By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
If you read the witness statements of The 'Tapas 7' and Gerry & Kates there are a lot of holes in them and the timing of events that evening doesn't tally with other witnesses in the Tapas bar. The Police theorised that either Gerry or Kate discovered Maddies body much earlier but they didn't raise the alarm until later after they had cleaned the apartment and temporarily hidden the body.
[Post edited 4 Jun 2020 20:08]
So they temporarily hid the body before dining out with friends then disposed of the body while being followed by the media 24/7. The friends went and checked on Maddie so are we saying they are co conspirators ?
Why look to explain an incredulous scenario, which has no evidence.
“I don’t believe they killed her deliberately or even by accident, but I do think they covered up her death”
Umm, what???
That she died as a result of an accident in the apartment when she was left on her own and they covered it up as they had too much to lose if found guilty of severe neglect.
Definitely the McCann's what? For what it's worth I don't think they killed her deliberately or even by accident. I do believe based on what evidence there is it is more likely they covered up her tragic death and hid the body possibly with help than her being abducted. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence against a cover-up by the Mcann's and the Tapas 7 when there is zero evidence that she abducted unless you are aware of some.
You started off ok. I say ok in that you based your theory on your belief of facts you read. The middle was a bit mixed, some points to back up your theory of facts you read and some not made up of facts. You have ended terribly. You are just digging an awfully big hole for yourself. Give up now while you are losing 7-0. The record is joint at 9-0.
So they temporarily hid the body before dining out with friends then disposed of the body while being followed by the media 24/7. The friends went and checked on Maddie so are we saying they are co conspirators ?
Why look to explain an incredulous scenario, which has no evidence.
That is what the police report concluded was the most likely scenario.
That is what the police report concluded was the most likely scenario.
Is this the totally discredited Portuguese one ?
I would love to have been a fly on the wall that night, look 5 friends we have accidentally killed our daughter, would you mind covering for us while we sort it ? Thanks, we owe you one.
Tapas ?
I don’t care what the report says, you think that is a credible scenario ?
I would love to have been a fly on the wall that night, look 5 friends we have accidentally killed our daughter, would you mind covering for us while we sort it ? Thanks, we owe you one.
Tapas ?
I don’t care what the report says, you think that is a credible scenario ?
It is only discredited by the McCann's & Clarence Mitchell. The MSM have mainly just printed the spin Clarence Mitchell has given them.
I think it is far more credible than the abduction theory yes. This is what Kate McCann said in her statement to the police when she discovered Maddie was missing. I will paraphrase it to shorten.
'I went in to the apartment and walked up to the bedroom door. The door wasn't closed over we left it ajar to let some light in . I went to open it fully but the door suddenly slammed shut. I opened it and peered in. It took a while for my eyes to adjust to the light. All of a sudden there was a whooshing sound and the curtains flapped wildly, thats when I realised the bedroom shutter and window were open. I then noticed Madeleine was not in her bed. I looked around the apartment to see if she was hiding but she was not there. I immediately thought they have taken her. I ran out out of the apartment and over to the Tapas bar to Gerry.'
Now a couple of things, if a door suddenly slammed shut would you not immediately investigate what made the door slam shut? Turn the light on and immediately look at the window. She only realised the window was open due to the gush of wind remember. According to readings from the local airport there was no strong winds that particular night it was very calm.
'Also I immediately thought they have taken her' Firstly who is 'they'!? And why would that be your first thought? Surely your first thought would be Maddie must have woken up and called for us and when no one came she got up to look for us. The patio door was left unlocked or so they claim, is it not possible she could have wondered out of the apartment looking for them? Secondly they had twins who were no more than a year old. Would you really leave two young children like that alone to run to the Tapas bar if you believed your other child was abducted? Remember she said the bedroom window was open. It over looked the Tapas bar which was only 50 meters away as the crow flies. Would it not make more sense to call for Gerry from the window?
In both their initial statements they stated the 'abducter' must have forced the shutter open and that is how they got in through the window. The Police discovered it was not possible to force the shutters open from the outside they could only be opened from the inside using the mechanism. There was also no evidence that someone even tried to force it open.(no dents or scratches) when they learnt of this from the police they then stated the intruder must have got via the patio door as they left it unlocked(yes like you do when you have got young kids!) Then opened up the shutter and window to the bedroom to make his escape with Maddie that way even though there is a clear line of sight from that window to the Tapas bar.
Oh and one other thing if you look at the crime scene photos of the bedroom. The bed is pressed right against one side of the curtains and a chair is pressed right against another side. There is no way the curtains could have violently blown in like she claimed.
