So will the truth ever come out?

[Kitty B]

I sit and wonder if the truth will ever come out about Madeleine.

Now, seems a bit odd that her parents would cause all this ruckus if they indeed had something to do with her disappearance. Again, if they did, it is a surefire way to divert attention from themselves.....

I still can´t get over the sedation issue. That just blows me away, and on the news here in Norway they have said that that is quite normal for parents to do if they want to have some "alone time"....hm......

I also know that if my husband or myself (GOD FORBID) was ever involved in any type of accident involving our children, neither of us would lie for the other. The truth will always set you free.......

I think the mother seems cold and unemotional. It could be that she is in shock and can´t cope, but I don´t know. What about the diary? What mother keeps a diary and whines about how hyper their kids are? I don´t get it.......

[bullmoose]

I sit and wonder if the truth will ever come out about Madeleine.

Now, seems a bit odd that her parents would cause all this ruckus if they indeed had something to do with her disappearance. Again, if they did, it is a surefire way to divert attention from themselves.....

I still can´t get over the sedation issue. That just blows me away, and on the news here in Norway they have said that that is quite normal for parents to do if they want to have some "alone time"....hm......

I also know that if my husband or myself (GOD FORBID) was ever involved in any type of accident involving our children, neither of us would lie for the other. The truth will always set you free.......

I think the mother seems cold and unemotional. It could be that she is in shock and can´t cope, but I don´t know. What about the diary? What mother keeps a diary and whines about how hyper their kids are? I don´t get it.......

All the crap about the diary and the mother--whatever is part of a deliberate disinformation campaign by the portugese cops to smear the parents and sway public opinion against them; all these endless supposed leaks, I thought it was all secret? I don't believe a single reported thing until I hear the McCanns say it, to me its just a PR campaign by the inept cops. JMHO

[Jo_Momma_82]

I will publicly say that my 2 and 4 yr. olds are hyperactive and can grate on my nerves every once in awhile. I don't know a single mother who doesn't get even a little overwhelmed. I KNOW that this will never lead to anything more than a little "solitary" in the corner or me eventually developing a nervous tick (LOL). As far as sedating the kids and leaving them, WOW ! I don't understand what would ever make either of those 'ok' to the parents. I actually had my daughters pediatrician tell me that it was ok to give my, now 8 yr. old daughter, benadryl to sleep (for colic from birth-3 months old) but, I couldn't do it. I think the only reason why she suggested it though was b/c she saw that my daughter was getting no sleep and crying constantly and couldn't find any other way to help her.

[JBRnotforgotten]

I don't understand why they are being treated like bad criminals and yet others are having sightings of Madeleine. I can not imagine how Kate and Gerry feel... I pray for them and of course Madeleine too

[Pelicanette]

None of us knows how we would feel or what we would do in such a situation. Many people like to post exactly what they would say and do, but in such an emotional shock, nobody knows. We may do something totally bizarre. I think Kate is in shock most of the time. But there are times she weeps. That is what any parent would do. She is caught up in a nightmare. I think the Portuguese police are inept fools at best and corrupt torturers at worst. They have not managed to leak one legitimate, provable fact thus far. I do not trust them at all. How dare them say the McCanns can no longer talk about their own daughter. It is the JOB of the police to find a missing child, and the Portuguese police have not done it.

[Eagle1]

I believe you're the first member we've had from Norway.

Maybe they didn't actually sedate Maddie, which if I remember correctly has been eliminated, but I may not remember correctly.

Leaving such young children alone, I agree, is absolutely inexcusable.

Naturally we can imagine how they would finally feel about getting caught doing this. We're not dunces. We also know a lot more, for instance that if we did such a thing we'd probably be in prison or something.

If the perp turns out to be someone else, fine, as long as Maddie is found alive and well, and surely they will have finally learned their common sense lesson. Nobody, including police who risk their lives for us every day, is being too rough on the McCanns.

Internet posters' loyalty should be with all of us colleagues, and our right to post our points of view equally, without attacks from those who claim to absolutely know the McC's are innocent and we're not, according to the rules all forums have. Hope you enjoy being with us. Don't take it seriously if anyone starts in about your sources being misleading or tabloids, just fillibustering. The Updates Only sticky always has the facts.

[Jayelles]

I believe you're the first member we've had from Norway.

Maybe they didn't actually sedate Maddie, which if I remember correctly has been eliminated, but I may not remember correctly.

Leaving such young children alone, I agree, is absolutely inexcusable.

Naturally we can imagine how they would finally feel about getting caught doing this. We're not dunces. We also know a lot more, for instance that if we did such a thing we'd probably be in prison or something.

If the perp turns out to be someone else, fine, as long as Maddie is found alive and well, and surely they will have finally learned their common sense lesson. Nobody, including police who risk their lives for us every day, is being too rough on the McCanns.

Internet posters' loyalty should be with all of us colleagues, and our right to post our points of view equally, without attacks from those who claim to absolutely know the McC's are innocent and we're not, according to the rules all forums have. Hope you enjoy being with us. Don't take it seriously if anyone starts in about your sources being misleading or tabloids, just fillibustering. The Updates Only sticky always has the facts.

Who has ever posted that they "absolutely know" the McCanns are innocent? I've seen plenty post that they believe there isn't sufficient evidence to prove their guilt or even that they don't think they are guilty - but I've never seen anyone post what you claim.

Facts are important. We are talking about real people's lives here. The tabloids have created a load of fairy stories around this case and many of these hurtful lies have been perpetuated on Internet forums. That is why forums like this require sources. Posters who make factual statements backed up with credible sources have nothing to fear. I think you'll find the Mods share this opinion.

[Eagle1]

Again, I have to agree with you.

