Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

Kess73

lugha wrote: »

The locking of the door in a separate matter. Even if they had locked the door I think many would still consider in inappropriate for them to be so far away from where their children were sleeping.

The locking of the door, or rather the not locking of the door in the case of the McCanns is not a seperate matter at all.

It is part of what happened that night and cannot be looked at as a seperate event.

There is simply no arguement that can be made that could say that leaving the door unlocked to an apartment containing three unsupervised toddlers/babies could be in any way safer than if the doors to the outside were locked.

The McCanns did not lock the door and it is just another part of the bad parenting skills displayed by them on the night their daughter is listed as going missing, and it is just one of a number of things not done by them, things that would be second nature to any good parent, which may have prevented the abductors or rather abductors as Kate was certain that it was a They straight away.


I agree that if they had locked the door and still gone drinking leaving their babies unsupervised in any way that it would still be bad parenting, but at least a locked door would have been some degree of a barrier to an intruder, and might have been enough to prevent someone getting in.

I bet that they don't go to sleep at night in their home and leave doors leading to the outside unlocked, and that would be with them still in the house, so why do such a thing in a foreign country with three tiny kids left alone?

And their attempts to pass it off as a normal thing for British people to do is a joke. It is not a normal thing done in Britain.

If your car got robbed in the night and you had forgotten to lock the doors, I bet an insurance company would not be listening to any talk of the door being left unlocked as being a seperate matter to the robber getting into the car.


Every thing they did helped the abductors they claim took their child. Every thing they did that night as they left that night totally flies in the face of what any normal parent would do if they had a pair of one year olds and a three year old.

No babysitter gotten despite the hotel offering a creche service to 23:30pm a service which included feeding and cots and constant supervison. The same creche service they had no problem availing of during the day earlier in their stay.

No availing of the listening service that the same hotel offered.

No locking of the door leading to the outside of the apartment.

And a checking system organised by them and their friends which had none of them actually look into the room to check on the one child that went missing. It is just amazing that the one child that nobody bothered to check on was the one that went missing. I mean what are the chances that the abductors were able to pick the one child that everyone would not check on.

The twins were seen by Oldfield in his check, as said in his statement. But he never checked to see if Madeline was there.

Gerry thought the door to where Madeline was sleeping looked wrong during his check, but as her father he never felt the need to stick his head into the room to look at the child he was checking on.

It is just a bloody huge slice of luck that the abductors managed to snatch the child on the same night that all the regular checkers who did the checking every night on such a regular basis all forgot to check on that one child.

To me that says one of two things.

That the checks were not done and that it was only brought up to try and make them look less bad as parents than they already do. And of course it would mean the child could still be abducted as their was nobody checking on a regular basis any night and that was probably noticed.


Or it means that the kid was not there to be checked, and the friends just pitched in with statements saying they did check as they believed whatever the McCanns told them.


So it is one of those two things.


Awful parenting that made it easy for an abductor or they had something to do with covering up whatever happened and were content to leave the remaining children alone, awful parenting anyway, until it was time to cry wolf.


So say the unlocked door is a seperate matter if you like, for me it is just one more part of a night were so much does not add up.

Silver Moon

I have absolutely no doubt they locked the door on all the nights they left their three young kids unattended. Unfortunately for them they have to claim they left it open because there was clearly no sign of forced entry anywhere and the McCanns made a hash of trying to make it look like the window shutters had been 'jemmied'.

iamwhoiam

Mistyeyes321 wrote: »

I'm sorry if you have misunderstood what I meant.. I didn't think who ever posted it first was Making this up, I just hadn't heard of this :eek:Fridge reference before & was & still am really really Shocked by this:eek: Thank you for the Link's too .:)

No thats fine . No worries . I always say in the Mc Canns case it is not one small niggle that makes people doubt , it is the rolling stone of gathering niggles that does it .So many unanswered questions, so many odd little additions , so many different witness accounts , so many unbelievable stories . The sueing , the travelling , ohh so many to write that makes me doubt them
Coupled with their complete and utter arrogance telling us " its like being in the back garden and we have all done it " which raised many hackles .
Seeinfg it first hand it most definetly is not like anyones back garden at all

Stella89

Just looking at the Irish Times paper today who today reviewed the book by Kate McCann , the review is by Ann Marie Hourihane, and it is the most embarassing book review( piece of journalism) I have ever read .


