A Dissection of the EBook about the McCanns

widowan wrote:Supposedly it wasn't about money it was the inadvisability of leaving them with the same strangers that watched them all day.

I guess people in a group are less likely to interfere with or harm your child, sure enough, but that wasn't what they were on about, it was that it didn't seem wise to leave them with strangers vs have their own parents check them.

I shudder to think what this lot would do if in government. I think that's safely ruled out however.

It costs alot off money for the children to go to the creche every day, morning and afternoon.


I think a morning or afternoon were free but the full days was expensive.


The mccanns had the three children in the creche every day morning and afternoon.

So they had money plus they had to pay for their tennis lessons...

I think he was a retired policeman Panda.

Panda wrote:Hi jinvta

The book is an EBook , free download , but I opted to print it and cherrypick the interesting bits.  It's 112 pages, but some are all references , but as you say it is very very interesting and the guy had obviously done his homework, this is the link

http://whathappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/free-e-book-detailing-facts-of.html

Thank you Panda! Things are looking so good for the McCanns at the moment!

kitti wrote:I think he was a retired policeman Panda.

Morning Kitti, Control Risk was a one man band? I thought they were Government .there was a brief spell with another Agency name beginning with H?

kitti wrote:Sheer coincidence that tanners man and smiths man were wearing the  exact same clothes....


Did they show smith man on SY recon?


What was he wearing?

They just showed the face, that they got from the efits that Exton had done. They didn't show him walking or carrying anyone that I recall.

the description was that he had on beige pants, he was 5-9, 35-45 years old, short brown hair. that was from kate's book by the way! the efits were done by the guys Halligen hired who came from MI5

Somehow his hair became gray once sy got hold of it but the face still looks young, tho I suppose there are 35-40 year olds with gray hair

I meant the e book was written by a retired policeman Panda.

widowan wrote:

kitti wrote:Sheer coincidence that tanners man and smiths man were wearing the  exact same clothes....


Did they show smith man on SY recon?


What was he wearing?

They just showed the face, that they got from the efits that Exton had done. They didn't show him walking or carrying anyone that I recall.

the description was that he had on beige pants, he was 5-9, 35-45 years old, short brown hair. that was from kate's book by the way! the efits were done by the guys Halligen hired who came from MI5

Somehow his hair became gray once sy got hold of it but the face still looks young, tho I suppose there are 35-40 year olds with gray hair

Well gerrys hair would be grey now, wouldnt it...by the way, why hasn't Gerry got grey hair, does he colour it?

kitti wrote:

Well gerrys hair would be grey now, wouldnt it...by the way, why hasn't Gerry got grey hair, does he colour it?

Of course he does, he's naturally ginger  

kitti wrote:I meant the e book was written by a retired policeman Panda.

I knew he had to be clued up and now we know the McCanns had a visit from Control risk , the plot thickens. Who is the Benefector who paid their fees. So Redwood used an old EFIT???? You know what, it's funny , but not really if you know what I mean , but after over 6 yrs we are no nearer finding out what really happened than on day one. If Amaral loses the case I will never post a comment about this case again....that's a promise.

O.K. cut the sighs of relief.   I see youv'e got the Buzzards out, ready to pounce eh kitti,  

Another little snippet from the Book:

"First Reports.....Trish Cameron, Brian Healey, Jon Corner, Jill Renwick........in all four cases they were told that the shutters were broken open , smashed or jemmied , three of the reports include that the door was open , or hanging open.

As one commentator, Anthony Sharples writing under the name John Blacksmith , percipiently noted:

What must be appreciated at this point , is that these comments , from cl;osest family and Friends - the first to be contacted, are not Chinese whispers. It is not a case that the McCanns rang one person who got the message wrong, and this got passed on to everyone else. These are four people who received independent telephone calls from Gerry or Kate, in the hours following the "abduction" and made independent statements. Yet the statements all recount the same story.The McCanns apartment was locked so the "Abductor" must have gained access via the jemmied shutters and left via the front door."


