Madeleine McCann

dark crystal

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Don’t apologize to a silly comment like that, the poster needs to comeback with more then 3 letters and an emoji. These are serious links, might end up being BS but these links can’t be dismissed only if you aren’t open to any theory in this case. To not be open is foolish as there is no hard evidence to support either way. So keep posting the links and we can debate them.

Mine's a silly comment, yet you're happy to swallow a load of Q-anon pizza-gate rubbish? Lol

Listen, there's a whole thread on Madeleine McCann on the conspiracy forum. This is where stuff like Masons and pizza-gate belongs, in with the Area 51, fake moon landings tripe.

The poster has no proof (as usual), this stuff is thrown out precisely because it cannot be proven. Posters think you can insinuate horrendeous things about people, who have been through a tragic experience and people will lap it up simply because they don't like them. When I posted facts about phone calls a few pages back in reply to a question you asked, you poo-poohed it, yet you are happy to accept this line of unfounded rubbish?

Calling someone a paedophile these days is akin to how people were labelled communists back in the day. Do not make serious claims about people until you have the proof. You may find that silly, but it's dead serious.

dark crystal

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Banana Republic. wrote: »

The Jane Tanner sighting can’t be right as neither Jeremy or Gerry seen a man carrying a young child away at the same time. (Even Operation Grange said the timing wasn’t right and it was later n the Smyth sighting was the most prominent) One of them would of been facing the way of the man in question. Gerry went missing fire a longer period, the last check was done at 9:30 supposedly and then the Smyth sighting was around the 10pm mark which is when Katie said she went back to check only to find Madeline was gone and they didn’t ring the police for around 40 mins. The timeframe is so tight with Gerry being missing “watching football” what match was on that night or where was Gerry watching this match? The luckiest abduction ever or the father (GmcC) was the guy carrying the girl (M) away down to the beach.

Gerry was watching what match? Where did anyone state he was watching a match? The man whom Jane Tanner saw carrying a child came forward.

Again with the Smith sighting....10pm, that was when they saw a man carrying a child. Gerry was seen by numerous independent witnesses at the Ocean Club at 10pm. A person simply cannot be in two places at once.

I say again, Smith only came forward to say it may have been Gerry he saw by the way he watched him a carry a child onto a plane. He bases this on having seen the man in dim light, having previously said he would not be able to identify him. Without his glasses. His children and their partners who were with him and also saw this man, did not agree it was Gerry.

If Gerry was 1/2 a KM away, walking towards the beach at 10pm, how could he have been at the Ocean Club at the same time?

Banana Republic.

dark crystal wrote: »

Mine's a silly comment, yet you're happy to swallow a load of Q-anon pizza-gate rubbish? Lol

Listen, there's a whole thread on Madeleine McCann on the conspiracy forum. This is where stuff like Masons and pizza-gate belongs, in with the Area 51, fake moon landings tripe.

The poster has no proof (as usual), this stuff is thrown out precisely because it cannot be proven. Posters think you can insinuate horrendeous things about people, who have been through a tragic experience and people will lap it up simply because they don't like them. When I posted facts about phone calls a few pages back in reply to a question you asked, you poo-poohed it, yet you are happy to accept this line of unfounded rubbish?

Calling someone a paedophile these days is akin to how people were labelled communists back in the day. Do not make serious claims about people until you have the proof. You may find that silly, but it's dead serious.

I actually asked about the calls I didn’t poo poo it? I'm as interested as you are. I’m not happy to accept it I’m happy to find new info to look into just like you are most likely (I could be wrong) I made no serious claims about anyone I’ve put in my opinion after listening to a seeps podcast on the events and the timelines provided in police files. They are tight timelines there seems to be only 2 scenarios, the parents or an abduction. 3 letter replies to a new poster doesn’t help the conversation. The poster put in the info they have looked into but they didn’t say it was absolute fact just looking at links. Nothing personal for me here just interested in the case since day one. Personally for me the logic and investigations is what interests me most plus obviously the safe return of Madeline at the forefront she’s the biggest victim in any scenario.

Banana Republic.

dark crystal wrote: »

Gerry was watching what match? Where did anyone state he was watching a match? The man whom Jane Tanner saw carrying a child came forward.

Again with the Smith sighting....10pm, that was when they saw a man carrying a child. Gerry was seen by numerous independent witnesses at the Ocean Club at 10pm. A person simply cannot be in two places at once.