Some direct qoutes by the reviewer of the book . .


"One gets the impression that Kate McCann was always a good girl ."

"You feel that McCann is a woman that always followed the rules ."

"The McCanns were criticised for leaving the children unattended in the appartment, allthough they explained that they checked the children every 30 minutes ."

and the last sentence of the book review .


"It is dificult to see why anyone would buy it for anything but charitable reasons: All royalities go to Madeline's fund, to continue the search for her ."

If only you bothered to do More research Anne! .

Kess73

Silver Moon wrote: »

I have absolutely no doubt they locked the door on all the nights they left their three young kids unattended. Unfortunately for them they have to claim they left it open because there was clearly no sign of forced entry anywhere and the McCanns made a hash of trying to make it look like the window shutters had been 'jemmied'.

How did the abductor get in then?


The police checked all door locks and the windows plus shutter and there was no sign of any forced entry or damage to the locks.


If they were 100% genuine then why would they have to make up a story about leaving doors unlocked and lying about a forced shutter?


It would make no sense at all for them to claim the doors etc were unlocked if they really were locked to start with.


Entry to a locked apartment with no signs of forced entry would mean the person had a key and the police would straight away be onto the hotel and it's staff.

maebee

From the blog of Pat Brown, Criminal Profiler:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/05/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-did.html

walshb

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I appreciate your apology.

It is not desperation or clutching at all and you know it. Several cases have been quoted to show how parent need only turn away for a second for child to go missing.
.

Come on. The chances that Madeleine gets taken IF both parents are there is so so so much less than if they are not there. Surely you have to see this? That is why I said that mentioning it is IMO desperation.

Also, yes, a parent need only take their eyes off their child for seconds for the child to go missing. But that would be most likely in a crowded and public area, like a zoo or shopping centre. And a lot of the time, the child themselves wander and stray This is not at all comparable to the McCann's case.

Loopy

The McCanns fucked up badly, and are now paying for it every day.
I'm just back from Portugal and cannot understand how any parent would leave their children and go out for the night. Mine came out with us, as they have always done over the years, it's what people do on holidays. If it had been a hotel and they were downstairs having dinner and the kids in bed maybe I could understand it but they were round the friggin' corner.
Having said that, I honestly don't believe they had anything to do with it. Kate has not worked as I think she is dedicating her life to trying to find her child. The guilt they will carry for the rest of their lives far outways any financial gain imo.

Silver Moon

Kess73 wrote: »

How did the abductor get in then?

The police checked all door locks and the windows plus shutter and there was no sign of any forced entry or damage to the locks.

If they were 100% genuine then why would they have to make up a story about leaving doors unlocked and lying about a forced shutter?

It would make no sense at all for them to claim the doors etc were unlocked if they really were locked to start with.

Entry to a locked apartment with no signs of forced entry would mean the person had a key and the police would straight away be onto the hotel and it's staff.

Well, it's simple isn't? There was no abductor.

Silver Moon

Loopy wrote: »

Kate has not worked as I think she is dedicating her life to trying to find her child.

although, by her own admission she didn't try to find her on the night of the 3rd. I've never seen much 'dedication' other than her and her husband being dedicated to saving themselves.

iamwhoiam

maebee wrote: »

From the blog of Pat Brown, Criminal Profiler:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/05/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-did.html

WOW .,:eek:

iamwhoiam

Silver Moon wrote: »

although, by her own admission she didn't try to find her on the night of the 3rd. I've never seen much 'dedication' other than her and her husband being dedicated to saving themselves.

I dont know Madeleine or her family and both my husband and I were in Praia da Luz 10 months after she went missing .We both found ourselves when out in the car looking for her everywhere we went .Not actively with shovels but we found ourselves when out waking or driving , looking in the ditches and odd places . We knew she was gone but it was instictive . I know that I would dig the Western Algarve up with my finger nails if one of my kids were missing .Day in day out .I would have pulled everyone bin and dumpster apart , every bush , every hole . Till this day I will never know how her mother and her father went jogging( and timed it ) in the weeks following . It amazes me that they never actually went searching in the days after .

Scuid Mhór

Stella89 wrote: »

Just looking at the Irish Times paper today who today reviewed the book by Kate McCann , the review is by Ann Marie Hourihane, and it is the most embarassing book review( piece of journalism) I have ever read .


