He was told that the twins were still sleeping in the bedroom. On the patio next to the front door, was an English woman who had spoken to the patrol, and had referred to having see someone pass in the street, in a dark area, who was carrying a child. As the information had already been gathered and given his limited knowledge of English, he did not manage to talk to the woman

Its important to remember that May 3rd 'night' was not about leaving children alone and drinking lots of wine and only checking on the children every 30 minutes.

Madeleine was dead.

They had formulated a plan and that night was to act out the plan. Most details had probably been considered but inevitably there is always random questions put to each of them that have not been discussed and that explans the discrepancies.

Some believe that Madeleine died that night and the plan was executed quickly within an hour (approx).

I have never believed that for a variety of reasons.

Shock and grief whether doctors or not takes time.

The endless details needed to put a plan into place

Removal of Madeleine's body. (I need a tin hat to suggest I cannot believe for one second that Gerry would openly walk around the streets with his dead daughter in his arms, possibly only a half an hour or so after she was found dead.)

The 'time' factor. WHY, if they found Madeleine dead that night would everything need to be in place by 10pm? Why not 11 to give them more time?

Why would they need to deal with it that night?

Why not leave it until the next day...or the day after...

Which is what I believe happened.

Amaral is quoted as saying Madeleine was last seen at 5.30pm on 3rd May .....I presume that the Staff at OC confirmed she had tea there and was picked up at 5.30pm by one of the Parents.

Panda wrote:Amaral is quoted as saying Madeleine was last seen at 5.30pm on 3rd May .....I presume that the Staff at OC confirmed she had tea there and was picked up at 5.30pm by one of the Parents.

Witness statements claim that.

However, when Mark Harrison did the searches his report claimed that they searched the CRECHE as the last place that Madeleine was seen by an independent person

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.

This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann . Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.

I think this is one of those instances where what we hear from Goncalo and the PJ has to reflect what the witnesses have told them.

To search the creche and claim it to be the last place she was seen has more credibility imo as to the truth.. The last CONFIRMED sighting

To add.....No suggestion as to what day!

Panda wrote:Amaral is quoted as saying Madeleine was last seen at 5.30pm on 3rd May .....I presume that the Staff at OC confirmed she had tea there and was picked up at 5.30pm by one of the Parents.

That does not necessarily mean he believes that. Amaral has to work with what is in the public domain. The PJ held a lot (some 30 +%) back. Amongst those papers are the creche records of the 29th April for instance.

As to lies not directly contributed to the McCanns, this has been their modus operandi all the time. When the results from the CSI dogs came through, they phoned the family and mouthpieces to pass on their reactions. In other words, they were extremely media and legally aware.
This is why I think it was all prepared, who on earth would think of such tactics if you've just lost your child?

In fact, Philomena who's not the most articulate of people, must have had emails from Gerry as she was repeating the message pretty well verbatim every time. I've seen the same in quote in newspapers from her re Maddie, at the start always described in a formulaic way. No variation in the words used points at having learnt it by heart.
It's when questions are asked that are not on the menu that truth creeps in. 'She was a screamer'. and 'That girl could throw a tantrum' are good examples of that.

I wonder if they used the cadaver dogs to search the creche and surrounding area.

tigger wrote:

Panda wrote:Amaral is quoted as saying Madeleine was last seen at 5.30pm on 3rd May .....I presume that the Staff at OC confirmed she had tea there and was picked up at 5.30pm by one of the Parents.

That does not necessarily mean he believes that. Amaral has to work with what is in the public domain. The PJ held a lot (some 30 +%) back. Amongst those papers are the creche records of the 29th April for instance.

As to lies not directly contributed to the McCanns, this has been their modus operandi all the time. When the results from the CSI dogs came through, they phoned the family and mouthpieces to pass on their reactions. In other words, they were extremely media and legally aware.
This is why I think it was all prepared, who on earth would think of such tactics if you've just lost your child?

In fact, Philomena who's not the most articulate of people, must have had emails from Gerry as she was repeating the message pretty well verbatim every time. I've seen the same in quote in newspapers from her re Maddie, at the start always described in a formulaic way. No variation in the words used points at having learnt it by heart.
It's when questions are asked that are not on the menu that truth creeps in. 'She was a screamer'. and 'That girl could throw a tantrum' are good examples of that.

If Madeleine was last seen at 5:30 pm on 3rd May then the observations of Dr christian Ludke clearly explain how it is perfectly credible for the plan to have been put into operation in the short period of time between 5:30 pm and 10:00 pm when the alarm was raised. As 'normal' observers we are unable to understand how parents could react within such a short period of time when faced with the result of what would have been a horrific accident. We therefore try to prove that the 'event' happened earlier in the week and that creche records have been tampered with etc. because that is the only way we can explain it - anything other than an accident is unacceptable.

http://madeleinemccann.org/2007/2164/dr-christian-ludke/

T4two wrote:

tigger wrote:

Panda wrote:Amaral is quoted as saying Madeleine was last seen at 5.30pm on 3rd May .....I presume that the Staff at OC confirmed she had tea there and was picked up at 5.30pm by one of the Parents.

That does not necessarily mean he believes that. Amaral has to work with what is in the public domain. The PJ held a lot (some 30 +%) back. Amongst those papers are the creche records of the 29th April for instance.

As to lies not directly contributed to the McCanns, this has been their modus operandi all the time. When the results from the CSI dogs came through, they phoned the family and mouthpieces to pass on their reactions. In other words, they were extremely media and legally aware.
This is why I think it was all prepared, who on earth would think of such tactics if you've just lost your child?

In fact, Philomena who's not the most articulate of people, must have had emails from Gerry as she was repeating the message pretty well verbatim every time. I've seen the same in quote in newspapers from her re Maddie, at the start always described in a formulaic way. No variation in the words used points at having learnt it by heart.
It's when questions are asked that are not on the menu that truth creeps in. 'She was a screamer'. and 'That girl could throw a tantrum' are good examples of that.

If Madeleine was last seen at 5:30 pm on 3rd May then the observations of Dr christian Ludke clearly explain how it is perfectly credible for the plan to have been put into operation in the short period of time between 5:30 pm and 10:00 pm when the alarm was raised. As 'normal' observers we are unable to understand how parents could react within such a short period of time when faced with the result of what would have been a horrific accident. We therefore try to prove that the 'event' happened earlier in the week and that creche records have been tampered with etc. because that is the only way we can explain it - anything other than an accident is unacceptable.

http://madeleinemccann.org/2007/2164/dr-christian-ludke/

Actually what Dr. Ludke says is that the plan would be formed a long time previously. Putting it in operation would indeed be possible if it was well-prepared.
If there was an accident, which is indeed likely, it doesn't preclude planning in any case. The accident wasn't foreseen, but imo the aftermath of the 'abduction' was prepared some time previous to the holiday.
I.e. imo the abduction was going to happen in any case, the plan had to be adjusted because of the accident, which imo probably happened quite early in the holiday.