Nobody's ever posted a SOURCE, that I know of, proving as FACT that any of the people in this case are innocent, no source, tabloid or whatever.

We've said over and over we're neutral as long as Maddie is found.

I've just had to do a defrag to get into any of CL tonight, also an AOL one, and I may have to wait until some time when there's less traffic.

First, can I share a bit of good news, not sure I could get into Blowin Off Steam? Wednesday I went to my retina specialist where I'd had a series of 4 up-to-100-laser-burns to seal off rogue blood vessels, and vision had improved in the eye which has been healing longest, from 20/50 to 20/40. The procedure's not even meant to improve vision, just to stop proliferation of extra blood vessels which cause blindness. When I go back in 2 mo. hopefully I may have some improvement in my worse eye too. The goal is just to save it, no guarantees. Thanks for listening, friends.

I'll let Odette reply about her source, if she thinks it's important enough. If she doesn't, I agree.

[Jayelles]

Again, I have to agree with you.

Nobody's ever posted a SOURCE, that I know of, proving as FACT that any of the people in this case are innocent, no source, tabloid or whatever.


You cannot prove a negative - which is precisely why the law views a person as innocent until proved guilty. Thankfully, we all enjoy that right in the civilised world.

It's absolutely not wrong to be suspicious of a person -it's not even wrong to express an opinion that they might be guilty when these suspicions and opinions are based upon facts. What IS wrong IMO is spreading hurtful misinformation and lies about the McCanns which influence the opinions of other people.

[Eagle1]

We're suspicious of quite a few people, plus unknown people, for which SOURCES are demanded, so our defense is the same, you can't prove a negative; they're all innocent until proven guilty.

They're ALL innocent until proven guilty, not just the McCanns. So if people have to have sources about them, they've also got to have sources about the McCanns, fair and equal.

Everybody's also suspect, besides "innocent until proven guilty". That's simple enough.

It's very early morning here, didn't go back to bed yet after a b/r break, and computer slowness is still almost as bad as last night, when I did two disk cleanups, not defrags, so if anyone else can translate that more simple, feel free. I need some more z's, and already explained about my eye treatments stress too. TIA.

[sallynuts]

I do not think the parents are to blame here... and that is in my own opinion,, ok..

i would just like to say,, without taking anything away from Madeliene.... how many children went missing this year? and have not been found? or last year for that matter,, or the year before... why are we soooo focused on this one child?? she is precious,, yes,, but no more precious than the next child...

I do pray, and i wish and hope that she and every other child that has EVER gone missing,, is found... :shrug: i don't know what happened to them.. i wish i did,, so that all you parents out there could find peace... i am a parent.. and i can only imagine the agony that you must go through each day...

for those who know what happened... and i know you will read this ... you won't be able to help yourselves.. you will get yours... maybe not today,,, but me or my kind will be waiting for you;.... don't ever think you will get away with it... :biggrin: we'll get ya....

[Jayelles]

We're suspicious of quite a few people, plus unknown people, for which SOURCES are demanded, so our defense is the same, you can't prove a negative; they're all innocent until proven guilty.

They're ALL innocent until proven guilty, not just the McCanns. So if people have to have sources about them, they've also got to have sources about the McCanns, fair and equal.

Everybody's also suspect, besides "innocent until proven guilty". That's simple enough.

It's very early morning here, didn't go back to bed yet after a b/r break, and computer slowness is still almost as bad as last night, when I did two disk cleanups, not defrags, so if anyone else can translate that more simple, feel free. I need some more z's, and already explained about my eye treatments stress too. TIA.

I requested a source for your suggestion that Kate McCann is bipolar. That is a very specific claim. I see plenty of avoidance and excuses but no attempt to provide the source.

[Babootje]

Although I find it very upsetting to think Gerry & Kate McCann have something to do with the disappearance of Madeleine I do (except of de evidence found) because of the following (excuse me for my bad english, for Im Dutch):

This is what they did, all nine friends during their holliday. They had dinner every evening, where all children were left alone. Only David and Fiona used an intercom system to hear if their children did not cry.
The dinner almost always lasted up to midnight. They came as from 8:30 PM to table, used aperitifs. Most of them drank the beer with martini, that is popular in Portugal, but Kate drank for example a cocktail on rum basis. Normally they also drank firm spirits after eating, but the particular evening they didn't came to that.
When all nine frieds arrived the ordered wine (white and red) en usually 10-12 bottles.
That evening no one of the guests at table has been left except Gerry and Russell, as becomes clear from depositions of the staff of the Tapas bar. Just as after nine and almost simultaneous. Gerry and Russell (man of Jane Tanner) left the table. Russell stayed away for an hour, with excuus that his doughter has been sick and the bed had to be changed, of which never proof has been found; there was never asked for clean bedsheets.

Gerry came into Jeremy, a producer that he met during the holiday, who walked his child tot sleep. On the same time Jane Tanner claimes to have seen the man with the child she believes was Maddie, but according to the waiters she has not been off the table, or they must have been mistaken.
When Gerry was already half an hour back at the table, Russell just returned.

A little while later (at 10.00) Kate left en alarms the group shouting from of the veranda. (In other versions she first went back to the group.) Everyone (except Dianne) went into the apartment. Dianne went a little later on. (In one of the TV productions Jane claims she was already in her apartment when Kate set out the alarm, this while every evening before she always stayed at the table with the others until midnight)
Dianne find everyone in the apartment to where the friends literally take everything in their hands, try doors, windows everything. (The later collected evidence became this way worthless, because they were contaminated products)
Then Pamela Fenn offers to phone the GNR (local police) Kate says that it is not necessary, because she already did so. Fact is although that phone call was done at 22.40 hrs, an hour after the discovery of disappearance.
At 23.00 the GNR arrived; because they didn't speak English, a staff member was asked to translate. After middernacht the Policia Juardica (PJ) arrived and the family where transferred. The twins who were fast asleep, did not awake during the transfer.
The first thing that occurs to the PJ is that the apartment is very clean and neat (while the McCanns just put 3 children in bath and to bed, just before they went to dinner)
Futhermore it occured strange to them (the PJ) that there was no first aid medicine in the apartment, something usual to take with you on holidays especially with children.

Cuddlecat was the only toy in the room which Kate held in her hands. At first she claimes it was on the floor, later she claims it was on a shelf of which was to high for Maddie to put it her self.
Later on there was discovered a scent of a corpse on the toy, of which Kate claimes this was related to her work.

What also was striking is that Kate insisted immediately on kidnapping, whereas the child could run also outside.

The PJ press the McCanns to the heart to not give the special details concerning Maddies eyes and how she looked. They warned them this will increase the possibility that the kidnapper wil get rid of her and kill her.
In spite of that they themselves initiated tot publish the photo's of Maddie including the special mark in her eyes (and deliberately took the risk the child would be killed).

[Babootje]

24Horas came with the news that Russell O Brien and Jane Tanner and another couple that also were in the Ocean Clup at the time Maddie disappeared (James and Charlotte Gorlod) in Exeter neighbours are of Samantha the sister of Robert Murat. He stayed with his sister 10 days and returned tot Praia da Luz two days before the disappearance of Maddie.
The police wants to check if in the weeks before the disappearance there was contact between them.

Furthermore it is relatively quiet concerning information coming from the PJ.
It is possible that this is for not giving too much information to the legal team of the McCanns.
In the articles that Odette translated from the Portugese papers you could conclude that we are near a final conclusion.
Although a great deal of the evidence found is inconclusive, some of them (they do not tell us which) are supportive of the line of research...
The PJ now is in the stage of completing the puzzle...
The McCanns fled to an unknown place for privacy reasons...
The PJ is preparing new hearings...
I think this will become to an end soon.

[Jayelles]

24Horas came with the news that Russell O Brien and Jane Tanner and another couple that also were in the Ocean Clup at the time Maddie disappeared (James and Charlotte Gorlod) in Exeter neighbours are of Samantha the sister of Robert Murat. He stayed with his sister 10 days and returned tot Praia da Luz two days before the disappearance of Maddie.
The police wants to check if in the weeks before the disappearance there was contact between them.

Furthermore it is relatively quiet concerning information coming from the PJ.
It is possible that this is for not giving too much information to the legal team of the McCanns.
In the articles that Odette translated from the Portugese papers you could conclude that we are near a final conclusion.
Although a great deal of the evidence found is inconclusive, some of them (they do not tell us which) are supportive of the line of research...
The PJ now is in the stage of completing the puzzle...
The McCanns fled to an unknown place for privacy reasons...
The PJ is preparing new hearings...
I think this will become to an end soon.

This is 24 Horas you are talking about - the Portuguese tabloid which will go down in the history of the case as having the most inaccurate and far-fetched reporting about the case. The McCanns are allegedly planning to suit them.

Exeter has a population of 120,000. It's a fairly spread out part of the country and Murat's sister is reported here as living within a few miles of the O'Brien's.

It's a link worth investigating - but it's hardly a smoking gun. IMO it's just another story to keep the papers selling.

[Results]

I believe you're the first member we've had from Norway.

Maybe they didn't actually sedate Maddie, which if I remember correctly has been eliminated, but I may not remember correctly.

Leaving such young children alone, I agree, is absolutely inexcusable.

Naturally we can imagine how they would finally feel about getting caught doing this. We're not dunces. We also know a lot more, for instance that if we did such a thing we'd probably be in prison or something.

If the perp turns out to be someone else, fine, as long as Maddie is found alive and well, and surely they will have finally learned their common sense lesson. Nobody, including police who risk their lives for us every day, is being too rough on the McCanns.

Internet posters' loyalty should be with all of us colleagues, and our right to post our points of view equally, without attacks from those who claim to absolutely know the McC's are innocent and we're not, according to the rules all forums have. Hope you enjoy being with us. Don't take it seriously if anyone starts in about your sources being misleading or tabloids, just fillibustering. The Updates Only sticky always has the facts.

Hey Eagle!

I for one don't care about the personal attacks. I have the right to my opinion and my VERY HONEST OPINION IS they are guilty either way. If she was kidnapped they are responsible. When a Mother feels like her children are being watched you don't leave them alone for who ever is watching your children to have an opportunity to take them. I don't buy their story for that reason. Some one is stalking you but you just go right ahead and leave the children alone? Something not right here. JMHO

[Results]

Although I find it very upsetting to think Gerry & Kate McCann have something to do with the disappearance of Madeleine I do (except of de evidence found) because of the following (excuse me for my bad english, for Im Dutch):

This is what they did, all nine friends during their holliday. They had dinner every evening, where all children were left alone. Only David and Fiona used an intercom system to hear if their children did not cry.
The dinner almost always lasted up to midnight. They came as from 8:30 PM to table, used aperitifs. Most of them drank the beer with martini, that is popular in Portugal, but Kate drank for example a cocktail on rum basis. Normally they also drank firm spirits after eating, but the particular evening they didn't came to that.
When all nine frieds arrived the ordered wine (white and red) en usually 10-12 bottles.
That evening no one of the guests at table has been left except Gerry and Russell, as becomes clear from depositions of the staff of the Tapas bar. Just as after nine and almost simultaneous. Gerry and Russell (man of Jane Tanner) left the table. Russell stayed away for an hour, with excuus that his doughter has been sick and the bed had to be changed, of which never proof has been found; there was never asked for clean bedsheets.