Some direct qoutes by the reviewer of the book . .


"One gets the impression that Kate McCann was always a good girl ."

"You feel that McCann is a woman that always followed the rules ."

"The McCanns were criticised for leaving the children unattended in the appartment, allthough they explained that they checked the children every 30 minutes ."

and the last sentence of the book review .


"It is dificult to see why anyone would buy it for anything but charitable reasons: All royalities go to Madeline's fund, to continue the search for her ."

If only you bothered to do More research Anne! .

Hahahaha well it's better than purple prose at least.

Silver Moon

a random selection of quote by Gerry McCann...

• We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing, It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that.
  
• I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleines disappearance in the long term.
  
• We have been advised our behaviour was legally well within the bounds of responsible parenting and have been assured no action will be taken.
  
• One good thing to come out of all of this is that there is so much in the press, nobody knows what is true, and what isn't.
  
• We are hoping for the best possible outcome for us.... and Madeleine.
  
• If the worst happened...at least she will be in a better place.

Kess73

Silver Moon wrote: »

a random selection of quote by Gerry McCann...

• We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing, It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that.
  
• I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleines disappearance in the long term.
  
• We have been advised our behaviour was legally well within the bounds of responsible parenting and have been assured no action will be taken.
  
• One good thing to come out of all of this is that there is so much in the press, nobody knows what is true, and what isn't.
  
• We are hoping for the best possible outcome for us.... and Madeleine.
  
• If the worst happened...at least she will be in a better place.

Any chance of links to the full interviews that those quotes are taken from?

Numbers 3,4, and 5 are shocking, but I would be curious to see them in the context of the interview or line of questioning they were taken from.

Sometimes a quote that looks awful when shown on it's own looks better, or makes more sense, when the full conversation is read.

Having said that, 3 and 4 are worded very badly for a man being coached by a professional media team.

maebee

Silver Moon wrote: »

a random selection of quote by Gerry McCann...

• We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing, It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that.
  
• I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleines disappearance in the long term.
  
• We have been advised our behaviour was legally well within the bounds of responsible parenting and have been assured no action will be taken.
  
• One good thing to come out of all of this is that there is so much in the press, nobody knows what is true, and what isn't.
  
• We are hoping for the best possible outcome for us.... and Madeleine.
  
• If the worst happened...at least she will be in a better place.

Add to that Kate McCann's comment at her press conference in London on Thursday May 12th 2011. When asked about an aged progression photo of Madeleine she said "It is something we will consider (doing) in a year or two".

The McCanns know that Madeleine will not be found.

K-9

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And as I and others have said it is not a simple matter of 'if an adult was there Madeleine would have been safe'. She most likely would have but you can't say she DEFINITLY would have.

most likely is the important phrase there, there are no definites with toddlers so you minimise risks as much as possible, baby sitter in this case or as another couple did, baby monitors in case they get sick, wake up scared.

CK2010

i dont think the long term thinking is an indication of knowledge though. when my girl was sick i always thought long term- medication in school etc.- because when you're faced with a bad situation you dont see yourself coming out the other end. so maybe it was similar to that,moreso than knowing the situation would be a long term thing.

maebee

Kess73 wrote: »

Any chance of links to the full interviews that those quotes are taken from?

Numbers 3,4, and 5 are shocking, but I would be curious to see them in the context of the interview or line of questioning they were taken from.

Sometimes a quote that looks awful when shown on its own looks better, or makes more sense, when the full conversation is read.

Having said that, 3 and 4 are worded very badly for a man being coached by a professional media team.

3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-470896/Madeleines-parents-subjected-spiteful-internet-hate-campaign.html

Will have a look for the others.

thebullkf

maebee wrote: »

From the blog of Pat Brown, Criminal Profiler:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/05/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-did.html

i read half of it, saw spelling errors and stopped reading, can it be verified

maebee

thebullkf wrote: »

i read half of it, saw spelling errors and stopped reading, can it be verified

What do you mean can it be verified? This is the blog of a top Criminal profiler. She's a regular on CNN. It's just her opinion.

Re spelling & grammar, "I" should always be capitalised.
You should have put a full stop after "reading" and began your next sentence with a capital C for "Can" and a question mark should have been used after the word "verified"

thebullkf

maebee wrote: »

What do you mean can it be verified? This is the blog of a top Criminal profiler. She's a regular on CNN. It's just her opinion.