It is the view of a lot people these days but more importantly it was the view of the Portugese and Leicestershire police after they completed their investigation. They concluded that Madeleine died as a result of an accident and the Mccann's covered it up. All of the files from the investigation are available to the public online. There were 15 DNA markers that were a match for Maddie from bodily fluids found in the boot of the McCann's hire car. In some states in America that is enough to convict people.
" bodily fluids found in the boot of the McCann's hire car."
You have literally made this up.
Or copied it from a source that has made this up.
Why on earth would anyone be set on doing this whilst pretending to follow the 'evidence'?
No effort from you at all other than to recite tabloid speculation and present it as fact.
Much of it from circa 2007 ish too when this nonsense was rife.
" bodily fluids found in the boot of the McCann's hire car."
You have literally made this up.
Or copied it from a source that has made this up.
Why on earth would anyone be set on doing this whilst pretending to follow the 'evidence'?
No effort from you at all other than to recite tabloid speculation and present it as fact.
Much of it from circa 2007 ish too when this nonsense was rife.
This is real low stuff.
'No effort from me at all other than to recite tabloid speculation.' Even though I provided links to the official report which the majority of the MSM ignored. Possible body fluids, it can't be determined what it was but it contained 15 DNA markers that matched Madeleine 's. Not conclusive proof much should not be ignored either. Can you explain the reaction of the Cadaver dogs who before they were incorrectly smeared and discredited by the McCanns had been incredibly successful in helping the police secure convictions in many cases, some of which were high profile?
Perhaps you and some others should have a look at this statement analysis by the respected statement analyst Peter Hyatt. Then it might just persuade to look into the maddie case just a little bit deeper.
'No effort from me at all other than to recite tabloid speculation.' Even though I provided links to the official report which the majority of the MSM ignored. Possible body fluids, it can't be determined what it was but it contained 15 DNA markers that matched Madeleine 's. Not conclusive proof much should not be ignored either. Can you explain the reaction of the Cadaver dogs who before they were incorrectly smeared and discredited by the McCanns had been incredibly successful in helping the police secure convictions in many cases, some of which were high profile?
Perhaps you and some others should have a look at this statement analysis by the respected statement analyst Peter Hyatt. Then it might just persuade to look into the maddie case just a little bit deeper.
[Post edited 5 Jun 2020 0:00]
Again, how would they persuade 5 other people to cover this for them that their daughter had died ? All of them risking jail time and loss of careers, then go for dinner ?
how on earth did they dispose of the body when being followed by the worlds media ?
Slight inconsistency in statements does not explain an almost impossible task that defies logic. Cadaver dogs are not always accurate and the crime scene was not properly managed can explain this.
'No effort from me at all other than to recite tabloid speculation.' Even though I provided links to the official report which the majority of the MSM ignored. Possible body fluids, it can't be determined what it was but it contained 15 DNA markers that matched Madeleine 's. Not conclusive proof much should not be ignored either. Can you explain the reaction of the Cadaver dogs who before they were incorrectly smeared and discredited by the McCanns had been incredibly successful in helping the police secure convictions in many cases, some of which were high profile?
Perhaps you and some others should have a look at this statement analysis by the respected statement analyst Peter Hyatt. Then it might just persuade to look into the maddie case just a little bit deeper.
[Post edited 5 Jun 2020 0:00]
I don;t need to look at anything, I read the lot years ago.
There were no bodily fluids. How many times?
There was the possibility of some dna transference. FFS.
Not conclusive means there's no evidence, not that there's room for more speculation. You clearly have no idea of how terminology works.
You are strangely obsessed with wanting these people to have killed their own child and that makes you more than a bit weird.
He (and others) wants to believe the parents killed their own daughter.
No amount of anything will change that.
If the true offender is found, these freaks will then say, "I don't care what anyone says, I still say..."
[Post edited 4 Jun 2020 21:45]
You see this is typical of a lot of people on TWTD. They misquote a poster, i think often deliberately then are just happy to bury their head in the sand.
I already stated earlier Jeera that I do not believe the McCann's killed Maddie. I believe based on all the evidence put forward that it is much more likely she died as a result of a tragic accident & the McCann's covered it up than she was abducted.
If Maddie is found alive and well i will happily eat humble pie. I am not one of that's people who is too proud to admit when they have got something wrong
Again, how would they persuade 5 other people to cover this for them that their daughter had died ? All of them risking jail time and loss of careers, then go for dinner ?
how on earth did they dispose of the body when being followed by the worlds media ?
Slight inconsistency in statements does not explain an almost impossible task that defies logic. Cadaver dogs are not always accurate and the crime scene was not properly managed can explain this.
It's almost like they were traumatised.
