Madeleine book sheds light on mystery predator

wjk wrote:

kitti wrote:Haven't we heard all this crap before though.


Even though the pj discounted everything, all this book is doing is  disputing the discounting....


Secretly bashing the pj and insinuating  that they didn't follow up these leads.

This book, from what we have seen, is purely an opinion piece!
Its not full of anything other than old stories and the authors opinions on them!

And it's the same newspaper that is serialising those old stories which happened to be their headlines for the past 7 years.....the sun.


Are they at least a bit embarrassed with what they are doing.

thought K McC was a Liverpool girl, surprised she has any dealings with the Sun

almostgothic wrote:The McCanns may not have been interviewed face-to-face or phone-to-phone but, as with newspapers, these things are sometimes done indirectly through a third party so as to be non-attributable. Think 'source' ...

In any case, without the approval of the McCann lawyers this book would never have seen the light of day.

Of course the McCann lawyers approved of this book which tows the party line. I highly doubt that we will hear anything from Clarrie about how despicable this pair is profiting off of a missing child, as he commented many times regarding Amaral's book. Such a hypocrite.

Agree with comprenda and wjk that the comment that the McCann's would have likely locked the door had they known that their had been burglars and child predators around is truly shocking. Again, surely any sane person would not have left the children alone, yet the authors are very careful with their wording not to criticize the McCanns here or place any blame on them whatsoever.

The statistics about 56% of children who go missing being found safe and unharmed is totally irrelevant here. This statistic may be true, but certainly doesn't apply to children who have been missing for over 7 years! Surely that statistic would be closer to 1 in 1,000,000 or 0.0001%, and would be even lower for each minute, hour, day, month, and year that a child been missing.

chrissie1 wrote:Why after 7 years of following this case have i only just heard of a man in a mask with laundry round his feet, hope its not the mcscams dirty washing

I'd like to know what kind of laundry he wears around his feet.
Because 'laundry' is something of a blanket term, isn't it?
It would have to be something matching (like pillowcases) otherwise he'd just look weird if they weren't identical.
(I can't believe I just typed that...)


I think this is a guy who looked in his sock drawer and could only find odd socks.

Hang on a minute - this man lives with ME!  

oh that so funny almostgothic

interested wrote:

wjk wrote:This comment beggars belief!!
'Mr Summers said: "Had there been a warning note in the apartment, do we think the McCanns would have left the patio door unlocked on the night they went to the other side of the pool to have dinner away from their children?

"One would be tempted to think they would make sure everything was firmly locked up."


OMG!! So these authors are saying MW should have left notes to parents to make sure they locked their children IN! Not the parents should never have left the children alone night after night!!
NO ONE ever says they SHOULD NOT have left the children alone!It makes my blood boil!!

Next on the "to sue" list will be Mark Warner.

I think it might very well be the other way around. The book basically infers that it was Mark Warner that was negligent for not leaving warning notes in the apartment.

Ipso facto, Maddie was 'taken' because the McCann's left the apartment doors unlocked thinking it perfectly safe to do so.

That, written and published statement, by any stretch of the imagination, is pretty defamatory and damning.

If I were in Mark Warner's shoes, I would certainly look into the possibility of suing the Authors...

almostgothic wrote:

chrissie1 wrote:Why after 7 years of following this case have i only just heard of a man in a mask with laundry round his feet, hope its not the mcscams dirty washing

I'd like to know what kind of laundry he wears around his feet.
Because 'laundry' is something of a blanket term, isn't it?
It would have to be something matching (like pillowcases) otherwise he'd just look weird if they weren't identical.
(I can't believe I just typed that...)


I think this is a guy who looked in his sock drawer and could only find odd socks.

Hang on a minute - this man lives with ME!  

This couple actually make a living from their books?

Unbelievable!

Not Born Yesterday wrote:This couple actually make a living from their books?

Unbelievable!

Oh, I don't know NBY. Lots of people like fiction books.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:This couple actually make a living from their books?

Unbelievable!

Indeed

Personally I am amazed at this particular comment:

"The book also reveals how another intruder got into the bed of a young girl in the nearby resort of Carvoeiro three years earlier.

The man fled after the girl and her sister woke up and asked if he was their daddy or uncle, said Ms Swan."


Were these two children used to waking up and find either their daddy or their uncle in bed with them? I find it very strange.

very strange indeed. there was a situation many years ago when a child told her mother what a security man had done to her. she immediately called the police and during questioning the child said something along the lines of it was like Daddy does. Family moved in 24 hours, father and security guard arrested.

Lifted off Facebook: e-fit of the latest Maddie suspect.

I always thought it was The Mummy wot dunnit ......

So it wasn't Posh Spice or George Harrison, it was Boris Karloff!
It's like an episode of Futurama with all the celebrity heads in jars. Only not as clever or funny.

almostgothic wrote:I always thought it was The Mummy wot dunnit ......

Love it!

With a little help from her friends thereafter.......

Not Born Yesterday wrote:

almostgothic wrote:I always thought it was The Mummy wot dunnit ......

Love it!

With a little help from her friends thereafter.......

Brilliant!

excellent |

Nothing to 'look at here'

We've always thought that a 'mummy' did 'it'

Only not a 3,000 year old 'mummy'!

What we didn't know, til now, is that the 'mummy' wore laundry on her feet instead of 'gladiator' sandals!

Which were all the 'rage' apparently, in early Egyptian 'culture'!

What mummy, do we know of, nowadays, that still wear 'gladiator' sandals, everywhere?  

Some comments on the book - courtesy of the Jill Havern forum.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10283-a-very-quick-first-scan-of-looking-for-madeleine

This sounds worse than we can ever have imagined in our nightmares!

Many thanks to "Not Born Yesterday" for the link.  After reading Tony Bennett's brief synopsis, I am speechless/wordless!!

Reading that actually made me feel quite nauseous.

It didn't render me totally speechless, but let's just say that if I posted the words I wanted to use, I'd probably be banned from the internet for good.
I'm wrenching my angry fingers away from the keyboard as we speak ......