Re spelling & grammar, "I" should always be capitalised.
You should have put a full stop after "reading" and began your next sentence with a capital C for "Can" and a question mark should have been used after the word "verified"

my grammar and spelling is irrelevant, can it be verified that she wrote it, and i never heard of her.

Both you and Gerry state your only guilt in the matter is not being their when Madeleine “was taken.”

btw her profile has had less than 2 views per day since it began....and i've looked at it twice ..!

fairly basic mistake if you ask me, even for a regular on CNN;)

mrsbyrne

thebullkf wrote: »

my grammar and spelling is irrelevant, can it be verified that she wrote it, and i never heard of her.




btw her profile has had less than 2 views per day since it began....and i've looked at it twice ..!

fairly basic mistake if you ask me, even for a regular on CNN;)

thebullkf what youll find with more or less professional mccann haters like maebee is that, any crackpot/axe murderer/registered sex offenders who can do a bit of two-fingered typing and who apparently concur with the mccann hating mantra are considered to be terribly important influential people. mr Anthony Bennett for example a disgraced solicitor, and hilariously once a rather dimwitted actress who apparently appeared in Coronation Street (her name escapes me but if pushed i could dig up her incredibly literate well thought out (not)magazine article, funny we dont hear much from her these days). Naturally, genuinely prominent journalists and commentators, the vast majority almost without fail of whom are sympathetic towards the mccanns, are all idiots, in the pay of the mccanns or child neglecters themselves. it really is quite genuinely hilarious, if it wasnt so shockingly sick and cruel and inhuman. your wasting your time arguing here. they have all made literally thousands of posts repeating the same toxic mantra of forum myths and 1/2 truths and lies, trolling the internet day and night for madeleine mccann discussions in chat rooms such as this one. if you check the posters particulars most will only have registered with a board as soon as a mccann thread starts. its amazing really. the mother ship of these posters is a website you will find if you google the fact that madeleine is missing, but you need a strong stomach as the vile outpourings of bile daily for years now are absolutely horrific. no point in attempting to register, any dissenting voices are immediately rounded on, bullied mercilessly, before incurring a ban. mods and posters have included, as mentioned before, a remorseless convicted self confessed axe murderer. (he murdered his landlady with an axe, i think ,because she asked him to put out the bins, or somesuch... lovely guy). a convicted paedophile and several other clearly sadly disturbed individuals. if you pop over there right now you will discover a very lively thread discussing the apparently very real possibility that poor little madeleine was in fact a clone!?! I kid you not! but as i said, strong stomach needed,vile stuff indeed. Sorry for hijacking this thread.

OutlawPete

Still very surprised at the amount of attention that is focused on what Kate and Gerry said, in comparison to Jane Tanner. If any of the Tapas 9 seem to be full of it, it's her.

She says the guy carrying Maddie was wearing a "big heavy jacket and trousers" and she thought this was "quite odd" in hindsight. Yet she also says that she herself was wearing a "big jumper" cause it was "quite a cold night" and was the reason she thought the guy was not a "particularly good parent" as Maddie had no socks on.

So, considering all that, then why was it "quite odd" for the guy to be wearing trousers and a jacket? Makes no sense.

She also said the reason she knew the guy was carrying a girl was because the pajama legs were "pinky aspect". Sorry, but there is no way you could distinguish colors of pjammas and even if that were possible, is that really something you would remember. In fact. she not only says that she remembers the colour of them, she said it was the main reason she remembers anything

"At the time, I knew what I'd seen, I'd gave that information to the Police and cause of the pajamas, and absolutely convinced that is what I saw".

Also, she said she thought Maddie's abductor was "quite odd" with what he was wearing and that he wasn't a "particularly good parent" for carrying his daughter with no socks and just pajamas, yet she said:

"As soon as Rachael said to me Maddie's gone, this person sort of came into my head, I hadn't given it a second thought up to that point but then this person sort of .. I suddenly thought oh .. oh that person was a bit odd, suddenly Maddie's not there and I've seen someone that .. then you think oh .. that maybe was a bit odd, it just seems too much of a coincidence."

So, she says the guy carrying the girl was "quite odd" at the time .. but then says it only appeared "a bit odd" after she found out maddie was gone.