=========================================

How did they explain that away to their Family and friends when there was no evidence the shutter was jemmied and only Kate's fingerprint was found on the Window? Yet Kate in the Channel 4 Anniversary programme , even does a physical impression of the curtain blowing..

Panda wrote:
Another little snippet from the Book:

"First Reports.....Trish Cameron, Brian Healey, Jon Corner, Jill Renwick........in all four cases they were told that the shutters were broken open , smashed or jemmied , three of the reports include that the door was open , or hanging open.

As one commentator, Anthony Sharples writing under the name John Blacksmith , percipiently noted:

What must be appreciated at this point , is that these comments , from cl;osest family and Friends - the first to be contacted, are not Chinese whispers. It is not a case that the McCanns rang one person who got the message wrong, and this got passed on to everyone else. These are four people who received independent telephone calls from Gerry or Kate, in the hours following the "abduction" and made independent statements. Yet the statements all recount the same story.The McCanns apartment was locked so the "Abductor" must have gained access via the jemmied shutters and left via the front door."


=========================================

How did they explain that away to their Family and friends when there was no evidence the shutter was jemmied and only Kate's fingerprint was found on the Window? Yet Kate in the Channel 4 Anniversary programme , even does a physical impression of the curtain blowing..

These are the kinds of lies that make real detectives scratch their heads and take a closer look at Tapas 9 and in particular the McCanns, because why would you lie to cover up the fact that you left the kids vulnerable, when that was so obvious to anyone with a pulse.

I wonder what Oldfields are saying to each other at this point, or Jane and Russell for that matter. All these people conspired in the fabrication and they dog piled onto Murat, as well.

They managed to "out" dozens of people who had nothing to do with this but we can't know anything about the people who were actually involved because they've been sworn to secrecy? It's okay to "protect" the witnesses whose stories had "major anomalies" but random people should just have their blond children seized?

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner. She was publically ridiculed for her part in this. It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner.  She was publically ridiculed for her part in this.  It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

I've always believed JT was protecting ROB!

pennylane wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner.  She was publically ridiculed for her part in this.  It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

I've always believed JT was protecting ROB!

Pennylane, great minds and all that ...... 

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.

sweater.
I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner.  She was publically ridiculed for her part in this.  It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

Morning mossman, I remember reading a long time ago that Police went to the Home in the UK of Jane Tanner and picked up a Sweater. I also remember reading that O,Brien was called to 5a to do a tracheotomy on Madelaine which failed. Of course, these could be just the figment of someone's imagination but there could be some truth in it.

mossman wrote:

pennylane wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner.  She was publically ridiculed for her part in this.  It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

I've always believed JT was protecting ROB!

Pennylane, great minds and all that ...... 

 

Their daughter had an operation on a nasty foot infection right before the holiday. Perhaps they had some prescribed calming medication in the event she had trouble sleeping?

pennylane wrote:

mossman wrote:

pennylane wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

Yes widowan , it must have been embarassing for them , but I'm sure they wriggled out of it by saying "I know what I saw" which Jane Tanner said on Panorama all those years ago about the Man she saw carrying a child.

In that book as well is a paragraph about O'Brien's testimony which was very suspect. , I'll try to find it.


I think most of us would tell a little fib to help a friend, but to tell deliberate lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is most definitely unacceptable.

Panda, over the years the words "blood is thicker than water" have stayed in my mind, when it comes to Jane Tanner.  She was publically ridiculed for her part in this.  It might some day transpire her involvement was to protect somebody much closer to home, her home, IMO.

As you say, telling lies when the fate of a missing child is at stake is huge and not something most people would do for an acquaintance.

I've always believed JT was protecting ROB!

Pennylane, great minds and all that ...... 

 

Their daughter had an operation on a nasty foot infection right before the holiday.  Perhaps they had some prescribed calming medication in the event she had trouble sleeping?

