Kate's book

Tigger, they both are using that tactic. Tell a lie, and add something what is harmless and factual.
Or the other is, gerrys favorite, tell sort of "off lies" ..could you call them that??
Like:
"I never send 16 sms" he said. (interview, Rotley)

Of course he did not, he send 14, according to PJ files. (in one day, was it second of May?)
I a perfect example what he does.

He is not telling lies, it's only comes to that how informed the interviewer is. He does it a lot. The interviewer has the responsibility, gerry is shifting it over.

She doesnt have to write another book, after all, she said the proceeds go towards the search for Madeleine , SY are supposedly doing that now with OUR money, the same OUR money that cant go toward searching for other children as the MET haven't got the resources.


By the way, missing people website, I have always wondered, where does the donated money go apart from wages, do they actually search for the missing child or just give support.....

@weissnicht:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P-z5HJxr0o&feature=player_embedded

This is the same tactic. Note Kate's body language - she's positively flirting with the interviewer, like a girl on a first date.

At about 1.00 Gerry says something like 'no way there were x text messages .. the next day we had hundreds...

Same tactic. We're not b..... asking about the next day, but he deftly 'admits' to hundreds the following day - implying that there is some mix-up.

From the same interview:
Q – Did you fear that you might lose custody over Sean and Amelie because your behaviour was considered to be negligent?

Gerry – We were not negligent, we did what any reasonable parent would do.

So we've had glowing reports on their parenting:
Well within the bounds of reasonable parenting. (anonymous lawyer)
Seems to be Model Parents - Alan Pike. (book)
- we did what any reasonable parent would do.

Well that's all right then.

In the same interview Gerry states that his phone only holds ten calls. This was 2007 - that phone must have been old enough to vote.

Lioned wrote:You could take kate mccanns remarks as a 'veiled' threat at the Authorities who are hiding a bigger secret (clone snatchback theory maybe ?)
Or maybe she's just mental.

Could be as you say, a veiled threat to the authorities to
'play ball' or else a full disclosure would rock the system
of government(s) to the very core?
'Time' maybe what KM requires, time to raise her twins above
an age when these authorities could not remove them. Then, as
she describes, truth will become more clear without the fear
of losing her other children.
IMO Kate is therefore playing for time, and only when the time
is right for her, will the truth be known and its consequences
not so as devastating as it would be now.

tigger wrote:
@weissnicht:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P-z5HJxr0o&feature=player_embedded

This is the same tactic. Note Kate's body language - she's positively flirting with the interviewer, like a girl on a first date.

At about 1.00 Gerry says something like 'no way there were x text messages .. the next day we had hundreds...

Same tactic. We're not b..... asking about the next day, but he deftly 'admits' to hundreds the following day - implying that there is some mix-up.

From the same interview:
Q – Did you fear that you might lose custody over Sean and Amelie because your behaviour was considered to be negligent?

Gerry – We were not negligent, we did what any reasonable parent would do.

So we've had glowing reports on their parenting:
Well within the bounds of reasonable parenting. (anonymous lawyer)
Seems to be Model Parents - Alan Pike. (book)
- we did what any reasonable parent would do.

Well that's all right then.

In the same interview Gerry states that his phone only holds ten calls. This was 2007 - that phone must have been old enough to vote.

Agree. These people are liars - they aren't even very good liars and they do not get any better despite all the practice they've had over the years. But lying is what they do best - which makes one wonder how they ever got through a university education and qualified as doctors. If this is the sort of person most commonly found in the NHS these days it isn't surprising that the UK is way down the league tables in combating the major killer deseases. Frightening!

Kate McCann, mother of the century, says....

" I have had to keep saying to myself: I know the truth, we know the truth and God knows the truth. And one day, the
truth will out.

Yet publishing the truth is fraught with risks for our family. "
Unquote

Perhaps Amaral, like the dogs knows the real truth....

I know I would far sooner believe their versions, than hers.
Why on Gods earth should anyone believe her latest scrawled ramblings?

tigger wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Not Born Yesterday wrote:It's interesting to see the full quote in context.

It still makes no sense though that being truthful would lead to more criticism.

Most of that makes no sense: she knows the truth, they know the truth and God knows the truth, but the only person who knows what happened is the abductor?

Even odder, she sounds really weird.

Imo it might be the literal truth. If you consider that 'they've taken her' could also apply to a body being removed to another place by a person unacquainted with KM - this careful formulation would perhaps not even alert a polygraph.
The 'takers' can be abductors if one wishes to lie, not only to the world, but to oneself.
Purely theoretical of course but I do know habitual liars who are exactly like this.

The repeating 'truth' statement - she might be talking about the truth of the fact that Maddie has been 'taken'. Indeed she has.

I think she's trying to formulate a mantra that she can use or in the way advertising is used: the thing you're selling has to be named as often as possible.
They're selling the truth. Not as such of course, just the word.

Try "the angels" have taken her.

Iris wrote:

tigger wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Not Born Yesterday wrote:It's interesting to see the full quote in context.

It still makes no sense though that being truthful would lead to more criticism.

Most of that makes no sense: she knows the truth, they know the truth and God knows the truth, but the only person who knows what happened is the abductor?

Even odder, she sounds really weird.

Imo it might be the literal truth. If you consider that 'they've taken her' could also apply to a body being removed to another place by a person unacquainted with KM - this careful formulation would perhaps not even alert a polygraph.
The 'takers' can be abductors if one wishes to lie, not only to the world, but to oneself.
Purely theoretical of course but I do know habitual liars who are exactly like this.

The repeating 'truth' statement - she might be talking about the truth of the fact that Maddie has been 'taken'. Indeed she has.

I think she's trying to formulate a mantra that she can use or in the way advertising is used: the thing you're selling has to be named as often as possible.
They're selling the truth. Not as such of course, just the word.

Try "the angels" have taken her.

Or perhaps MI 5/6? Where was James Bond at that time - anyone checked him out?

5. There is a cadaver that has not been located, a conclusion that is validated by the English EVRD and CSI dogs and corroborated by the preliminary lab test results.

Certainties until October

“For me, and for the investigators that worked with me on the case until October 2007, the results that we reached were the following:
1. The minor Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A at the Ocean Club, in Vila da Luz, on the evening of the 3rd of May 2007;
2. An abduction was simulated;
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann are suspected of involvement in the concealment of their daughter’s cadaver;
4. Death may have resulted from a tragic accident;
5. There is indicia of neglect in the guard and safety of the children.”



That's the truth......

And.....



The cadaver was frozen?


Correio da Manhã - What do you think happened to the body?

Gonçalo Amaral – Everything indicated that the body, after having been at a certain location, was moved into another location by car, twenty something days later. With the residues that were found inside the car, the little girl had to have been transported inside it.

How can you state that?

Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk’s right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there.