Not too mention that fact that she says she walked right passed Gerry and Wilkins chatting in the narrow road just seconds before seeing the guy carrying Maddie and yet neither of them somehow seen her.

People say that the disappearance of Madeleine McCann gets all the attention it does because she is a white young pretty girl and so the media laps it up, I disagree - I think this story gets the attention it does because when you look at all the facts, it's like reading a script for the fcuking Twilight Zone.

K-9

I think nearly everybody has discounted Jane Tanner at this stage, if anything is a fact in this case, that is!

OutlawPete

K-9 wrote: »

I think nearly everybody has discounted Jane Tanner at this stage, if anything is a fact in this case, that is!

Which is why I said I was "surprised" with how much attention is focused on Gerry and Kate, in comparison to Jane.

I simply don't understand why more attention is not focused on her obvious contradictions, especially considering that she is the only one to have seen the man who took Maddie. Seems strange to me that people can just say so easily that what Jane said doesn't matter, yet still pick apart everything that Gerry and Kate said and imply they had something to do with it.

If Jane's statements are to be believd, then that proves Kate and Gerry had nothing to do with it.

The only facts concering Jane Tanner that I see, is that most of what she has said, has gigantic holes in it. Even the description she initially gave of the man carrying Maddie, wasn't close to the one that she gave a month later. Is it any wonder the Portuguese police called her a "fantasist".

Micky Dolenz

maebee wrote: »

Re spelling & grammar, "I" should always be capitalised.
You should have put a full stop after "reading" and began your next sentence with a capital C for "Can" and a question mark should have been used after the word "verified"

See here.

Babooshka

mrsbyrne wrote: »

as i said, strong stomach needed,vile stuff indeed. Sorry for hijacking this thread.

I have to agree with you, it's like it draws all the mentalists out to attack, and to verbally and visually insult people they don't know. People who haven't been proved guilty yet and may be totally innocent.

Some of the stuff I saw in one of the other threads on this forum are disgusting and should be taken off, it doesn't matter even if they did have a hand in the child's disapperance all of those wrongs (on attacking forums boards, this one or other ones) aren't justified by any perceived wrong on the McCann's part, people are just plain hurtful sometimes. Fair enough if you suspect that there is foul play but for God's sake posting up immature photoshopped pictures of the McCanns with song or movie or book titles is extremely offensive. Lot of dicks on this forum.

deco nate

Babooshka wrote: »

I have to agree with you, it's like it draws all the mentalists out to attack, and to verbally and visually insult people they don't know. People who haven't been proved guilty yet and may be totally innocent.

Some of the stuff I saw in one of the other threads on this forum are disgusting and should be taken off, it doesn't matter even if they did have a hand in the child's disapperance all of those wrongs (on attacking forums boards, this one or other ones) aren't justified by any perceived wrong on the McCann's part, people are just plain hurtful sometimes. Fair enough if you suspect that there is foul play but for God's sake posting up immature photoshopped pictures of the McCanns with song or movie or book titles is extremely offensive. Lot of dicks on this forum.

what?!
where????!really?dont just leave it at that!

Mistyeyes321

maebee wrote: »

From the blog of Pat Brown, Criminal Profiler:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/05/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-did.html

Great Read thank's for the Link:)

I have got to say I think this Lady Pat, Has Kate McCannn off perfectly imho...I don't agree with some who think she is this Weeping Willow tree all Shy & Butter really wouldn't melt in my Mouth.!

I'm so glad i'm not the only person who see's Mrs M in this light this is only my Opinion which mean's Nothing I know...Just seeing someone else put it all out their has made me realize maybe just Maybe i'm not as stupid as some would like to think... :onot that i'm saying anyone here has suggested such a Thing:o

I still can't get out my head these Timelines... What i'm trying to say is I really don't believe any of it tbh...I think these Children we're left alone from their Parent's Leaving for their evening Meal until their return at whatever time that was??!

Also wasn't there one of the Friend's Husband who stayed at the Apartment because his Child was Sick? Does anyone know how far apart his Apartment was from the MCS?! I ask for the reason wouldn't he have Heard someone supposedly Tinkering with the Shutter's? They are hardly know for being well Oiled & yes I am refering to the Shutter's with the Well Oiled Comment:eek: