Dr Kate McCann, in her book ‘madeleine’,
On pages 249-250 of ‘madeleine’, for example, she writes:
“At
one point [during the screening of a video of the cadaver dog Eddie
alerting to the scent of a corpse in the living room of the McCanns’
apartment] the handler [Martin Grime] directed the dogs to a spot behind
the conch in the sitting room, close to the curtains. He called the
dogs over to him to investigate this particular site.
“The dogs ultimately ‘alerted’. I felt myself starting to relax a little. This was not what I would call an exact science”.
An interesting comment to make and telling indeed.
Kate
spoke about junk science and relaxing when the cadaver dogs reacted.
If, as
claimed, the parents are innocent of involvement in the disappearance
of their daughter, why would kate tell us she relaxed when the cadaver
and blood dogs reacted in the apartment (and subsequently the hire
car)
This is highly unexpected. Put yourself in the same situation for a
moment.
Your child goes missing ( you aren't involved) blood and cadaver
dogs are brought in along with normal search dogs.
The search dogs
don't react but the blood and cadaver dogs do.
Your first and instant
reaction wouldn't be oh it's junk science, nor would you relax.
Rather than
relaxing at what was indicated, the innocent parent would be terrified
for their child, hysterical with the worry their child was injured and
in pain or worse was dead removing any hope of a safe return
Your
first instinct would be does this mean my child was hurt?
They were
bleeding?
Does this mean my child was killed in the room before being
removed?
You would be demanding they recheck, they retest.
You would be
hysterical, knowing or believing the abductor could have injured your
child whilst abducting her.
You would be hysterical wondering what was
done to cause the bleeding.
You wouldn't be oh well it was a nose bleed
or a grazed knee, especially given the locations.
You would be demanding
answers and more help to find your child.
You would be out physically
searching, even to looking for possible drops of blood leading away from
the apartment.
Your child was hurt and scared, they were bleeding,
You
want to get to them and make everything better.
This is normal parental
instinct.
Guilty
parents on the other hand would be looking for any excuse to denigrate, demean and minimise
the actions of the dogs since to admit the dogs were correct would be
to implicate themselves.
Instead we get explanations and excuses.
No physical
searching.
Insults and demeaning of those trying to find their daughter.
Comments all about themselves and how
they feel, what they are doing and general chitchat and drivel rather than what their daughter could have been going
through.
The guilt would be enormous that their child was abducted
possibly injured and they weren't there to stop it.
But then, innocent
parents wouldn't have left their children home alone in the first place.
It is well known gerry researched cadaver dogs
(why?) and pointed out in the case of eugene zapata as a false reaction
and thus the dogs was unreliable. Although the evidence was excluded
from Zapata's first trial, police said corpse-sniffing dogs indicated
the scent of human remains at the Indian Trace home and two other homes
occupied by Zapata as well as a storage locker and a rental car. Based
on Zapata's statement, the locker and car indications were correct.
For
more than 30 years, he maintained that Jeanette Zapata just
disappeared. He kept the secret until earlier this month, when he
confessed to Madison police.
Zapata's confession came Feb. 5. 2008 He
gave a detailed account, as required under a plea agreement he reached
with prosecutors to avoid another trial
Strange to say after that the mccanns went real quiet on cadaver dogs.
It
is interesting to note that dogs are used not only to track scents they
are used to detect drugs,explosives, fruit and veg, pirated DVDs,
cash, human remains, trapped people in earthquake zones as well as in
avalanches and much more.
Skills which are taken for granted the world
over, yet, when cadaver dogs reacted in the apartment, to clothing and
cuddlecat and the hire car, rather than the expected is my child hurt?
we instead see, ignore the dogs they are wrong.
Their families even
went so far as to claim she had dealt with several dead bodies in the
weeks or so before their vacation and had included taking cuddlecat with
her (the, if they don't move when she touched them with it then they
are dead school of diagnosing death) sea bass (Sean's favorite meal) which
allegedly produces a smell like cadaverine, rotting meat, dirty diapers
and sweaty sandals and according to gerry's sister philmacakehole i mean
philomena the PJ had gone so far as to plant DNA evidence from Maddie!!
This then is the
other problem.
Medical people are hyper vigilant of their children.
They
know what can happen in a split second, even with a parent right there.
The children were never left home alone.
Each night they were all placed
in one apartment and an allegedly 'sick' adult watched them.
The parents had to
claim they were neglectful and left their children home alone in order
for there to be an opportunity for abduction.
There could be no
abduction if the children were being watched by an adult.
NO NEGLECT =NO ABDUCTION and a lot of awkward questions.
They knew if they claimed
neglect they could plea deal down.
All the lawyers they hired within days of "the abduction" would have advised them on their options and how to minimise any possible charges.
They also knew if charged with
neglect, homicide charges couldn't then be pressed.at a later date.
It was the lesser of
two evils, a risk they had to take, hence the PJ not knowing what
crimes had been committed.
You can't charged someone with a they did something but we don't know what charge, and if you don't know what crime has been committed you can't charge them full stop.
The PJ knew the children were all together and
thus no abduction was even possible let alone took place.
They knew they get only one chance so LE will bide
their time and get as much evidence as possible before pressing
charges, both charges in Portugal and also in the UK , probably relating to fraud in regard to the fund, plus they may also face criminal charges in relation to the payment from sundry newspapers,
Maddie is not as risk nor can she be further harmed for she is
long dead.
This then begs the question ,why could the mccann's not
allow an autopsy to take place?
What would it reveal?
What was so
damning they were prepared to risk neglect charges?
Were there signs of
neglect and/or abuse be it regular sedation/ injuries old and new/
sexual abuse?
Sedation over a period of time would result in charges and
loss of their licences, ditto for old and new injuries- her medical
records would reveal if they had been treated in a hospital if
applicable and if not, again the consensus would be they treated her at
home to keep it secret and again charges, loss of licence etc.
Sexual
abuse they could face charges if they couldn't show it was committed by
someone else who had access (especially if recent plus medical records
could show for example frequent UTI, DP anyone?)
This would make the statements from the Dr's Gaspar important since it was both gerry and david payne having the conversation.
Whatever it was they
couldn't allow an autopsy since perhaps it would show non accidental
death.
If it was from a drugs overdose they could have claimed she saw the pills and ate
them thinking it was candy, it happens all the time,
They could have left her in bed and then claimed they thought she was asleep when she was instead dying or dead when they checked.
She ate some pills and went back to bed or even dying from natural causes, a possibility given her health ( the coloboma and any associated health issues
Again, if a fall
they could have placed her/ left her in situ on the floor etc and claimed they found her
when they woke up.
Maddie was known to be a wanderer, and, in a strange place she could have climbed onto the sofa or something high and fallen, they have the star chart on the fridge that showed she would wake and wander as proof.
It would be passed off as yet another tragic accident that no one could have foreseen or prevented.
Clearly
this was not something that could be explained away easily.
How would they explain sedatives in the body or evidence in the hair that perhaps showed long term sedation?
How could injuries be explained away such as bruises that weren't commensurate with an accident such as hand or finger marked shaped bruising or perhaps shoe marks, scratches etc.
Marks around the throat or signs of an attempt to resuscitate such as tracheotomy or broken ribs from CPR.
This would lead to questions as to why they never called 911 even though they were doctors.
There is still no explanation why the twins were not taken to hospital to be checked out for sedation ( since they slept deeply through the ruckus and kate kept checking their breathing by fingers under their noses and a hand on their backs or for signs of molestation.
Innocent parents in a similar situation would be panicking if their children never awoke and would be demand tests to make sure their remaining children were not at risk from overdose or had been injured in any way.
They would also be asking for their children's clothing and bedding etc examined in case their was any forensic evidence.
That the mccann's never did any of this makes me realise, they didn't need to have their children examined since they knew what they had been given, how much and when and that there would be no evidence of abuse ( or they didn't want the twins examined in case there were signs of abuse which would lead to awkward questions since the time line for any possible abduction was mere minutes, how would any abductor have time to abuse the twins and then scarper with Maddie in his arms. It would lead to awkward questions, well even more awkward questions regarding the checks and the timings of or rather lack of timings)
Was there
involvement of CPS with the family prior to the vacation perhaps? ( is
it still ongoing?)
Were the family aware that kate seemed to not be
coping and obsessing over their sleep patterns?
Was it true they were
looking to farm Maddie out to a family member?
If so why?