I say again, Smith only came forward to say it may have been Gerry he saw by the way he watched him a carry a child onto a plane. He bases this on having seen the man in dim light, having previously said he would not be able to identify him. Without his glasses. His children and their partners who were with him and also saw this man, did not agree it was Gerry.

If Gerry was 1/2 a KM away, walking towards the beach at 10pm, how could he have been at the Ocean Club at the same time?

In the podcast an investigator called Pat Brown said that Kate was annoyed with Gerry that he hadn’t returned as usual due to watching a football match. These timelines are coming from the Tapas 7 ( which can’t be trusted if he was involved) Smyth sighting had no significance until Gerry boarded the plane which the brain triggers a memory so that’s a very strong gut reaction. As DCI Redwood said The Tanner sighting has no relevance given her timeline but the Smyth one does. Is there cctv of Gerry at Tapas Bar? Once he’s ruled out then we’re looking at a definitive abduction.

joeguevara

dark crystal wrote: »

Mine's a silly comment, yet you're happy to swallow a load of Q-anon pizza-gate rubbish? Lol

Listen, there's a whole thread on Madeleine McCann on the conspiracy forum. This is where stuff like Masons and pizza-gate belongs, in with the Area 51, fake moon landings tripe.

The poster has no proof (as usual), this stuff is thrown out precisely because it cannot be proven. Posters think you can insinuate horrendeous things about people, who have been through a tragic experience and people will lap it up simply because they don't like them. When I posted facts about phone calls a few pages back in reply to a question you asked, you poo-poohed it, yet you are happy to accept this line of unfounded rubbish?

Calling someone a paedophile these days is akin to how people were labelled communists back in the day. Do not make serious claims about people until you have the proof. You may find that silly, but it's dead serious.

I did apologise for the conspiracy theory element. I didn't mean to. The Kingsley Napley solicitor firm I do stand beside.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

joeguevara wrote: »

I did apologise for the conspiracy theory element. I didn't mean to. The Kingsley Napley solicitor firm I do stand beside.

Maybe the solicitors are good at their job so a variety of people use them. I'll have to remember to ask my solicitor if she's ever defended any pedophiles or rapists, as that would make me one and I wouldn't want that.

dark crystal

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Banana Republic. wrote: »

In the podcast an investigator called Pat Brown said that Kate was annoyed with Gerry that he hadn’t returned as usual due to watching a football match. These timelines are coming from the Tapas 7 ( which can’t be trusted if he was involved) Smyth sighting had no significance until Gerry boarded the plane which the brain triggers a memory so that’s a very strong gut reaction. As DCI Redwood said The Tanner sighting has no relevance given her timeline but the Smyth one does. Is there cctv of Gerry at Tapas Bar? Once he’s ruled out then we’re looking at a definitive abduction.

Aah ok, so this podcast featured notorious McCann critic Pat Brown. The same Pat Brown who said they may have taken Madeleine's mummified body back home to the UK in a suitcase? Ok, I think I can understand the kind of podcast this may have been now.

As you may or may not be aware, there was no CCTV in the Ocean Club in 2007. Had there been CCTV, we may well not have a 13 year old mystery on our hands.

No, as I mentioned, there are numerous witnesses, staff, guests etc. Who place Gerry at the Ocean club at 10 pm when the alarm was raised. It's all in the witness statements. If he wasn't there at that time, it would be pretty significant don't you think?

00so

Kate McCann returned to the apartment at 10pm to check on the children. She says the bedroom door is open wider than they left it. Two checks had been carried out since she had been in the apartment so that would not be unusual. She then pulled out the door without looking in to see if the children were OK. Suddenly a gust of wind slammed the door shut. Then she looked into the room. If she thought it was unusual the the door was opened wider than before would she not check the children immediately? How come the breeze had not slammed the door shut before that if the window was open? Just wondering.
Why can't they ever admit they shouldn't have left the children on their own instead of always trying to claim that it was ok to do it?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

The peado ring element is something no one wants to believe. It would be just too sick. There are a few strange occurrences though. Some have been mentioned in the previous few pages and didn't the McCanns visit Freud right after they became official suspects? Coincidence maybe. You also must remember the statement from Katherina Gaspar:


"I was sitting between Dave and Gerry whom I believe were both talking about Madeleine. I don't remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like ?she?, referring to Madeleine, ?would do this?.