I've known some friends of mine say the McCanns 'looked' guilty and were acting strangely.
Well I've never had a 4 year old child kidnapped from me, but I'm gonna stick my neck out and suggest it might do some funny things to my head if something like that were to happen and I might just not seem myself.
You see this is typical of a lot of people on TWTD. They misquote a poster, i think often deliberately then are just happy to bury their head in the sand.
I already stated earlier Jeera that I do not believe the McCann's killed Maddie. I believe based on all the evidence put forward that it is much more likely she died as a result of a tragic accident & the McCann's covered it up than she was abducted.
If Maddie is found alive and well i will happily eat humble pie. I am not one of that's people who is too proud to admit when they have got something wrong
Misquote?
Hold on a second sunshine.
You have laid your cards very firmly on the table.
Don't you accuse me of misquoting you when you may have finally realised you've been behaving poorly.
Own it and leave the rest of us who have been telling you well out of it.
I don;t need to look at anything, I read the lot years ago.
There were no bodily fluids. How many times?
There was the possibility of some dna transference. FFS.
Not conclusive means there's no evidence, not that there's room for more speculation. You clearly have no idea of how terminology works.
You are strangely obsessed with wanting these people to have killed their own child and that makes you more than a bit weird.
How many times are you going to misquote me? I said she likely died as a result of an accident. It can't be determined what the stain was the that the DNA was obtained. Not that there were definitely no bodily fluids.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that strongly suggests something. Of course it's not proof. If I had any sort of concrete proof i would pass it on to the police. But there is zero circumstantial evidence of an abduction. Strange how people are more inclined to believe that theory. Is it because it is being pushed by the media?
I noticed you swerved my question about the Cadaver dogs
Based on circumstantial evidence people often come to their own conclusions. your conclusion is the McCann's had nothing to do with it. Mine is that they covered up what happened.
I believed OJ simpson killed Nicole Brown Smith even before he was found guilty in the civil trial. Like a lot of people did. Could I prove it? no, but people often come to their own conclusion based on what evidence has been presented at the time. Sometimes they are proved right other times wrong. .
You have laid your cards very firmly on the table.
Don't you accuse me of misquoting you when you may have finally realised you've been behaving poorly.
Own it and leave the rest of us who have been telling you well out of it.
Project your disgusting crap back onto me...
[Post edited 4 Jun 2020 23:07]
Think you meant *don't* "Project your disgusting crap back onto me..." ?
I've given up on him now anyway, he's admitted he made "No effort from me at all other than to recite tabloid speculation" and subsequently tied himself in knots to try and reduce how much of an idiot he looks.
You have laid your cards very firmly on the table.
Don't you accuse me of misquoting you when you may have finally realised you've been behaving poorly.
Own it and leave the rest of us who have been telling you well out of it.
Project your disgusting crap back onto me...
[Post edited 4 Jun 2020 23:07]
'when you have finally realised you have been behaving badly.' You have the ability to read people's minds do you? Did I use any abusive language? No. Have I name called? No. Have I tried to bully someone? No. You misquoted me and I corrected you it is as simple as that. If you don't like that well tough. I am not in here to have arguments with people, life is far too short but at the same time I am not trying to win any popularity contests either. I will give my opinion on certain things and I am happy to debate. If people agree with me great if they don't that is fine. If you don't like my opinion on certain things then that is your problem not mine. You just have to learn to deal with it in a grown up way and not patronise or belittle people my calling them sunshine. As there is absolutely no need for it and it is not clever or hard.
Think you meant *don't* "Project your disgusting crap back onto me..." ?
I've given up on him now anyway, he's admitted he made "No effort from me at all other than to recite tabloid speculation" and subsequently tied himself in knots to try and reduce how much of an idiot he looks.
Again, how would they persuade 5 other people to cover this for them that their daughter had died ? All of them risking jail time and loss of careers, then go for dinner ?
how on earth did they dispose of the body when being followed by the worlds media ?
Slight inconsistency in statements does not explain an almost impossible task that defies logic. Cadaver dogs are not always accurate and the crime scene was not properly managed can explain this.
Think of what they had to lose if they were found guilty of negligence that resulted in her death. They would both serve time in prison. They would both lose their well paid jobs. The twins would have been taken into care. This isn't proof but it is a powerful motive to cover up her death.
Cadaver dogs are very reliable especially the one's used in the McCann case. Can you provide a source that states cadaver dogs aren't very reliable?
Would an abductor be able to enter an apartment without being seen or heard? Take a child from its bed without waking it? Spend time opening up the window then the shutter then climbing out without leaving a single trace of evidence behind?. Then leave the resort again without being seen or heard?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