Had anyone offered to take over the care of Maddie?
We know they dumped Maddie on her grandparents whilst the twins had their first Christmas, was this to see how she coped?
Would this become a regular habit with Maddie staying for longer periods?
Was this a one off or something else?
The medical
records of both Maddie and kate have a big role in this i think.
.
The Thoughts And Ponderings Of A Hobnob
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Genuine woman stealing a child to care for Versus the mccann's Maddie stolen by a childless family to love and care for claim.
TOWN
OF BELOIT, Wis – An hour after a woman reported her newborn son missing
from a Wisconsin home, police were questioning her step-sister -- found
with a prosthetic pregnancy belly, baby clothes and a stroller, but no
baby, according to court documents.
It was more than 24 hours after Kayden Powell went missing before authorities discovered the infant, less than a week old, in a plastic storage crate outside an Iowa gas station, miraculously alive and well despite frigid temperatures.
Kristen Smith of Denver had pretended to be pregnant, went to Wisconsin and stole her step-sister's baby from his bassinet as his parents slept, court documents say. Then, as police closed in on her, she allegedly abandoned the infant, who was swaddled in blankets.
Federal prosecutors in Madison charged Smith with kidnapping Friday afternoon, hours after an Iowa police chief found Kayden.
"He's strong," the newborn's great-uncle, Mark Bennett, said of the boy. "I'm glad that baby is still living instead of in a ditch somewhere on a strange highway."
The discovery of the infant shortly after 10 a.m. Friday capped a frantic search that involved police officers in Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa.
It began after the boy's mother, Brianna Marshall, called police around 4:30 a.m. Thursday to report her newborn had vanished from Bennett's home, where she and the baby's father, Bruce Powell, had been staying, according to police and the affidavit.
Marshall said Smith had left the house a couple of hours earlier to return to Colorado. While police were at the house, Smith called on her cellphone. She told police that Marshall and Bruce Powell were planning to move to Denver on Saturday to live with her and she had Kayden's clothes in her car but didn't have the boy.
Police told her to pull over for questioning. An officer met her at a Kum & Go gas station near Interstate 80 in West Branch, Iowa. She was arrested about 5:30 a.m. on an outstanding Texas warrant, but she denied any knowledge of Kayden's whereabouts, the affidavit says.
A search of her cellphone revealed emails in which she said she gave birth on Feb. 5, according to the court document. A search of her Facebook page turned up postings in which she claimed she was pregnant.
Smith didn't appear pregnant, according to the affidavit. A pregnancy test that was administered while she was in custody came back negative, U.S. Attorney John Vaudreuil said.
Meanwhile, dozens of officers began searched for the child at possible stop-offs along Smith's route from Wisconsin to Iowa. West Branch Police Chief Mike Horihan decided to check the area around a BP station about 500 yards from the station where Smith was arrested. He heard a baby's cries and discovered Kayden in a closed storage crate alongside the building. The newborn was responsive and healthy, the chief said.
"I had tears in my eyes," BP station manager Jay Patel said, recalling his reaction to the police chief telling him that the infant had been found. "It's good news, but it's sad, too."
Temperatures in West Branch, about 180 miles southwest of the Town of Beloit, dipped below zero Thursday night into Friday. They were still in the single digits when the baby was found.
"Surprisingly with the weather the way it was, he was surprisingly healthy," Horihan, the Iowa police chief, said. "To be honest with you, that's not what I expected." The baby was taken to an Iowa City hospital, where he was reunited with his parents and released Friday evening.
Online court records didn't list a defense attorney for Smith. She faces life in prison if convicted.
Police interviewed Smith again after Kayden was discovered, the affidavit said, and she admitted she had taken the baby and left him at the BP station.
Bennett, the baby's great-uncle, told The Associated Press he first met Smith on Thursday night, when he came home and found her, his mother and the baby's mother and father in his house. He said his mother later explained to him that Marshall and her step-sister had the same father but different mothers.
He went to his room in the basement. When he woke up, the baby and Smith were gone.
He said he kept telling Marshall that Smith had to have taken the child, but Marshall refused to believe it. The baby's bassinet was 2 feet from the parents' bed and he found a paring knife on the ground next to it.
"I could have woke up to a bloody mess," Bennett said.
He said he hopes Smith gets locked up for life.
"You stole him like you're stealing something from the grocery store," the great-uncle said. "Nobody in their right mind should have thought of that."
Smith appears to go by multiple names and has had run-ins with the law in multiple states, authorities said. The Texas warrant stems from a felony indictment charging her with tampering with government documents late last year while she was in jail in Colorado.
A spokesman for the Arapahoe County, Colo., sheriff's office declined to discuss the details of her arrest there. A spokeswoman for the district attorney's office in Tarrant County, Texas, said it's not clear why Colorado authorities released Smith instead of sending her back to Texas.
It was more than 24 hours after Kayden Powell went missing before authorities discovered the infant, less than a week old, in a plastic storage crate outside an Iowa gas station, miraculously alive and well despite frigid temperatures.
Kristen Smith of Denver had pretended to be pregnant, went to Wisconsin and stole her step-sister's baby from his bassinet as his parents slept, court documents say. Then, as police closed in on her, she allegedly abandoned the infant, who was swaddled in blankets.
Federal prosecutors in Madison charged Smith with kidnapping Friday afternoon, hours after an Iowa police chief found Kayden.
"He's strong," the newborn's great-uncle, Mark Bennett, said of the boy. "I'm glad that baby is still living instead of in a ditch somewhere on a strange highway."
The discovery of the infant shortly after 10 a.m. Friday capped a frantic search that involved police officers in Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa.
It began after the boy's mother, Brianna Marshall, called police around 4:30 a.m. Thursday to report her newborn had vanished from Bennett's home, where she and the baby's father, Bruce Powell, had been staying, according to police and the affidavit.
Marshall said Smith had left the house a couple of hours earlier to return to Colorado. While police were at the house, Smith called on her cellphone. She told police that Marshall and Bruce Powell were planning to move to Denver on Saturday to live with her and she had Kayden's clothes in her car but didn't have the boy.
Police told her to pull over for questioning. An officer met her at a Kum & Go gas station near Interstate 80 in West Branch, Iowa. She was arrested about 5:30 a.m. on an outstanding Texas warrant, but she denied any knowledge of Kayden's whereabouts, the affidavit says.
A search of her cellphone revealed emails in which she said she gave birth on Feb. 5, according to the court document. A search of her Facebook page turned up postings in which she claimed she was pregnant.
Smith didn't appear pregnant, according to the affidavit. A pregnancy test that was administered while she was in custody came back negative, U.S. Attorney John Vaudreuil said.
Meanwhile, dozens of officers began searched for the child at possible stop-offs along Smith's route from Wisconsin to Iowa. West Branch Police Chief Mike Horihan decided to check the area around a BP station about 500 yards from the station where Smith was arrested. He heard a baby's cries and discovered Kayden in a closed storage crate alongside the building. The newborn was responsive and healthy, the chief said.
"I had tears in my eyes," BP station manager Jay Patel said, recalling his reaction to the police chief telling him that the infant had been found. "It's good news, but it's sad, too."
Temperatures in West Branch, about 180 miles southwest of the Town of Beloit, dipped below zero Thursday night into Friday. They were still in the single digits when the baby was found.
"Surprisingly with the weather the way it was, he was surprisingly healthy," Horihan, the Iowa police chief, said. "To be honest with you, that's not what I expected." The baby was taken to an Iowa City hospital, where he was reunited with his parents and released Friday evening.
Online court records didn't list a defense attorney for Smith. She faces life in prison if convicted.
Police interviewed Smith again after Kayden was discovered, the affidavit said, and she admitted she had taken the baby and left him at the BP station.
Bennett, the baby's great-uncle, told The Associated Press he first met Smith on Thursday night, when he came home and found her, his mother and the baby's mother and father in his house. He said his mother later explained to him that Marshall and her step-sister had the same father but different mothers.
He went to his room in the basement. When he woke up, the baby and Smith were gone.
He said he kept telling Marshall that Smith had to have taken the child, but Marshall refused to believe it. The baby's bassinet was 2 feet from the parents' bed and he found a paring knife on the ground next to it.
"I could have woke up to a bloody mess," Bennett said.
He said he hopes Smith gets locked up for life.
"You stole him like you're stealing something from the grocery store," the great-uncle said. "Nobody in their right mind should have thought of that."