Yes, that littl girl was recovering from toxic shock which is potentially fatal. It was touch and go as to whether or not they would travel with her, they decided just a few days beforehand. Then, they just leaver her alone, it's unbelievable.

What about the rumour of a blood stained sheet hanging over the balcony of O'Briens Apartment that O"Brien had washed.?

Going back to the shutters, in the EBook , the Author mentions a Dispatches Programme "Searching for Madeleine" aired on 18th October 2007. It was effectively proved that "no way anybody could break into the Apertment and leave no trace".

During the week following the Dispatches programme the McCanns official spokesman , Clarence Mitchell announced that the McCanns now reversed their previous stance on the break'in story.

"The spokesman for the family of Madeleine McCann has reversed a statement made in the early days of the search for the missing child...However, in the early part of the hunt , friends and family told journalists that the shutter on the Apartment where the McCanns were staying had been broken.
There was no evidence of a break-in said Mr Mitchell. "I'm not going into the detail , but I can safely say that Kate and Gerry
are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out of the window as their means of escape, and to do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything, they got out of the window fairly easily.


CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS GUY!!!!!!

No one touched the sill so how an adult would get over that bed and out the window is a real mystery.

Try doing it with a 4 year old in your arms, you couldn't even hand her through the window without getting onto the bed first. I suppose they could have stood on the bed to hand her out - without disturbing the sill lichen which was still undisturbed. This would put her out the front window with a door only feet away but possibly you could not open that door without a key. I'll give them open window and perhaps the one on the inside left via the patio doors after straightening the cover so that no footprints would be found on it... it wasn't jimmied though which they told no fewer than four people on the night.


I would not tell a fib to save a friend in this situation other than something high level like They are generally good parents, they're very concerned about their kids and responsible - I certainly wouldn't invent a CHECK I didn't do, or state that I watched them leave the table to check if I knew it weren't true. That's ridiculous. they're educated people they know this would interfere with the investigation and if one other person could refute that statement then you'd be seen to be a liar and the scrutiny would fall on you. Unwise all the way around as well as unethical.

I don't think Rob washed any bloody sheets nor did I ever hear that one was hanging off his balcony, that wouldn't be terribly clever in trying to hide a crime.

he did wash his kid's sheets from vomit supposedly, possibly to hide signs of medication in the vomitus? or maybe just because that is what you do when your child is ill and you have a washing machine right there.

I wonder if Jane and Rob are the friends Kate mentions in the book about people they are no longer close with. SY believes Jane that she saw a tourist walking with a kid, Gerry never corroborated her statement and their family was drawn into this and made to look bad, especially her husband who was the one man away from the table for any length of time...

I think if this had happened in an English speaking Country it would have been resolved by now. Not only did the McCanns receive unprecedented support, imagine a small resort like PDL having an Ambassador brought in !!!!!

What bothers me is, if the McCanns were guilty of disposing of Madeleine's body, would they have phoned a PM for help?

widowan, do you remember the case not so long ago of a similar situation, a baby/child? goes missing, the Husband works nights I think and it happened in a small town.....do you remember it and if so ws the case solved.?

Panda wrote:I think if this had happened in an English speaking Country it would have been resolved by now. Not only did the McCanns receive unprecedented support, imagine a small resort like PDL having an Ambassador brought in !!!!!

What bothers me is, if the McCanns were guilty of disposing of Madeleine's body, would they have phoned a PM for help?

widowan, do you remember the case not so long ago of a similar situation, a baby/child? goes missing, the Husband works nights I think and it happened in a small town.....do you remember it and if so ws the case solved.?

No I don't. Children go missing in the US a frightening amount. And frighteningly often it is a parental involvement scenario.

Lisa Irwin....

kitti wrote:Lisa Irwin....

Thanks kitti, that was a similar case wasn't it, "abduction" , wasn't she a bit of a drinker and fell asleep.