Gerry came into Jeremy, a producer that he met during the holiday, who walked his child tot sleep. On the same time Jane Tanner claimes to have seen the man with the child she believes was Maddie, but according to the waiters she has not been off the table, or they must have been mistaken.
When Gerry was already half an hour back at the table, Russell just returned.

A little while later (at 10.00) Kate left en alarms the group shouting from of the veranda. (In other versions she first went back to the group.) Everyone (except Dianne) went into the apartment. Dianne went a little later on. (In one of the TV productions Jane claims she was already in her apartment when Kate set out the alarm, this while every evening before she always stayed at the table with the others until midnight)
Dianne find everyone in the apartment to where the friends literally take everything in their hands, try doors, windows everything. (The later collected evidence became this way worthless, because they were contaminated products)
Then Pamela Fenn offers to phone the GNR (local police) Kate says that it is not necessary, because she already did so. Fact is although that phone call was done at 22.40 hrs, an hour after the discovery of disappearance.
At 23.00 the GNR arrived; because they didn't speak English, a staff member was asked to translate. After middernacht the Policia Juardica (PJ) arrived and the family where transferred. The twins who were fast asleep, did not awake during the transfer.
The first thing that occurs to the PJ is that the apartment is very clean and neat (while the McCanns just put 3 children in bath and to bed, just before they went to dinner)
Futhermore it occured strange to them (the PJ) that there was no first aid medicine in the apartment, something usual to take with you on holidays especially with children.

Cuddlecat was the only toy in the room which Kate held in her hands. At first she claimes it was on the floor, later she claims it was on a shelf of which was to high for Maddie to put it her self.
Later on there was discovered a scent of a corpse on the toy, of which Kate claimes this was related to her work.

What also was striking is that Kate insisted immediately on kidnapping, whereas the child could run also outside.

The PJ press the McCanns to the heart to not give the special details concerning Maddies eyes and how she looked. They warned them this will increase the possibility that the kidnapper wil get rid of her and kill her.
In spite of that they themselves initiated tot publish the photo's of Maddie including the special mark in her eyes (and deliberately took the risk the child would be killed).

Excellent post!

[Jayelles]

Hey Eagle!

I for one don't care about the personal attacks. I have the right to my opinion and my VERY HONEST OPINION IS they are guilty either way. If she was kidnapped they are responsible. When a Mother feels like her children are being watched you don't leave them alone for who ever is watching your children to have an opportunity to take them. I don't buy their story for that reason. Some one is stalking you but you just go right ahead and leave the children alone? Something not right here. JMHO

I'd be interested in your source for Kate feeling that someone was watching/stalking her before Madeleine went missing (as opposed to thinking this with hindsight)?

I know that Gerry has said that "in retrospect" they feel that someone might have been watching them, but I've never seen any credible source which stated that prior to Madeleine's disappearance either McCann felt they were being watched/stalked.

When Gerry McCann stated in an interview that he thought the abductor might have actually hiding been in the apartment when he checked on the children one of the tabloid forums whipped itself into a frenzy over Gerry "thinking there was an abductor in the apartment and choosing to return to his meal regardless" - which of course was not at all what was said. Gerry McCann had been speaking "with hindsight".

[Jayelles]

Contrary to Result's claim that the McCanns had felt that prior to Madeleine being taken, that they were being watched/stalked, I have noted several occasions where they said they felt safe. Here is one interview:-

Mrs McCann said: "I ask myself, 'Why did I think it was safe?' But it felt safe. You don't expect a predator to break in and take your daughter."


http://internationalrewardscentre.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=824&Itemid=2

Here is another:-

"If I had thought for a second that they were in any danger or in any risk I would have never done it. This place is so small and so quiet – we all just felt safe.

"We were still within the complex grounds and were checking on them regularly.

"We never thought that anything like this could ever happen – not in such a peaceful and quiet resort like Praia da Luz."



http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccann/2007/08/20/we-won-t-be-bullied-out-of-praia-da-luz-64375-19660629/

I don't think that they would have "felt safe" if they were feeling that they were being watched or stalked.

[andU]

Contrary to Result's claim that the McCanns had felt that prior to Madeleine being taken, that they were being watched/stalked, I have noted several occasions where they said they felt safe. Here is one interview:-



http://internationalrewardscentre.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=824&Itemid=2

Here is another:-



http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccann/2007/08/20/we-won-t-be-bullied-out-of-praia-da-luz-64375-19660629/

I don't think that they would have "felt safe" if they were feeling that they were being watched or stalked.

I agree with you, Jayelles. Some people read the tabloids and think they are reading truth in print when in fact, it is nothing but sensationalism - written to sell the garbage. I give them not one minute of my time; they don't know fact from fiction.

[Babootje]

The possibillity of sedation of Maddie is not ruled out. The McCanns' did som testing on the hairs of the twinns to prove that they were not sedated. But... there were traces found in DNA samples with a sedation.
With the testing they thus prooved (in my opinion) that the DNA traces in which the sedation is found must belong to Maddie. (For the DNA of the twinns is very similar whith Maddies).

The whole case of the disappearance of Maddie rests on DNA evidence and some circumstantial evidence such as telephone records, the testimonies of the friends and staff of the Ocean Club . The PJ is preparing a re interview but all friends now have had enough time to coordinate their testimonies.

I hope the PJ has more evidence in reserve, otherwise I fear we will never know what happened.

In my opinion the truth mostly lies nearby the most logical explanation.
That is why I cannot believe the kidnapping story, because pedophile kidnappers mostly are opportunists that will not take such a risk to take a sleeping child out of an appartment with other children sleeping.
The are many more childeren easier to take, sadly because nobody gives a ****. Why take Madeleine? Thats something I can not believe.

[Jayelles]

The possibillity of sedation of Maddie is not ruled out. The McCanns' did som testing on the hairs of the twinns to prove that they were not sedated. But... there were traces found in DNA samples with a sedation.
With the testing they thus prooved (in my opinion) that the DNA traces in which the sedation is found must belong to Maddie. (For the DNA of the twinns is very similar whith Maddies).

The whole case of the disappearance of Maddie rests on DNA evidence and some circumstantial evidence such as telephone records, the testimonies of the friends and staff of the Ocean Club . The PJ is preparing a re interview but all friends now have had enough time to coordinate their testimonies.

I hope the PJ has more evidence in reserve, otherwise I fear we will never know what happened.

In my opinion the truth mostly lies nearby the most logical explanation.
That is why I cannot believe the kidnapping story, because pedophile kidnappers mostly are opportunists that will not take such a risk to take a sleeping child out of an appartment with other children sleeping.
The are many more childeren easier to take, sadly because nobody gives a ****. Why take Madeleine? Thats something I can not believe.

Do you have a source for traces of sedation being found in the DNA?

Don't you think if the PJ had evidence they would have arrested someone?

[Jayelles]

I agree with you, Jayelles. Some people read the tabloids and think they are reading truth in print when in fact, it is nothing but sensationalism - written to sell the garbage. I give them not one minute of my time; they don't know fact from fiction.

If this case has taught me anything, it's that some tabloids will print anything to sell their newspapers.

:seeya:

[andU]

If this case has taught me anything, it's that some tabloids will print anything to sell their newspapers.

:seeya:


Yeah, this case, Elvis' death and the Ramsey case - they have made a haul! ..and foolish people still buy the trash and take every word as truth.

[Jayelles]

Yeah, this case, Elvis' death and the Ramsey case - they have made a haul! ..and foolish people still buy the trash and take every word as truth.

Well... I think it speaks volumes that the BBC and the broadsheet newspapers have hardly covered the case at all. Several months ago they condemned the tabloids for manufacturing stories in order to keep up sales and said they would only report facts when there were facts to report. And they've been largely silent!

Today there is a report which says that contrary to the tabloids saying that Maddie's blood was found in the apartment - that the lab which did the testing said that they couldn't even tell whether it was blood let alone whether it was Maddie's!

[andU]

Well... I think it speaks volumes that the BBC and the broadsheet newspapers have hardly covered the case at all. Several months ago they condemned the tabloids for manufacturing stories in order to keep up sales and said they would only report facts when there were facts to report. And they've been largely silent!

Today there is a report which says that contrary to the tabloids saying that Maddie's blood was found in the apartment - that the lab which did the testing said that they couldn't even tell whether it was blood let alone whether it was Maddie's!

I can believe that. They blow everything out of proportion and/or invent something.

[Babootje]

Do you have a source for traces of sedation being found in the DNA?

Don't you think if the PJ had evidence they would have arrested someone?

It has been a while, when I read that. It was in one of the newspapers. I try to look it up for you.

The thing is, why the police did not arrest them, is that the traces they found in the appartment en the rented car are so poor that they are not conclusive.
For instance, there the DNA that was found could belong to Maddie and the twins ass well, because it was not possible to get a full DNA profile from the poor material.
Furthermore the material found in the appartment was contaminated,
because the McCanns took care of that "the whole world and its dog" (as the PJ statet) had been in there before the police came. They litteraly took everything in their hands, opened doors and windows etc.

Although there are very strong leads, they are all circumstantial.
Furthermore, there is an enormous political pressure on this case.
Gerry McCann is a very high in rank member of the masonry; they have a lot of very influencial friends. So in fact the PJ has to proove guilt (beyond doubt) before they can be arrested.

[Jayelles]

It has been a while, when I read that. It was in one of the newspapers. I try to look it up for you.

Thank you.

The thing is, why the police did not arrest them, is that the traces they found in the appartment en the rented car are so poor that they are not conclusive.

The reason the police haven't areested them is because there is no proof that they harmed their daughter! In yesterday's papers, it was reported that the Portuguese police are admitting that there is no proof Madeleine is dead. For the past few months, they have been saying that they believe that she IS dead. It's just all a mess.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/maddie/article559642.ece

For instance, there the DNA that was found could belong to Maddie and the twins ass well, because it was not possible to get a full DNA profile from the poor material.

Actually, we don't know anything about the DNA evidence because all that has been printed about it is tabloid speculation. There has been NO official statement about it. The newspapers this week said that they only found 17 cells in the car - which is really microscopic.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/maddie/article541098.ece


Furthermore the material found in the appartment was contaminated,
because the McCanns took care of that "the whole world and its dog" (as the PJ statet) had been in there before the police came. They litteraly took everything in their hands, opened doors and windows etc.

You are blaming the McCanns for this? Are they also to blame for the cops and SOCO allegedly dropping their cigarette ash?


Although there are very strong leads, they are all circumstantial.
Furthermore, there is an enormous political pressure on this case.
Gerry McCann is a very high in rank member of the masonry; they have a lot of very influencial friends. So in fact the PJ has to proove guilt (beyond doubt) before they can be arrested.

There was certainly speculation on the Mirror gossip tabloid forum that Gerry McCann is a Mason, but do you have proof of this? I haven't seen it from any credible source and there is also the FACT that he is a Catholic - and a Glasgwegian Catholic at that. Catholics are not usually Freemasons (in fact Freemasonry goes against the Catholic faith).

If you are going to make statements "as fact" like this, please provide a source.

[Babootje]

Jayelles:
Herewith my first reaction:
The information that traces of drugs were found in DNA similar toe Maddies was in serveral papers ca. half september; o.a. Correio da Manha
It is difficult to recollect the older news but after searching I found the news on a Duch site: http://www.nu.nl/news/1235839/21/'Madeleine_gedood_door_drugs'.html
It states that the source of the information is the French paper Soir, and their source is the Portugese Police.
It states that traces of drugs were found in the bodily fluids found in the car the McCanns hired 25 days after the disappearance of Maddie.

Because the McCanns stated themselves that the DNA found in the hire car could be from the twinss (because the have DNA similar to Maddies) and the test the did on the twins and Kate, I assume the DNA must be Maddies.

Your statement that the PJ did not arrest the McCanns because there is no proof they harmed their daughter is the exact truth.
All the found evidence on itself can't point even out that Maddie is dead.

The scent of corpse and blood found by specially trained sniffer dogs was the reason of the turn in the investigation. That special scent only comes ca. 2 hours after death; with a child it could be earlier.
Before that, the parents were no suspects.
Snifferdogs found a few different traces of blood, one was not Maddies, one was Maddies. The named traces was found under a tile in the appartment and was not visible for the eye because of cleaning up. (Source is Correio da Manha, must look it up),
Furthermore the snifferdogs picked op a scent of corpse in the hire care en the same scent leading to the coast, where a big search was submitted. They also picked up the scent on cuddle cat and clothes of Kate.
Off course the PJ investigate there was no earlier or later death in the appartment in the weeks before and after the disappearance.
The scent on itself is not enough evidence, because it could not direct be linked to Maddie.
Correio da Manha reported also a found seringe with a tranquillizer on a commode in the bedroom of the children.

About the cuddle cat there were also strange statements made by Kate; at first she stated she found it on the floor and that was why she was alarmed, because Maddie always held it. In another statement cuddle cat was on a shelf out of reach of Maddie so that the kidnapper would have placed it there.

Furthermore there are the contradictions in statement of the McCann friends.
They stated regulary checks on the children. A computer reconstruction based on this statement pointed out that a kidnapper would have a few minutes to go in and out the appartment and take Maddie.
However, the waiters of the tapas restaurant did not see any of them leave the table, except Gerry and Russel O Brien, who stayed away for an hour, with the excuse that is daughter was ill and threw up (and he had to clean the bed) of which never found any proove like filthy bedsheets or a request of clean sheets.

You are right by stating that the PJ made mistakes at the beginning but they seriously did not think the worst at that time. Maddie could simply had been wandering off.
It was the McCanns that directly stated there was a kidnapping without ransom. But they themselves intelligent people (maybe watched CSI sometimes) let all their friends wandering in and out of the appartment.

For what I know about the free masonry and catolisism is that today both wont "bite" eachother. I try to find the article.
In the free masonry it is usage to cremate the death. That is perhaps why the interest of the PJ went out to a nearby crematorium, but a search there led to nothing.

[Jayelles]

Jayelles:
Herewith my first reaction:
The information that traces of drugs were found in DNA similar toe Maddies was in serveral papers ca. half september; o.a. Correio da Manha
It is difficult to recollect the older news but after searching I found the news on a Duch site: http://www.nu.nl/news/1235839/21/'Madeleine_gedood_door_drugs'.html
It states that the source of the information is the French paper Soir, and their source is the Portugese Police.
It states that traces of drugs were found in the bodily fluids found in the car the McCanns hired 25 days after the disappearance of Maddie.

Because the McCanns stated themselves that the DNA found in the hire car could be from the twinss (because the have DNA similar to Maddies) and the test the did on the twins and Kate, I assume the DNA must be Maddies.

Your statement that the PJ did not arrest the McCanns because there is no proof they harmed their daughter is the exact truth.
All the found evidence on itself can't point even out that Maddie is dead.

The scent of corpse and blood found by specially trained sniffer dogs was the reason of the turn in the investigation. That special scent only comes ca. 2 hours after death; with a child it could be earlier.
Before that, the parents were no suspects.
Snifferdogs found a few different traces of blood, one was not Maddies, one was Maddies. The named traces was found under a tile in the appartment and was not visible for the eye because of cleaning up. (Source is Correio da Manha, must look it up),
Furthermore the snifferdogs picked op a scent of corpse in the hire care en the same scent leading to the coast, where a big search was submitted. They also picked up the scent on cuddle cat and clothes of Kate.
Off course the PJ investigate there was no earlier or later death in the appartment in the weeks before and after the disappearance.
The scent on itself is not enough evidence, because it could not direct be linked to Maddie.
Correio da Manha reported also a found seringe with a tranquillizer on a commode in the bedroom of the children.

About the cuddle cat there were also strange statements made by Kate; at first she stated she found it on the floor and that was why she was alarmed, because Maddie always held it. In another statement cuddle cat was on a shelf out of reach of Maddie so that the kidnapper would have placed it there.

Furthermore there are the contradictions in statement of the McCann friends.
They stated regulary checks on the children. A computer reconstruction based on this statement pointed out that a kidnapper would have a few minutes to go in and out the appartment and take Maddie.
However, the waiters of the tapas restaurant did not see any of them leave the table, except Gerry and Russel O Brien, who stayed away for an hour, with the excuse that is daughter was ill and threw up (and he had to clean the bed) of which never found any proove like filthy bedsheets or a request of clean sheets.

You are right by stating that the PJ made mistakes at the beginning but they seriously did not think the worst at that time. Maddie could simply had been wandering off.
It was the McCanns that directly stated there was a kidnapping without ransom. But they themselves intelligent people (maybe watched CSI sometimes) let all their friends wandering in and out of the appartment.

For what I know about the free masonry and catolisism is that today both wont "bite" eachother. I try to find the article.
In the free masonry it is usage to cremate the death. That is perhaps why the interest of the PJ went out to a nearby crematorium, but a search there led to nothing.


There are so many points in your post that I want to address, but I have a heavy cold and I just want to have an early night.

Regarding the Crime Scene being trashed
There are numerous witnesses who have stated that the McCanns were beside themselves with anguish when they discovered Madeleine was missing - I really don't think they were in any state of mind to be concerned with preserving evidence - even if they did watch CSI (and we don't know that they did/do - I post on these forums and I have never seen a single episode of CSI - ever!). That is pure speculation.

Regarding the Waiters
The waiters in the bar were working - not standing watch over the McCanns. Just because the waiters didn't see them leave doesn't mean they didn't. Remember - prior to the 3rd May, they were just another family on holiday to these waiters. Some of the waiters sold stories to the tabloids at the end of the season - what kind of stories do you suppose would sell? The tabloids also twist things to suit their own purpose. An interview could have gone something like this:-

Journalist: Did you see the McCanns leave the table?
Waiter: No
Journlaist: Not even once?
Waiter: No
Journalist: Were you there all night?
Waiter: Yes

Headline - "Waiter says 'I was there all night and never saw the McCanns leave the table once"

Regarding the Sniffer Dogs
The sniffer dogs make false alerts all the time. That is not evidence. It's like geophys. You get a signal and you start digging. Sometimes you find nothing and sometimes you find treasure, but just because you get a signal, doesn't always mean there's treasure there.

Regarding the Blood
This week the newspapers said that the British labs said that they couldn't even tell whether the sample was blood - let alone whether it was Madeleine's blood. These apartments are let out for 20+ weeks of the year to families of 4-6 people on a weekly basis. People cut their feet on holidays because they walk around barefoot on beach holidays. There is a high possibility that a degraded blood sample on the floor of the apartment could belong to any one of several dozen people who'd stayed there over the previous months.

Regarding the Scent of Death
Apparently, the "scent of death" is a chemical substance (whose name I forget but it's like cadaver....") and it is also present in urine and semen amongst other things! Therefore, cadaver dogs can false alert on urine and semen.

Regarding the Portugues Police as a Source
I'm sorry, but the Portuguese police have proved to be a highly unreliable source of information. Just think of all the inaccurate and contradictory stories which have appeared over the months whose source was the Portuguese police.

[Babootje]

We will see. Never said it wasn't difficult

[Seashell]

We will see. Never said it wasn't difficult
I also had my doubts about the parents, they are negligent in my eyes for leaving those babies alone to go out wine and dine with the tapas 9.
I am also sitting tight and waiting to see what will come out sooner or later.
Time alone will tell.


Maddie you are not forgotten...:rose:

[Results]

I'd be interested in your source for Kate feeling that someone was watching/stalking her before Madeleine went missing (as opposed to thinking this with hindsight)?

I know that Gerry has said that "in retrospect" they feel that someone might have been watching them, but I've never seen any credible source which stated that prior to Madeleine's disappearance either McCann felt they were being watched/stalked.

When Gerry McCann stated in an interview that he thought the abductor might have actually hiding been in the apartment when he checked on the children one of the tabloid forums whipped itself into a frenzy over Gerry "thinking there was an abductor in the apartment and choosing to return to his meal regardless" - which of course was not at all what was said. Gerry McCann had been speaking "with hindsight".

I will have to look it up and I don't know if I will find it in time before the closing of CL. However, I expect to see you at our new community and I will let you know where I read that. I also want to let you know that I registered on the Mirror Forum as Results (any website I join I use the same name Results) and I made one post. This post was to ask did Gerry McCann really write that in his blog and was told I was so niave. The reason that I don't post there are read there since then is because if you are making things up about Gerry's blog as a joke that is pretty sick IMO. I don't know what happened to Maddy and I don't know who done what and for someone to print false accusations of Gerry writing in his blogs as a sense of humor that person needs help. IF I did get this from a tabloid as you say I will be the first one to stand corrected and apologize for posting tabloid BS. Since I don't read at the mirror I'm sure I read it here on CL but I will try to find it for you. I know on this case you have a strong opinion that the McCann's are innocent and I don't really know. Always know Jay that when I debate a case I don't take things personally and if I disagree with you on something that just means I don't have the same opinion as you do nor do you have the same opinion of mine. JMHO

To Eagle you posted lies on another forum about me and I do not appreciate it. I saw a post in which I felt you were down and I told you on the board that to don't worry about what others think and post away in what you believe. I thought I was encouraging you to not take things so personal and then you have the gall to try to start trouble with me and Jay. That is not right at all. I don't know Jay and I don't know you. I thought that I showed respect to everyone on this forum no matter what their opinions were and when someone doesn't have the same opinion as me I try to listen to their side to see if it fits better into the case of the most probable answer of what happened to Maddy.

One more thing I did think at some point that Jay was being disrespectful and I told her that she didn't want me to get disrespectful with her. After this encounter I saw that Jay wasn't posting much and I thought it was because of me. Since I really didn't have such a strong opinion and Jay did I backed away from the case hoping she would come back if it was me keeping her from this forum. Jay cared alot about this case and I was asked to come read about it and check it out so I felt that Jay should be here and I certainly never meant for her to leave. Eagle evidently because I left you said I was banned for having it out with Jay which was a lie. I have never been banned from CL nor CTV. I also want you to know Eagle that because of the incident with the updates from Odette she stopped updating because you drug her name into something that was not true. I am furious about that because Odette is my best friend. Can you acknowledge a pattern that you are doing Eagle? If this is the way that you are going to act to cause trouble between posters that you don't even know then I hope that you stand down and don't move with us to the new community because from what I have seen that you have done is create trouble between posters and this is unacceptable in my book. You should be ashamed of yourself and if you aren't ashamed please know that I am ashamed for you.