When he mentioned ?this?, Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, whilst with the other hand he circled his nipple, with a circulating movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner there being an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing.

I remember that I was shocked at this, and looked at Gerry, and also at Dave, to see their reactions. I looked around (page 4) to see ?did anyone else hear this, or was it just me?. There was a nervous silence noted in the conversations of all the others and immediately afterwards everyone began talking again.

I never spoke to anyone about this, but I always felt that it was something very strange and that it wasn't something that should be done or said.

Apart from this, I remember that Dave did the same thing once again. When I refer to this, I want to mention again that it was during a conversation, in which he was talking about an imaginary situation, though I could not say precisely what it was about. I believe that he was talking about his own daughter, L., though I'm not certain. He slid one of his fingers in and out of his mouth, while the other hand drew a circle around his nipple in a provocative and sexual manner. I believe that he was referring to the way that L., would behave or would do it."

joeguevara

cnocbui wrote: »

Maybe the solicitors are good at their job so a variety of people use them. I'll have to remember to ask my solicitor if she's ever defended any pedophiles or rapists, as that would make me one and I wouldn't want that.

That was in no way how it was raised or portrayed. I just made a point that an unknown person who happened to invite the McCanns for lunch, where it never transpired that he had a dark cloud happened to use a niche (ie. you wouldn't know them) firm of solicitors, as did his friends for the same reason and immediately after one lunch where nothing was discussed, the McCanns appointed them. That is a bit different to the scenario you espouse above.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

00so wrote: »

Kate McCann returned to the apartment at 10pm to check on the children. She says the bedroom door is open wider than they left it. Two checks had been carried out since she had been in the apartment so that would not be unusual. She then pulled out the door without looking in to see if the children were OK. Suddenly a gust of wind slammed the door shut. Then she looked into the room. If she thought it was unusual the the door was opened wider than before would she not check the children immediately? How come the breeze had not slammed the door shut before that if the window was open? Just wondering.
Why can't they ever admit they shouldn't have left the children on their own instead of always trying to claim that it was ok to do it?

‘Our terrible regret at leaving Madeleine alone’ - April 2008.

Gerry: ‘Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

I won’t reply directly to that poster because I’m one of the 15 people with a different opinion to him so I’m on ignore...

This Gaspar lady, didn’t her husband hear this conversation also but he said he didn’t think they were talking about Madeline?

I would be more than a little surprised if the lads were talking about the sexual activity of a 3 year old at a table full of witnesses..

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Ah, the infamous Gasper statement where she remembers a gesture.. she thinks it was about Madeleine but she’s not sure.. she can’t remember anything else about the conversation.. can’t remember what they may have been discussing but she’s certain it happened in Leicester.. or was that Majorca? I can’t remember.. neither can she.. anyway she remembers remembering a gesture but can’t remember anything else about it..
Her husband remembers too but he remembers nothing suspicious about it. They remember it so well but they never discussed it or anything about how strange or potentially inappropriate it was after that.

Yeah. She’s not bad shlt fcuking crazy at all.

callmehal wrote: »

The peado ring element is something no one wants to believe.

That would be because of the whole “no evidence” thing, remember? Have you forgotten your copy and pasted Wikipedia link of what evidence is already?

Now, I know I’m not neutral like you but I don’t tend to speculate whether or not people are involved in an organised paedophile ring without as much as a hint of proof to support such a theory but sure look I’d be pure daft like that.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

‘Our terrible regret at leaving Madeleine alone’ - April 2008.

Gerry: ‘Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html

Gerry McCann: “like being at the bottom of your garden.… You could see our apartment from where we were.”

Actual distance:

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Rock77 wrote: »

I won’t reply directly to that poster because I’m one of the 15 people with a different opinion to him so I’m on ignore...

I need to start having a more “open minded, unemotional and neutral view” on things and start putting people on ignore when they say things I don’t want to read or agree with. Clearly I’m doing it all wrong.

joeguevara

retro:electro wrote: »

Ah, the infamous Gasper statement where she remembers a gesture.. she thinks it was about Madeleine but she’s not sure.. she can’t remember anything else about the conversation.. can’t remember what they may have been discussing but she’s certain it happened in Leicester.. or was that Majorca? I can’t remember.. neither can she.. anyway she remembers remembering a gesture but can’t remember anything else about it..
Her husband remembers too but he remembers nothing suspicious about it. They remember it so well but they never discussed it or anything about how strange or potentially inappropriate it was after that.

Yeah. She’s not bad shlt fcuking crazy at all.




That would be because of the whole “no evidence” thing, remember?

Now, I know I’m not neutral like you but I don’t tend to speculate whether or not people are involved in an organised paedophile ring without as much as a hint of proof to support such a theory but sure look I’d be pure daft like that.

So what are your thoughts on Clement Freud. Who happened to befriend the couple. Who does it transpired have connections to less than desirable people. Who gave sanctuary in his mansion in praia da luz to other less than desirable people.

What is your definition of hint of proof?

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Gerry McCann: “like being at the bottom of your garden.… You could see our apartment from where we were.”

Actual distance:

And your point is? Where did I defend or justify the distance between the tapas bar and the apartment? You have a serious propensity for arguing against points that were never even made in the first place.
Someone said they have never regretted leaving the kids, when they clearly do.
That’s what I was replying to.

00so

SusieBlue wrote: »

‘Our terrible regret at leaving Madeleine alone’ - April 2008.

Gerry: ‘Hindsight has proven we made a mistake and we would never leave the children again’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1016816/Our-mistake-leaving-Madeleine-Gerry-McCann.html

"The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was 'perfectly reasonable' to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz."
Who would think it was perfectly reasonable? They should have admitted immediately that it was a stupid thing to do - Gerry tried to say it was like being out in the garden at home with the children in bed in the house.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Then we had a statement from Arul Savio Gaspar, the husband of Katherina, this corroborates her statement.

"During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne.
I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue."

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

And your point is? Where did I defend or justify the distance between the tapas bar and the apartment? You have a serious propensity for arguing against points that were never even made in the first place.
Someone said they have never regretted leaving the kids, when they clearly do.
That’s what I was replying to.

Just pointing out one of the excuses peddled by the McCanns. Made no mention of you. Chillax.

yourdeadwright

Accident happened, parents hid body

I never understand people who rule out the parents,

Was there ever any actually evidence that anyone else entered the apartment ?
I don't think it could be proven anyone bar the McCann's had entered the apartment that evening surely until you can prove someone else was ever even there then the McCann have to be counted as a possibility ,

I'm not saying they done it but I would never rule them out until evidence points at someone else,

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

00so wrote: »

"The father of three said he and his wife Kate had thought at the time it was 'perfectly reasonable' to leave Madeleine, then three, and their two-year-old twins alone in an unlocked holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz."
Who would think it was perfectly reasonable? They should have admitted immediately that it was a stupid thing to do - Gerry tried to say it was like being out in the garden at home with the children in bed in the house.

Because that’s what they thought at the time, and with the benefit of hindsight they realised they were wrong. To be fair, what you originally said was:

00so wrote: »

Why can't they ever admit they shouldn't have left the children on their own instead of always trying to claim that it was ok to do it?

They have long since acknowledged that they should never have done it.
Wondering why they thought it was reasonable in the first place is a bit pointless when it’s already done. I imagine Gerry believed his comment to be true, and I also think that if they had immediately admitted wrong doing, people would have said ‘if they knew it was wrong all along then why did they do it’.
Either way I’m sure it’s a question that they ask themselves every single day.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I never understand people who rule out the parents,

Was there ever any actually evidence that anyone else entered the apartment ?
I don't think it could be proven anyone bar the McCann's had entered the apartment that evening surely until you can prove someone else was ever even there then the McCann have to be counted as a possibility ,

I'm not saying they done it but I would never rule them out until evidence points at someone else,

Oh no. Expect to come under attack any moment now for making that reasonable comment!

Of course, they have to be considered suspects. That doesn't mean they did it but the only evidence available points to them. It's not much, circumstantial but still, it's more than on anyone else.

dark crystal

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Then we had a statement from Arul Savio Gaspar, the husband of Katherina, this corroborates her statement.

"During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne.
I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue."

Yes? You're just reiterating what the previous poster said about him not knowing who the conversation was about. He certainly doesn't back up his wife's (maybe, not sure) suggestion that it was in relation to Madeleine.

Why would a grown man, in the company of other adults he had just met, make paedophilic references at dinner? Does that make any sense to you? Has the man in question ever been arrested on suspicion of or been charged with child abuse?

Oh I forgot...friends in high places and all that.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Then we had a statement from Arul Savio Gaspar, the husband of Katherina, this corroborates her statement.

"During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne.
I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue."

Hmm now why would you leave out the part where he says he does not believe David was referring to Madeleine. Such neutrality!

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Gerry McCann: “like being at the bottom of your garden.… You could see our apartment from where we were.”

Actual distance:

From the Tapas to the apartment:

That is less than from one corner of my property to the other. I can see how the amphitheater like effect of the surrounding apartments could lead to a false sense of security.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

dark crystal wrote: »

Yes? You're just reiterating what the previous poster said about him not knowing who the conversation was about. He certainly doesn't back up his wife's (maybe, not sure) suggestion that it was in relation to Madeleine.

Why would a grown man, in the company of other adults he had just met, make paedophilic references at dinner? Does that make any sense to you? Has the man in question ever been arrested on suspicion of or been charged with child abuse?

Oh I forgot...friends in high places and all that.

He does back up his wife's statement. It seems very creepy and I wouldn't know why Gerry didn't stop it or whatever but it adds in to the weirdness of it all.

By the way, is it a case of believing witness statements when it suits and not believing them when it doesn't? :pac:

dark crystal wrote: »

No, as I mentioned, there are numerous witnesses, staff, guests etc. Who place Gerry at the Ocean club at 10 pm when the alarm was raised. It's all in the witness statements.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

He does back up his wife's statement.

Nope.

“I can say that Dave was a pleasant person. I do not remember him having any unusual characteristics.

During the holidays Dave never behaved in an inappropriate manner with Madeleine or with any of the other children. Dave was popular with the children and I took this to be because he was a close friend to the family.


I never distrusted Dave. After the holidays there was one occasion when we were with Kate and Gerry and Fiona and Dave were also present.

That was in a restaurant in Leicester in 2005. I do not remember the name of the restaurant.

We had a pleasant evening, just the three couples without the children.

I do not remember Dave having behaved inappropriately on this occasion. We have not spoken to Dave or Fiona since December 2005, only due to their being friends of Kate and Gerry, not for any other reason.

The last time I saw Kate, Gerry, Madeleine, Sean and Amelie was in March 2007 when they came to our house for the first birthday celebration of my daughter *****. On the morning of 4th May Katherine saw the news about Madeleine on television. We were very shocked and worried given that they were close friends.


It was during the days following the news of the abduction that we discovered that Fiona and David Payne were also with them in Portugal.

It was at this moment that Katherina showed concern at the gesture made by Dave in Majorca in 2005. Katherina remembered that when Dave made the gesture he was referring to Madeleine.

I only remember that Katherina saw the gesture at the time, I had forgotten the episode, it was never the subject of conversation.

At the time I did not feel the gesture was referring to Madeleine.”

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm

:pac:

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

It's sickening but some of the main suspects seem to be linked with peadophilia. It would be the nightmare scenario if it turned out to be true. Horrific way for it to end for poor Madeleine. We know the German peados history.

I'm not sure if the McCann links have been investigated fully. It took a long time for the Epstein thing to come out. The meeting with Freud, the solicitors firm they used, the sick conversations Gerry was having with his pal. That they all liked to take turns bathing each others kids. It all most likely is a coincidence but when the number of coincidences keep adding up.......

Banana Republic.

dark crystal wrote: »

Aah ok, so this podcast featured notorious McCann critic Pat Brown. The same Pat Brown who said they may have taken Madeleine's mummified body back home to the UK in a suitcase? Ok, I think I can understand the kind of podcast this may have been now.

As you may or may not be aware, there was no CCTV in the Ocean Club in 2007. Had there been CCTV, we may well not have a 13 year old mystery on our hands.

No, as I mentioned, there are numerous witnesses, staff, guests etc. Who place Gerry at the Ocean club at 10 pm when the alarm was raised. It's all in the witness statements. If he wasn't there at that time, it would be pretty significant don't you think?

You can only understand if you listen to the actual podcast. Yea I knew nothing previously of this Pat Brown. Mummified Jesus I suppose King Tut was in on the job too eh, that’s wild as heck. Yea if he wasn’t there it would be hugely significant so that meeting says the abduction was planned to a tee and “they” got very lucky. No trace of the child in 13 years, where the hell was she put, possibly moved a few times over the proceeding weeks?