Smith appears to go by multiple names and has had run-ins with the law in multiple states, authorities said. The Texas warrant stems from a felony indictment charging her with tampering with government documents late last year while she was in jail in Colorado.
A spokesman for the Arapahoe County, Colo., sheriff's office declined to discuss the details of her arrest there. A spokeswoman for the district attorney's office in Tarrant County, Texas, said it's not clear why Colorado authorities released Smith instead of sending her back to Texas.
This is a classic example of a child abduction by a woman desperate
to have a baby for whatever reason such as infertility, miscarriage etc.
The age is right as they can pass the child off as their own after a
faked pregnancy.
They often go to extremes to pretend pregnancy as can be
seen in this case.
Most times the baby is found as family members and
relatives notice unusual behavior by the 'mother' and have heard about
an infant abduction.
Abduction by a childless woman is not going to
mean grabbing a nearly 4 yr old toddler who can talk,
There is no way in
hell they could claim they just gave birth, a 57 month pregnancy is
unusual, in fact, extremely rare in humans,
Abduction of a child by a mentally healthy woman is
rare especially these days with advances in IVF, adoption and even
fostering.
Some countries offer free IVF for a number of cycles, making
it unlikely they will steal a child.
Abduction by gypsies is so
medieval, just read the fairy stories.
Why steal a child when you can
legally buy one if you want a child of a certain color, you can definitely
illegally buy one if you have nefarious deeds in mind as we have seen
all too often in the media.
This then leaves us with either abduction by
paedophile in which case she is long dead or parental involvement , in which case she is also long dead.
Paedophiles usually grab from
outside rather than indoors due to the risk of being caught by a parent
or other responsible adult and the forensic evidence they would leave
behind.
They will not abduct a dead child or abuse, murder/accidentally
kill the child and then take the body with them since it is pretty damn
hard to hide a body when they could leave it in situ and make for a
speedy getaway.
This leaves us then with the most common crime abuse/killing by a parent/family member/someone known to the family with
access to the child.
Since we have evidence that there was a dead body
in the apartment and Maddie is missing, the obvious and logical answer, is, Maddie died in the apartment.
We then need to ask why did Maddie die and how?
Int the majority of
cases it is from neglect or abuse either over a long period of time ,
the proverbial red-headed step child who is blamed for all the family
woes or when the parent loses their temper and lashes out.
Other options often seen, particularly with mothers with mental health issues
is altruistic death, the child is sick and they put it out of its
misery.
The parent doesn't want to leave the child
parent less/motherless if suicide is contemplated.
Religious reasons as in
they think they are saving the child soul from the devil, or the
classic custody battles where one parent decides if i can't have them
no one can.
I exclude the latter since they were not divorcing ( that i
know of) however, given kate's warnings, should divorce be a possibility
or separation then the twins will likely be at risk.
Of all the options i
go with, either altruistic ( not my first choice)
Custodial ( not likely)
Long term neglect and abuse a la red headed step child as she
was very demanding and had a temper etc so she would be blamed when
things went wrong, or, loss of temper and ether deliberate killing or
accidental killing (both of which are my choices)
If she didn't bond with Maddie then we have the neglect and the loss of temper conclusions and motive.
It is worth noting that after Maddie vanished, rather than the haunted laden down with fear, guilt, weight on her shoulders as we see in genuine abduction cases of children, instead kate blossomed as if a weight had been lifted from her shoulders.
Maddie gone meant the end of all her problems, she could now live the perfect life with the perfect family.
We only saw the stress, the haggard face etc only when the LE in 2 countries reopened/opened the case and the libel trial was going catastrophically wrong for them as well as public belief in them and media belief going downhill fast (the media actually allowing negative comments to be posted)
Kate seemed to be obsessed with their sleeping
patters which might explain the sedation.
When they were asleep she
could cope and they were safe.
I note also the fact that it seems she
was unable to cope and had lots of family coming down to help, even to
taking Maddie away from her for the twins first Christmas although it was explained as sending her away (positive spinning the fact that she wasn't allowed to share in the twins first Christmas which in anyone's head is a red flag leading to questions why it happened)
Was it a case
of don't leave her alone with kids ever because of what might happen,
and when they did, the result was a dead Maddie and the biggest cover
up in history
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
The Three Little Burglars
Firstly three is the liars number (Mark McClish)
Secondly, the Met and the PJ are not going to release info as to what they are doing or who they will be arresting shortly since that then gives any guilty person a chance to leg it post haste.
The PJ operate under judicial secrecy, it is the law, they cannot, and will not, divulge any information regarding the case.
Since the PJ reopened the case on the basis of new or compelling evidence , it is also probable that kate and gerry and possibly robert murat have had arguido status reinstated, hence the silence from the mccanns.
As a witness, they cannot lie, or refuse to co-operate with any investigation on pain of jail time.
As an arguido they are protected by law and can lie to their hearts content and refuse to co-operate with any enquiry.
What i don't know is, if it was reinstated automatically, if they requested it thus giving them protection to carry on as before, or, if the PJ reinstated it to give the mccanns their legal protection.
What it means, which, despite the mccanns protests, is they cannot say anything about the case to anyone except the police and their lawyers, it gives them a big get out clause if asked an awkward question as we saw all too often especially gerry's little tantrum, when he stomped off in a huff.
Anyone familiar with the case will know there have been leaks all over the place, from the mccanns via a 3rd party such as family member or, their beloved spokespoodle clarence mitchell.
Leaks pertaining to the upcoming arrests of 3 burglars have not come from the Met or the PJ, rather they came from a family spokesman, IE clarence mitchell.
I wonder if he will face charges of peverting the course of justice because of all the 'leaks' and the misinformation.
Since their libel trial against Dr. Gonçalo Amaral has gone bosoms up (hence their desperate offer to buy him off and end the trial (it is almost unheard of for a plaintiff to want to drop their case) and the fact they already lost their attempt to ban his book on appeal, and then again in the supreme court (which they kept real quiet) we were expecting either a new sighting or a new suspect as per normal when things are looking bad for them.
We were treated to the Crime Watch debacle which they had demanded way back, in which it was revealed they had sat on e-fits for several years on the grounds it would confuse the public and show them in a bad light, tanner man did not exist per se and she didn't see a man abducting Maddie, and they gagged their PI's to stop them revealing their findings to anyone.
The e-fits only leaked out when the Met made a request to the fund's board of directors to get access to all the files. Tee hee(they couldn't exactly refuse now could they)
We then had a spate of new suspects in the media courtesy of the pink princess (mitchell) we had tractor man who was conveniently dead.
He was allegedly sacked from the complex and thus took Maddie as payback, just like we would do the same if we were sacked.
Rather than steal office supplies or screw up the IT we steal a non related child.
You get the point.
Except , this was a rehash of an earlier story where it was allegedly a sacked chambermaid who took Maddie.
Now, we have 3 burglars who allegedly broke in and rather than taking the valuables which would be easy to sell and would not warrant much attention from the local plods,, instead, decided to abduct a child,just like burglars do, after noticing the children were left allegedly home alone and left the property with Maddie and nothing valuable like passports cameras, watches, cell phones etc which weren't being worn or carried on the night, all very strange, especially given all the alleged checks that were taking place and especially leaving not one iota of a trace of their presence and somehow managing to leave cadaverine and body fluids everywhere.
However.
I know the kids weren't left home alone each night and the rest of the world is coming to realise this.
In fact gerry almost admitted this before stopping himself in the process of free editing. he leaked a lot more than he thought he did if you know where to look.
During that week there was one night, errr… and we can't give too much detail because it's part of the investigation file but there was one night where Madeleine came through and one of the other, errr… twins were crying, so, you know, and when she did mention to it… it to us and we asked her about it and she just dropped… she was completely fine and we thought, 'Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired.
Firstly he was going to say children before realising they were supposed to be home alone so he stops just before he says the magic word and changes it to other twins.
Now Sean and Amelie were the only set of twins in the group, there were no other twins.
Next we know that one adult was missing each night due to being sick.
That adult was the babysitter thus the children were not left alone.
Gerry tells us this is so when he refers to Madeleine asking why they didn't come and it is highly damning.
'Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired.
Now, if Maddie cried and they didn't hear her (which is why she asked the question) who was bathing her and the twins?
Who was putting them down for the night if it wasn't kate and gerry?
(this also makes kates story about the bedtime book etc a load of bollocks, the perfect emotions in the perfect place.)
We have a few options here.
If the children were in 5a and kate and gerry never heard her crying where were they?
Who was in 5a bathing the children and putting them to bed since it clearly wasn't kate or gerry, if it were them then the question would never have arisen?
I'm looking at you david payne.
If the children weren't in 5a and kate and gerry were, in whose apartment were they and again who was bathing and putting them to bed (david payne yet again?)
What is obvious is all the children were in one apartment
Gerry mccann : The twins were still sleeping in their cots. So... you'd be trying to leave it as undisturbed as possible, and they slept very soundly until we moved them out of the cots into their own apartment which does make me wonder about whether there was any substances used to keep them asleep.
This is telling.
He just told us they moved them out of the cots (Not their cots?) into their own apartment.
Since their own apartment was 5A whose apartment did they move them from?
Since all the children were in one apartment and being watched by an adult there could be no abduction.
If there was no abduction , how do they explain their missing daughter?
No paedophile is going to try and take a child whilst there is an adult watching their possible victim, they are not going to risk injury or being caught, arrested etc.
They will leave and perhaps try somewhere else or go home.
As the children were being watched, there was no abduction and thus a whole bunch of awkward questions as to what they did with Maddie.
The mccanns and chums had to claim neglect to allow for there to be an abduction.
The charges could result in a max 10 stretch, possible loss of their licences and perhaps their children or at least they would be monitored on the at risk register.
A good lawyer could plea bargain down to maybe a couple years max or probation and a fine.
This was the best option given they could be facing homicide charges as well as concealing a corpse and filing a false police report.
When found guilty it would mean serious time, loss of their licences and children, loss of everything.
They had everything to gain by claiming what they did and nothing to lose.
This explains why they were never prosecuted.
Firstly if charged with neglect they could not then be charged with homicide etc.
Secondly, there was no evidence of an abduction, no body, yet cadaverine was detected as were blood and body fluids.
The PJ did not know what if any crimes had been committed and they couldn't charge them for a crime they couldn't decide on or prove happened.
This was a damn good reason for them to scarper back to the UK and hire expensive extradition lawyers.
If they were going to be charged, they were going to make it hard as possible to be extradited back to Portugal.
When they did return it was on the proviso they would not be rearrested.
Maddie died in the apartment sometime during the vacation.
No one can officially say they saw her anytime after the Sunday, the creche records are a mess with parents signing each others children out and fake signatures,
Maddie dying before the 3rd (the mccanns have the anniversary as 2nd may which is interesting) would allow time for their panic to die down, for them to forensically clean the apartment and dispose of her remains temporarily and then move her again 25 days later to what was presumably her final resting place.
Anything you read in MSM will be coming from the mccanns and the pink princess, not the Met or the PJ and as such must be taken with a mountain of salt.
Secondly, the Met and the PJ are not going to release info as to what they are doing or who they will be arresting shortly since that then gives any guilty person a chance to leg it post haste.
The PJ operate under judicial secrecy, it is the law, they cannot, and will not, divulge any information regarding the case.
Since the PJ reopened the case on the basis of new or compelling evidence , it is also probable that kate and gerry and possibly robert murat have had arguido status reinstated, hence the silence from the mccanns.
As a witness, they cannot lie, or refuse to co-operate with any investigation on pain of jail time.
As an arguido they are protected by law and can lie to their hearts content and refuse to co-operate with any enquiry.
What i don't know is, if it was reinstated automatically, if they requested it thus giving them protection to carry on as before, or, if the PJ reinstated it to give the mccanns their legal protection.
What it means, which, despite the mccanns protests, is they cannot say anything about the case to anyone except the police and their lawyers, it gives them a big get out clause if asked an awkward question as we saw all too often especially gerry's little tantrum, when he stomped off in a huff.
Anyone familiar with the case will know there have been leaks all over the place, from the mccanns via a 3rd party such as family member or, their beloved spokespoodle clarence mitchell.
Leaks pertaining to the upcoming arrests of 3 burglars have not come from the Met or the PJ, rather they came from a family spokesman, IE clarence mitchell.
I wonder if he will face charges of peverting the course of justice because of all the 'leaks' and the misinformation.
Since their libel trial against Dr. Gonçalo Amaral has gone bosoms up (hence their desperate offer to buy him off and end the trial (it is almost unheard of for a plaintiff to want to drop their case) and the fact they already lost their attempt to ban his book on appeal, and then again in the supreme court (which they kept real quiet) we were expecting either a new sighting or a new suspect as per normal when things are looking bad for them.
We were treated to the Crime Watch debacle which they had demanded way back, in which it was revealed they had sat on e-fits for several years on the grounds it would confuse the public and show them in a bad light, tanner man did not exist per se and she didn't see a man abducting Maddie, and they gagged their PI's to stop them revealing their findings to anyone.
The e-fits only leaked out when the Met made a request to the fund's board of directors to get access to all the files. Tee hee(they couldn't exactly refuse now could they)
We then had a spate of new suspects in the media courtesy of the pink princess (mitchell) we had tractor man who was conveniently dead.
He was allegedly sacked from the complex and thus took Maddie as payback, just like we would do the same if we were sacked.
Rather than steal office supplies or screw up the IT we steal a non related child.
You get the point.
Except , this was a rehash of an earlier story where it was allegedly a sacked chambermaid who took Maddie.
Now, we have 3 burglars who allegedly broke in and rather than taking the valuables which would be easy to sell and would not warrant much attention from the local plods,, instead, decided to abduct a child,just like burglars do, after noticing the children were left allegedly home alone and left the property with Maddie and nothing valuable like passports cameras, watches, cell phones etc which weren't being worn or carried on the night, all very strange, especially given all the alleged checks that were taking place and especially leaving not one iota of a trace of their presence and somehow managing to leave cadaverine and body fluids everywhere.
However.
I know the kids weren't left home alone each night and the rest of the world is coming to realise this.
In fact gerry almost admitted this before stopping himself in the process of free editing. he leaked a lot more than he thought he did if you know where to look.
During that week there was one night, errr… and we can't give too much detail because it's part of the investigation file but there was one night where Madeleine came through and one of the other, errr… twins were crying, so, you know, and when she did mention to it… it to us and we asked her about it and she just dropped… she was completely fine and we thought, 'Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired.
Firstly he was going to say children before realising they were supposed to be home alone so he stops just before he says the magic word and changes it to other twins.
Now Sean and Amelie were the only set of twins in the group, there were no other twins.
Next we know that one adult was missing each night due to being sick.
That adult was the babysitter thus the children were not left alone.
Gerry tells us this is so when he refers to Madeleine asking why they didn't come and it is highly damning.
'Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired.
Now, if Maddie cried and they didn't hear her (which is why she asked the question) who was bathing her and the twins?
Who was putting them down for the night if it wasn't kate and gerry?
(this also makes kates story about the bedtime book etc a load of bollocks, the perfect emotions in the perfect place.)
We have a few options here.
If the children were in 5a and kate and gerry never heard her crying where were they?
Who was in 5a bathing the children and putting them to bed since it clearly wasn't kate or gerry, if it were them then the question would never have arisen?
I'm looking at you david payne.
If the children weren't in 5a and kate and gerry were, in whose apartment were they and again who was bathing and putting them to bed (david payne yet again?)
What is obvious is all the children were in one apartment
Gerry mccann : The twins were still sleeping in their cots. So... you'd be trying to leave it as undisturbed as possible, and they slept very soundly until we moved them out of the cots into their own apartment which does make me wonder about whether there was any substances used to keep them asleep.
This is telling.
He just told us they moved them out of the cots (Not their cots?) into their own apartment.
Since their own apartment was 5A whose apartment did they move them from?
Since all the children were in one apartment and being watched by an adult there could be no abduction.
If there was no abduction , how do they explain their missing daughter?
No paedophile is going to try and take a child whilst there is an adult watching their possible victim, they are not going to risk injury or being caught, arrested etc.
They will leave and perhaps try somewhere else or go home.
As the children were being watched, there was no abduction and thus a whole bunch of awkward questions as to what they did with Maddie.
The mccanns and chums had to claim neglect to allow for there to be an abduction.
The charges could result in a max 10 stretch, possible loss of their licences and perhaps their children or at least they would be monitored on the at risk register.
A good lawyer could plea bargain down to maybe a couple years max or probation and a fine.
This was the best option given they could be facing homicide charges as well as concealing a corpse and filing a false police report.
When found guilty it would mean serious time, loss of their licences and children, loss of everything.
They had everything to gain by claiming what they did and nothing to lose.
This explains why they were never prosecuted.
Firstly if charged with neglect they could not then be charged with homicide etc.
Secondly, there was no evidence of an abduction, no body, yet cadaverine was detected as were blood and body fluids.
The PJ did not know what if any crimes had been committed and they couldn't charge them for a crime they couldn't decide on or prove happened.
This was a damn good reason for them to scarper back to the UK and hire expensive extradition lawyers.
If they were going to be charged, they were going to make it hard as possible to be extradited back to Portugal.
When they did return it was on the proviso they would not be rearrested.
Maddie died in the apartment sometime during the vacation.
No one can officially say they saw her anytime after the Sunday, the creche records are a mess with parents signing each others children out and fake signatures,
Maddie dying before the 3rd (the mccanns have the anniversary as 2nd may which is interesting) would allow time for their panic to die down, for them to forensically clean the apartment and dispose of her remains temporarily and then move her again 25 days later to what was presumably her final resting place.
Anything you read in MSM will be coming from the mccanns and the pink princess, not the Met or the PJ and as such must be taken with a mountain of salt.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
"Taken A Little Girl Away From Her Family'? - Why The Distancing kate?
'it's not us that's committed a crime, it's the person that's gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family'?
A crime and not THE crime?
Was there more than one crime and if so what crimes were committed?
A crime implies there was more than one crime.
Abduction is a crime, neglect is also a crime, something they admitted to in order to facilitate the the theory of abduction.
There could be no abduction if all the children were being watched by an adult.
No abduction leaves them trying to come up with an explanation for their missing daughter.
This is close, that is distancing.
For there to be a that there has to be a this.
Why distance themselves from the apartment?
Why use the article THAT rather than the expected OUR apartment?
Was Maddie not in the apartment as claimed by the parents?
This would fit in with all the children being in one places watched by the missing member of the group each night.
It would explain the lack of evidence Maddie had even been in the apartment that week, in fact there was barely any trace of 3 toddlers ever having been there it was so forensically clean.
It would also explain the confusing statements about the twins being on the bed, in travel cots (plural) and cot singular, the missing bedding, the comment of moving them back to the apartment, the statement from oldfield in which he says he saw things in 5A that weren't there but rather another apartment and so on.
One has to wonder, given the lack of forensic evidence ( apart from cadaverine and body fluids in several spots) if the mccanns actually stayed in the apartment at all.
Is it possible they swapped apartments between the group according to their needs rather than as booked and that another apartment would show evidence of the mccanns staying there?
It would explain a lot of the discrepancies and statements.
"taken a little girl away from her family'?
This is concerning, there is a huge amount of distancing language here which is unexpected especially coming from a mother.
Why does she say A LITTLE GIRL rather than the expected MY DAUGHTER/ OUR DAUGHTER or even MADELEINE?
Why does she not take ownership of Maddie?
Such distancing language such as child/little girl etc can be an indication of abuse.
It doesn't mean there is, it must however be noted and probed deeper.
We need to see where the language changes, if it does, and if it applies to one child or many.
A parent distancing themselves from their child is never a good sign, especially in missing child cases.
IVF can be stressful for the prospective parents and expensive.
The resulting child may not be as they expected, especially if there are health issues, something which is common in IVF.
The parents may struggle to bond with their child as it may not be fully biologically theirs depending on method of IVF.
There is also a huge financial cost which some parents may regret or in effect blame the child for any family problems.
The fact she had at least 2 rounds of IVF and probably more means a lot of expense, a lot of stress, fluctuating hormones and the blame game as to who is at fault.
It could be that Maddie was a twin since most clinics implant a max of 2 eggs to ensure a good chance of pregnancy, clearly this was the case with Sean and Amelie,
Is this perhaps why they refused to handover the medical records for the family , as, again, it could lead to awkward questions if Maddie had in fact been a twin.
Questions such as where is the other one?
Was Maddie really Maddie etc.
Unlikely but given the circumstances, the non co-operation, the discrepancies etc it cannot be discounted.
"From her family'?
Who is HER family?
Why the distancing language referring to HER family rather than OUR family or the closer US
Does kate not think of her, gerry and the twins as part of Maddie's family?
If so, why not?
Again this leads then to who is Maddie's family if not the mccann's?
Was Maddie the 'red haired step child'?
The odd one out, after all, Sean and Amelie were the perfect family, it fitted in with their perception of the perfect family.
Blondie haired boy and girl twins, 2 good jobs, a big house, a high social class.
Maddie was the odd one out.
In their own words , she was born almost perfect, not unexpected in an IVF child.
She had a coloboma, something they said used as a good marketing ploy, despite being told it could put her at risk.
First it was noticeable then minimised as a small fleck by the parents and if true not something they would notice the moment she was born.
Gerry made a comment that she was still active, something strange to say the least, given she was still a toddler.
Why would she not be active in the future unless there were other health issues, hence the refusal to hand over her medical records.
We also know she had a temper, was demanding and could be a screamer.
This is very concerning when parents and family demean a missing person, it is unexpected.
It is akin to blaming the victim for what happened to them or as gerry said so succinctly "The situation Madeleine finds herself in"
It also provides a possible motive as in altruistic murder, where the killer feels they are putting the victim out of their misery, preventing further suffering.
It is not unknown for the parent to give the child a last happy day, this would fit in with kate's reference to Maddie saying she had the best day ever.
This would explain why she had to disappear and the abduction story dreamt up.
No body , no autopsy.
This leads then to consequences.
Is it likely kate killed Maddie?
Yes
Her own words tell me kate knows Maddie is dead and it was non accidental
Remember kate's own words spoken using the process of free editing
"They want me to lie - I'm being framed.
"Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."'
Not the order and pronouns, I'm being framed, not, WE'RE being framed.
Then she introduces MURDER making it sensitive.
Why bring in murder when they were claiming abduction and the PJ were investigating an abduction in public.
Why would the Portuguese blame the mccanns for Portugal not having paedophile laws?
Given they were claiming abduction by a childless couple etc why does she introduce paedophilia, again making it sensitive?
Why the s change in pronoun from I'M being framed to blaming US indicating unity or shared co-operation
Is this in relation to the actions of payne and gerry as reported by the Dr's Gaspar?
Is this relating to payne being recognised by a social worker in relation to child abuse?Is this isn relation to payne liking to bathe other people's children?
Is this in relation to payne outright being called a paedophile, including in a letter from Dr Amaral's wife Sofia.
Why has payne stayed silent given such allegations given they are pretty much the worst thing you can call someone?
Is it because there is a basis of truth and to deny would open a large can of worms including what did the mccann's and the rest of the group know oe suspect, and if they knew or suspected, why let him near their children?
Was Maddie killed by accident such as a fall or accidental ingestion of pillsas often happens?
Was she a victim of an assault gone to far, such as loss of temper?
Was she a victim of accidental overdose of sedation either coming round and falling or she simply stopped breathing
Was she the victim of sexual abuse which could not be explained away as accident and so she had to vanish?
Was she killed for an altruistic motive ( which could lead to time in a hospital rather than jail)
To prevent her suffering etc ?
Or for another reason?
Only the mccanns know the truth and possibly one or more of the tapas group.
A crime once done cannot be undone.
It then becomes a case of WHEN it is solved, not IF?
Modern science and forensics are advancing in leaps and bounds
It may be tomorrow it could be weeks, months, years, decades or even centuries.
The truth will out,
Criminals such as murderers and rapists cannot escape, even after death.
Look at jimmy saville as a prime example.
The mccanns will face justice, it is a given, as will their friends and anyone else involved in the cover up or the fraudulent fund if they knew or believed Maddie was dead.
Whether they bite the bullet and admit the truth to spare the twins or if they are woken by an early morning knock on the door and an invitation to visit the local nick.
I don't know,
A crime and not THE crime?
Was there more than one crime and if so what crimes were committed?
A crime implies there was more than one crime.
Abduction is a crime, neglect is also a crime, something they admitted to in order to facilitate the the theory of abduction.
There could be no abduction if all the children were being watched by an adult.
No abduction leaves them trying to come up with an explanation for their missing daughter.
This is close, that is distancing.
For there to be a that there has to be a this.
Why distance themselves from the apartment?
Why use the article THAT rather than the expected OUR apartment?
Was Maddie not in the apartment as claimed by the parents?
This would fit in with all the children being in one places watched by the missing member of the group each night.
It would explain the lack of evidence Maddie had even been in the apartment that week, in fact there was barely any trace of 3 toddlers ever having been there it was so forensically clean.
It would also explain the confusing statements about the twins being on the bed, in travel cots (plural) and cot singular, the missing bedding, the comment of moving them back to the apartment, the statement from oldfield in which he says he saw things in 5A that weren't there but rather another apartment and so on.
One has to wonder, given the lack of forensic evidence ( apart from cadaverine and body fluids in several spots) if the mccanns actually stayed in the apartment at all.
Is it possible they swapped apartments between the group according to their needs rather than as booked and that another apartment would show evidence of the mccanns staying there?
It would explain a lot of the discrepancies and statements.
"taken a little girl away from her family'?
This is concerning, there is a huge amount of distancing language here which is unexpected especially coming from a mother.
Why does she say A LITTLE GIRL rather than the expected MY DAUGHTER/ OUR DAUGHTER or even MADELEINE?
Why does she not take ownership of Maddie?
Such distancing language such as child/little girl etc can be an indication of abuse.
It doesn't mean there is, it must however be noted and probed deeper.
We need to see where the language changes, if it does, and if it applies to one child or many.
A parent distancing themselves from their child is never a good sign, especially in missing child cases.
IVF can be stressful for the prospective parents and expensive.
The resulting child may not be as they expected, especially if there are health issues, something which is common in IVF.
The parents may struggle to bond with their child as it may not be fully biologically theirs depending on method of IVF.
There is also a huge financial cost which some parents may regret or in effect blame the child for any family problems.
The fact she had at least 2 rounds of IVF and probably more means a lot of expense, a lot of stress, fluctuating hormones and the blame game as to who is at fault.
It could be that Maddie was a twin since most clinics implant a max of 2 eggs to ensure a good chance of pregnancy, clearly this was the case with Sean and Amelie,
Is this perhaps why they refused to handover the medical records for the family , as, again, it could lead to awkward questions if Maddie had in fact been a twin.
Questions such as where is the other one?
Was Maddie really Maddie etc.
Unlikely but given the circumstances, the non co-operation, the discrepancies etc it cannot be discounted.
"From her family'?
Who is HER family?
Why the distancing language referring to HER family rather than OUR family or the closer US
Does kate not think of her, gerry and the twins as part of Maddie's family?
If so, why not?
Again this leads then to who is Maddie's family if not the mccann's?
Was Maddie the 'red haired step child'?
The odd one out, after all, Sean and Amelie were the perfect family, it fitted in with their perception of the perfect family.
Blondie haired boy and girl twins, 2 good jobs, a big house, a high social class.
Maddie was the odd one out.
In their own words , she was born almost perfect, not unexpected in an IVF child.
She had a coloboma, something they said used as a good marketing ploy, despite being told it could put her at risk.
First it was noticeable then minimised as a small fleck by the parents and if true not something they would notice the moment she was born.
Gerry made a comment that she was still active, something strange to say the least, given she was still a toddler.
Why would she not be active in the future unless there were other health issues, hence the refusal to hand over her medical records.
We also know she had a temper, was demanding and could be a screamer.
This is very concerning when parents and family demean a missing person, it is unexpected.
It is akin to blaming the victim for what happened to them or as gerry said so succinctly "The situation Madeleine finds herself in"
It also provides a possible motive as in altruistic murder, where the killer feels they are putting the victim out of their misery, preventing further suffering.
It is not unknown for the parent to give the child a last happy day, this would fit in with kate's reference to Maddie saying she had the best day ever.
This would explain why she had to disappear and the abduction story dreamt up.
No body , no autopsy.
This leads then to consequences.
Is it likely kate killed Maddie?
Yes
Her own words tell me kate knows Maddie is dead and it was non accidental
Remember kate's own words spoken using the process of free editing
"They want me to lie - I'm being framed.
"Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."'
Not the order and pronouns, I'm being framed, not, WE'RE being framed.
Then she introduces MURDER making it sensitive.
Why bring in murder when they were claiming abduction and the PJ were investigating an abduction in public.
Why would the Portuguese blame the mccanns for Portugal not having paedophile laws?
Given they were claiming abduction by a childless couple etc why does she introduce paedophilia, again making it sensitive?
Why the s change in pronoun from I'M being framed to blaming US indicating unity or shared co-operation
Is this in relation to the actions of payne and gerry as reported by the Dr's Gaspar?
Is this relating to payne being recognised by a social worker in relation to child abuse?Is this isn relation to payne liking to bathe other people's children?
Is this in relation to payne outright being called a paedophile, including in a letter from Dr Amaral's wife Sofia.
Why has payne stayed silent given such allegations given they are pretty much the worst thing you can call someone?
Is it because there is a basis of truth and to deny would open a large can of worms including what did the mccann's and the rest of the group know oe suspect, and if they knew or suspected, why let him near their children?
Was Maddie killed by accident such as a fall or accidental ingestion of pillsas often happens?
Was she a victim of an assault gone to far, such as loss of temper?
Was she a victim of accidental overdose of sedation either coming round and falling or she simply stopped breathing
Was she the victim of sexual abuse which could not be explained away as accident and so she had to vanish?
Was she killed for an altruistic motive ( which could lead to time in a hospital rather than jail)
To prevent her suffering etc ?
Or for another reason?
Only the mccanns know the truth and possibly one or more of the tapas group.
A crime once done cannot be undone.
It then becomes a case of WHEN it is solved, not IF?
Modern science and forensics are advancing in leaps and bounds
It may be tomorrow it could be weeks, months, years, decades or even centuries.
The truth will out,
Criminals such as murderers and rapists cannot escape, even after death.
Look at jimmy saville as a prime example.
The mccanns will face justice, it is a given, as will their friends and anyone else involved in the cover up or the fraudulent fund if they knew or believed Maddie was dead.
Whether they bite the bullet and admit the truth to spare the twins or if they are woken by an early morning knock on the door and an invitation to visit the local nick.
I don't know,
Sunday, December 22, 2013
The mccanns' Annual Christmas Message, Wherefore Art Thou?
Once again another year has passed and we await expectantly the mccann's annual Christmas message to the world.
Yet, we have heard nothing, not a whisper, not even the slow quiet hiss of a leak from a family friend or trusted supporter.
The shop is still shuttered up on their page, awaiting forlornly something that was promised to be delivered within hours and still hasn't arrived.
The donation button which had been reinforced specially to handle the torrent of donations they plead for every year, telling us how low the fund is and how they can only search for another couple of months, despite the fact they never searched in the first place and, apparently neither did their private investigators.
Claims that no one was searching for Maddie bit the dust when both Scotland yard and the PJ started or reopened the investigation thus negating their cry for donations to fund the non existent search.
We haven't even heard of donations for gifts for Maddie , which should she not be found alive be handed on to some nice charity preferably one created by themselves.
Are their supporters still donating money? If so how and more to the point , why? especially after the car crash that was their appearance on Crime Watch.
Are their supporters instead donating gifts to a long dead child?
Are they age appropriate as in Maddie would be 10 or are they still sending toys suitable for a 3yr old?
Will the tags on the prezzies say lots of love the fund/a well wisher/ a supporter etc?
What about all the prezzies that were sent to Maddie over the years?
Are they all still stored somewhere safe and wrapped or, as is more likely, stuffed under the tree for the twins with the original tags removed as applicable after all with all their legal costs the fund must have taken a huge hit, assuming of course it hasn't been frozen.
Since they are living on one salary and they have become accustomed to the life of Riley on two incomes, gerry and the fund will we now see appeals for presents for the twins as mom and pop are piss poor after buying a couple of bottles of good quality NZ white.as opposed to their good quality wristbands?
Will we hear about them leaving their turkey home alone, apart from the twins who were left behind the Christmas tree., only to have their turkey whoosh gobble ( hens cluck turkeys gobble) by an abductor who got into their unlocked (no change there then) house raced to the oven and snatched the gently roasting bird without alerting the twins who were on guard duty, whilst they were out quaffing mulled wine with their friends in the pub only 2 streets away, well within range of hearing the twins shaking their prezzies.
Can we then expect an appeal for the return of the turkey as their stomachs are grieving their loss and them having to make do with a pile of spam kate found in the back of the PC email box marked begging letters (to send)
On boxing day will we see them speaking from a bit of wrapping paper saying they have been advised they were well within the realms of responsible cheffing and many of us have done the same thing.
Will there be descriptions of the turkey abductor, a large jolly man wearing a distinctive red suit and match hat with white trim, a large belt with a distinctive gold belt and black boots. he is expected to be local to the area as he knew the layout of the house and went straight to the oven, smashing his way in and grabbing the innocent bird from it's tray.
He was accompanied by his pets as experts found traces of hoof prints on the roof, some carrots and other veg and a pile of brown something which one of the coppers stood in. there was evidence of drag marks on the roof which could indicate a struggle from the turkey or perhaps , as is more likely his escape vehicle.
The local police have said there is absolutely no evidence of any break in although they did find traces of turkey fat near the chimney, in a wardrobe and on a pair of black and white checked women's trousers.
Sniffer dogs were brought in and initially they alerted to the oven and then led their handlers on a merry chase through the house to a wardrobe in the parents room, the bathroom, and a laundry basket
The mccanns meanwhile have sought out the most expensive lawyers the fund could find and also contacted various animal welfare charities to support their claim they were being responsible turkey roasters.
Timelines were found to have been written on the inside cover of the new Beano annual which had been unwrapped for the occasion, with checks being made every 30 Min's to check it was basting nicely and hadn't woken up for a glass of sherry or a mince pie.
A total stranger was reported to have peered into the kitchen but hadn't noticed if the turkey was there or not due to the fridge obscuring his view.
Jane tanner reported she had seen a man scurrying across the top of the street carrying a large bulging sack, she didn't see his face but did recall his clothing, she saw he was dressed inappropriately for the night as it was very mild and he looked to be dressed for the arctic, he was wearing a heavy red suit a big hat and black boots.
Gerry who claimed he had just checked on the turkey was talking to a neighbor, she had to walk round them as they took up the whole sidewalk, neither gerry or the neighbor saw her as she walked round them or the man carrying a sack.
Due to lots of use by various family members all of whom had access to and had taken out and brought in the wheelie bin it wasn't fully examined for 25 days.
A turkey cadaver dog and turkey juice dog were brought in and both alerted to the wheelie bin ,and ,when tests were done there were traces of turkey juices at the bottom and along the lid.
When asked why the dogs had alerted to the wheelie bin, kate said no comment and gerry said ask the dogs before going on to explain how unreliable such dogs were citing a case where a husband had allegedly had a turkey 30 years previously and said turkey had not been seen since.
This backfired on gerry when it was pointed out the husband had finally admitted the dogs had been right all along when they had alerted to the oven, a roasting tin, several plates and the trashcan and that he had roasted and then disposed of the bird.
The mccanns have issued a last photo of the bird as it lay trussed and wearing an adorable bacon outfit bought from the local butcher.
A fund has been started to find the turkey and bring it home, those who wish to donate money can do so at any bank or via payupppalorelse, checks can be made out to cash and money in envelopes can be sent to kate and gerry rothley towers and it will get there.
If donating a turkey please make sure it is organic free range Norfolk bronze and 15lbs or larger fresh is preferred but frozen will be acceptable and in this case anyone wanting to donate a large walk in freezer warehouse size would be welcomed.
In the event of their turkey being found all donations will be given to turkey charities including the turkey charity they have just created by chance.
Please do not harm it, please do not scare it, leave it, take it to a safe place such as a 5* restaurant or hotel or any catering organisation.
It can be easily recognised by it's parsons nose.
Merry Christmas from kate gerry the turkey oh and the twins and forgetting, i mean not forgetting Margaret i mean Madeleine.
Yet, we have heard nothing, not a whisper, not even the slow quiet hiss of a leak from a family friend or trusted supporter.
The shop is still shuttered up on their page, awaiting forlornly something that was promised to be delivered within hours and still hasn't arrived.
The donation button which had been reinforced specially to handle the torrent of donations they plead for every year, telling us how low the fund is and how they can only search for another couple of months, despite the fact they never searched in the first place and, apparently neither did their private investigators.
Claims that no one was searching for Maddie bit the dust when both Scotland yard and the PJ started or reopened the investigation thus negating their cry for donations to fund the non existent search.
We haven't even heard of donations for gifts for Maddie , which should she not be found alive be handed on to some nice charity preferably one created by themselves.
Are their supporters still donating money? If so how and more to the point , why? especially after the car crash that was their appearance on Crime Watch.
Are their supporters instead donating gifts to a long dead child?
Are they age appropriate as in Maddie would be 10 or are they still sending toys suitable for a 3yr old?
Will the tags on the prezzies say lots of love the fund/a well wisher/ a supporter etc?
What about all the prezzies that were sent to Maddie over the years?
Are they all still stored somewhere safe and wrapped or, as is more likely, stuffed under the tree for the twins with the original tags removed as applicable after all with all their legal costs the fund must have taken a huge hit, assuming of course it hasn't been frozen.
Since they are living on one salary and they have become accustomed to the life of Riley on two incomes, gerry and the fund will we now see appeals for presents for the twins as mom and pop are piss poor after buying a couple of bottles of good quality NZ white.as opposed to their good quality wristbands?
Will we hear about them leaving their turkey home alone, apart from the twins who were left behind the Christmas tree., only to have their turkey whoosh gobble ( hens cluck turkeys gobble) by an abductor who got into their unlocked (no change there then) house raced to the oven and snatched the gently roasting bird without alerting the twins who were on guard duty, whilst they were out quaffing mulled wine with their friends in the pub only 2 streets away, well within range of hearing the twins shaking their prezzies.
Can we then expect an appeal for the return of the turkey as their stomachs are grieving their loss and them having to make do with a pile of spam kate found in the back of the PC email box marked begging letters (to send)
On boxing day will we see them speaking from a bit of wrapping paper saying they have been advised they were well within the realms of responsible cheffing and many of us have done the same thing.
Will there be descriptions of the turkey abductor, a large jolly man wearing a distinctive red suit and match hat with white trim, a large belt with a distinctive gold belt and black boots. he is expected to be local to the area as he knew the layout of the house and went straight to the oven, smashing his way in and grabbing the innocent bird from it's tray.
He was accompanied by his pets as experts found traces of hoof prints on the roof, some carrots and other veg and a pile of brown something which one of the coppers stood in. there was evidence of drag marks on the roof which could indicate a struggle from the turkey or perhaps , as is more likely his escape vehicle.
The local police have said there is absolutely no evidence of any break in although they did find traces of turkey fat near the chimney, in a wardrobe and on a pair of black and white checked women's trousers.
Sniffer dogs were brought in and initially they alerted to the oven and then led their handlers on a merry chase through the house to a wardrobe in the parents room, the bathroom, and a laundry basket
The mccanns meanwhile have sought out the most expensive lawyers the fund could find and also contacted various animal welfare charities to support their claim they were being responsible turkey roasters.
Timelines were found to have been written on the inside cover of the new Beano annual which had been unwrapped for the occasion, with checks being made every 30 Min's to check it was basting nicely and hadn't woken up for a glass of sherry or a mince pie.
A total stranger was reported to have peered into the kitchen but hadn't noticed if the turkey was there or not due to the fridge obscuring his view.
Jane tanner reported she had seen a man scurrying across the top of the street carrying a large bulging sack, she didn't see his face but did recall his clothing, she saw he was dressed inappropriately for the night as it was very mild and he looked to be dressed for the arctic, he was wearing a heavy red suit a big hat and black boots.
Gerry who claimed he had just checked on the turkey was talking to a neighbor, she had to walk round them as they took up the whole sidewalk, neither gerry or the neighbor saw her as she walked round them or the man carrying a sack.
Due to lots of use by various family members all of whom had access to and had taken out and brought in the wheelie bin it wasn't fully examined for 25 days.
A turkey cadaver dog and turkey juice dog were brought in and both alerted to the wheelie bin ,and ,when tests were done there were traces of turkey juices at the bottom and along the lid.
When asked why the dogs had alerted to the wheelie bin, kate said no comment and gerry said ask the dogs before going on to explain how unreliable such dogs were citing a case where a husband had allegedly had a turkey 30 years previously and said turkey had not been seen since.
This backfired on gerry when it was pointed out the husband had finally admitted the dogs had been right all along when they had alerted to the oven, a roasting tin, several plates and the trashcan and that he had roasted and then disposed of the bird.
The mccanns have issued a last photo of the bird as it lay trussed and wearing an adorable bacon outfit bought from the local butcher.
A fund has been started to find the turkey and bring it home, those who wish to donate money can do so at any bank or via payupppalorelse, checks can be made out to cash and money in envelopes can be sent to kate and gerry rothley towers and it will get there.
If donating a turkey please make sure it is organic free range Norfolk bronze and 15lbs or larger fresh is preferred but frozen will be acceptable and in this case anyone wanting to donate a large walk in freezer warehouse size would be welcomed.
In the event of their turkey being found all donations will be given to turkey charities including the turkey charity they have just created by chance.
Please do not harm it, please do not scare it, leave it, take it to a safe place such as a 5* restaurant or hotel or any catering organisation.
It can be easily recognised by it's parsons nose.
Merry Christmas from kate gerry the turkey oh and the twins and forgetting, i mean not forgetting Margaret i mean Madeleine.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Gonçalo Amaral book, Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie. Chapter 3
A good friend of mine, John McGowan sent me this and asked what i thought.
Like myself he is learning the principals of Statement analysis and also, he is very good with the body language side of things.
Like myself he is learning the principals of Statement analysis and also, he is very good with the body language side of things.
Take a look, and tell me what you think.
I've just started reading Gonçalo Amaral book, Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie.
I came across this in chapter 3.
There are many possible leads: voluntary disappearance - the child could have wakened and not seeing her parents, gone off to look for them; accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated; an act of vengeance; taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
In Statement Analysis order is important. The subject is giving us additional information by the order they list things. Most people will mention their oldest child first and their youngest child last. This is because the oldest one has been around the longest. If a parent is talking about something that the youngest child has done, then he or she may mention the youngest one first then continue to talk about the rest of their children according to age.
Ask yourself to name some of your old school friends, there is a high possibility you will mention first the person you were closest to, and so on. Back to this paragraph from the book.
Look at the order that is at the forefront of the polices mind..It starts of with the possibility of Maddie going missing, wondering off..It then continues..accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated; an act of vengeance; taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
Look what they think may have happened foremost in order. Then look what they think may have happened last in order..This tells me that from the very beginning they did not believe Maddy was Abducted, and or Kidnapped, but that they were involved right from the very start.
Taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
Look at this part especially.
We know there was no taken for ransom otherwise there would have been a police shutdown on it especially once a ransom note was found or delivered.
It would have been dealt with behind the scenes rather than as we saw in the media.
All the media attention would have made it impossible for the kidnappers to get a ransom let alone collect it as everyone would be watching for them.
We would only have heard about it after Maddie was released alive or more likely found dead.
Kidnappers would see her as a liability or would be panicked and kill her.
Since we know this definitely didn't happen as the media attention would have endangered the child, anything following this possibility also didn't happen, do you follow the logic?
An act of vengeance is only likely if gerry or kate had done something to another, medical negligence perhaps.
Given their jobs this is not likely although i believe oldfield was under a malpractice investigation and gerry was helping him.
The likely target thus would have been oldfield not gerry.
Vengeance by a family member or friend is possible, again unlikely, as usually they target the responsible adult not the child.
Children tend to be victims in custody battles where one parent has custody.
The non custodial parent decides if they can't have them no one can.
In this case it is possible, as she was IVF for a donor to take action but then would they know who the recipient of their donation was?
This then is also unlikely.
This takes us then to voluntary disappearance - the child could have wakened and not seeing her parents, gone off to look for them; accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditate.
If she wandered and was taken then she would be in the immediate or local area.
If we accept the time lines from the group then Maddie would likely have been seen by an adult from the group with all the checks or she would have been calling for daddy since he had just left her sleeping and was talking to Jez Wilkins in the street just outside the apartment
. This though means the patio doors would have been open as toddlers wouldn't usually consider closing them unless they slide closed themselves, she would have heard her dad in the street as it was quiet and voices carry and she would have been calling for daddy/mummy etc.
They would have heard her voice and gone to look.
For her to be wandering and picked up by a passing paedophile who struck it lucky is also unbelievable.
The way he has written it is clever, a possible option
. he gives the minimally possibly option which doesn't refer to any evidence and allows for the possibility she is still alive although pretty much every adult on seeing a lost child would naturally call the police.
There were no calls and given the time she was allegedly missing they would likely have found her at some point.
Accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated.
He gives one possibility of her being alive which is what we would all hope for and would be the natural instinct, a live child is the best outcome and thus a priority, it is something he allows for as a parent not as a cop especially since no body has been found as yet which would be definitive proof of death.
He then gives us FOUR options for a death, again he gives the parents the option of coming clean with a minimal cause of death, accidents happen and the parents panicked etc. he is giving them an out.
They admit to this, Maddie gets recovered.
The rest are plain and simple murder either premeditated or not.
This is where his real attention lies.
I've just started reading Gonçalo Amaral book, Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie.
I came across this in chapter 3.
There are many possible leads: voluntary disappearance - the child could have wakened and not seeing her parents, gone off to look for them; accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated; an act of vengeance; taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
In Statement Analysis order is important. The subject is giving us additional information by the order they list things. Most people will mention their oldest child first and their youngest child last. This is because the oldest one has been around the longest. If a parent is talking about something that the youngest child has done, then he or she may mention the youngest one first then continue to talk about the rest of their children according to age.
Ask yourself to name some of your old school friends, there is a high possibility you will mention first the person you were closest to, and so on. Back to this paragraph from the book.
Look at the order that is at the forefront of the polices mind..It starts of with the possibility of Maddie going missing, wondering off..It then continues..accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated; an act of vengeance; taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
Look what they think may have happened foremost in order. Then look what they think may have happened last in order..This tells me that from the very beginning they did not believe Maddy was Abducted, and or Kidnapped, but that they were involved right from the very start.
Taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar.
Look at this part especially.
We know there was no taken for ransom otherwise there would have been a police shutdown on it especially once a ransom note was found or delivered.
It would have been dealt with behind the scenes rather than as we saw in the media.
All the media attention would have made it impossible for the kidnappers to get a ransom let alone collect it as everyone would be watching for them.
We would only have heard about it after Maddie was released alive or more likely found dead.
Kidnappers would see her as a liability or would be panicked and kill her.
Since we know this definitely didn't happen as the media attention would have endangered the child, anything following this possibility also didn't happen, do you follow the logic?
An act of vengeance is only likely if gerry or kate had done something to another, medical negligence perhaps.
Given their jobs this is not likely although i believe oldfield was under a malpractice investigation and gerry was helping him.
The likely target thus would have been oldfield not gerry.
Vengeance by a family member or friend is possible, again unlikely, as usually they target the responsible adult not the child.
Children tend to be victims in custody battles where one parent has custody.
The non custodial parent decides if they can't have them no one can.
In this case it is possible, as she was IVF for a donor to take action but then would they know who the recipient of their donation was?
This then is also unlikely.
This takes us then to voluntary disappearance - the child could have wakened and not seeing her parents, gone off to look for them; accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditate.
If she wandered and was taken then she would be in the immediate or local area.
If we accept the time lines from the group then Maddie would likely have been seen by an adult from the group with all the checks or she would have been calling for daddy since he had just left her sleeping and was talking to Jez Wilkins in the street just outside the apartment
. This though means the patio doors would have been open as toddlers wouldn't usually consider closing them unless they slide closed themselves, she would have heard her dad in the street as it was quiet and voices carry and she would have been calling for daddy/mummy etc.
They would have heard her voice and gone to look.
For her to be wandering and picked up by a passing paedophile who struck it lucky is also unbelievable.
The way he has written it is clever, a possible option
. he gives the minimally possibly option which doesn't refer to any evidence and allows for the possibility she is still alive although pretty much every adult on seeing a lost child would naturally call the police.
There were no calls and given the time she was allegedly missing they would likely have found her at some point.
Accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated.
He gives one possibility of her being alive which is what we would all hope for and would be the natural instinct, a live child is the best outcome and thus a priority, it is something he allows for as a parent not as a cop especially since no body has been found as yet which would be definitive proof of death.
He then gives us FOUR options for a death, again he gives the parents the option of coming clean with a minimal cause of death, accidents happen and the parents panicked etc. he is giving them an out.
They admit to this, Maddie gets recovered.
The rest are plain and simple murder either premeditated or not.
This is where his real attention lies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)