This is all I have to say on the matter!

Forgot to add I did exchange PM's with Jay and asked her to post a response from me to you on that forum and I hope you read it there as well as here. Jay I do appreciate you telling me what was going on and posting my response since I could not. I think you showed your true character to PM me and ask me if I was saying things about you and what was being said about me. I have great respect for you for letting me know this was going on and I hope you do realize how much I appreciate the heads up especially since you thought I was talking bad about you. If I ever have anything bad to say to anyone they are the first to know. So, don't believe lies when it is said Results is talking about you because I promise you you will be the first one to know. Again thank you for the heads up and see ya at the new community....I'm so excited!

Everyone please have a wonderful and safe Holiday because I want to see my neighbors at our new neighborhood in 2008! God bless you all! Merry Christmas!

[Babootje]

Yesterday in an article in This is London (Evening Standard) in an interview the mayor of Praia da Luz stated that Kate and Gerry McCann in his opinion were guilty of abandoning their children the evening of May 3. And that the PJ was wrong to let them leave Portugal, because the crime happened in Portugal and they are arguido's at least of abandoning Madeleine and the twins.

In an article today in Daily Express, the mother of Robert Murat accuses Methodo 3, the private detectives of the McCanns of bribing witnesses to change their stories. Furthermore she states that the friends of the McCanns that saw Robert Murat around the appartment that night are "extremely mistaken" for she knows he was with her all evening.
She furthermore states that the lifes of her and her son are devastated although they are completely innocent. The McCanns in fact are at least guilty for abandoning their children.

In a reaction the spokesman of the McCanns states:
“We are not going to get into a row and she is entitled to her own opinion, but Kate and Gerry felt they had done everything possible for their children on May 3 and that they were perfectly safe.
“They feel they did not do anything wrong and had been caring for their children in the best way possible.
“Nobody regrets more than them what actually happened.”
------------------

I still find it shocking that the McCanns repeatedly say that they have done everything possible for their children to be perfectly safe while they didn't even bothered to hire the babysit service the Ocean Club provides in.
I can imagine that you do not think of this to happen, but it happened and as a mother I would - at least now - FEEL guilty I left them alone.

But were they affraid that they would be charged of neglicence? Is that why the tapas 9. tuned up their stories in a way that rised the suspicion of the PJ, Their statements (regular checks on the children) is contradicted by the waiters at the tapas bar who waited their table.
Is that the reason why they, in fact, the McCanns refused to cooporate with the PJ? That they were affraid to be charged wit neglect and tried to cover up?
If that is the case, I can't understand, such egoism. The main thing has to be, to find your child a.s.a.p.
If the McCanns are innocent, I cannot understand their manners after the dissapearance. In short:
Not cooperating with the PJ.
Neglecting the advise of the PJ not to spread any pictures or marks to prevent an abductor to harm Madeleine.

-----------------
Furthermore a special fund set up in a bid to find Madeleine has been used to pay for the services of Barcelona-based Metodo 3.
The firm is being paid £50,000 a month in a six-month contract.

--------
For ca. one mond the agency stated dat they were at the tail of the abductor. Now it is very quit from that direction. Maybe 50.000 pounds a month will not speed up the case.
There is a lot of critism about the way they question witnesses, by showing them one photograph (of Murat) by asking if they have seen this man.

[Babootje]

I will have to look it up and I don't know if I will find it in time before the closing of CL. .... I also want you to know Eagle that because of the incident with the updates from Odette she stopped updating .....the new community ......... Again thank you for the heads up and see ya at the new community....I'm so excited!


What a shame CL stops,:shrug: I did not know.
I did ask myself why Odette stopped updating/translating. I regret that because I highly appreciated the service.
Please let me know the url of the new community.
Kind regards

[Seashell]

What a shame CL stops,:shrug: I did not know.
I did ask myself why Odette stopped updating/translating. I regret that because I highly appreciated the service.
Please let me know the url of the new community.
Kind regards

www.320sycamore.com its opening on the 1st jan. 2008 see you there! :rose:

[Eagle1]

Hey Eagle!

I for one don't care about the personal attacks. I have the right to my opinion and my VERY HONEST OPINION IS they are guilty either way. If she was kidnapped they are responsible. When a Mother feels like her children are being watched you don't leave them alone for who ever is watching your children to have an opportunity to take them. I don't buy their story for that reason. Some one is stalking you but you just go right ahead and leave the children alone? Something not right here. JMHO


I agree with you about this, and can't yet find a post by you that I just received an email notification for. Because of the Christmas rush I'm not posting much, only read one notification, finally, this morning. I may have to print it out and later, much later after Christmas rush, pm it to you along with brief explanation of truth, what was really going on.

We've very soundly defeated nations who "mess with" Americans, and yet, doesn't anyone notice, we tolerate being called stupid, enough to read tabloids, by a rep from one evidently, judging by what all you said, playing us against each other by pm's?


There's actually a TOS that NOBODY can bring anything here from another forum! Does anyone remember?

You're all my witnesses that I've been consistently admiring of both Results and Odette, would not have caused her any discouragement in any way.

Ask yourself, could someone else have been flat out jealous of her and making trouble behind the scenes? I especially was being accused constantly of posting tabloid stuff, and part of my defense was that nobody's doing that, and we've even gotten lazy and been letting Odette do all the work. Whatever you fell for, maybe Riviera did too? Shall we have a New Years Resolution not to believe everything we hear? Meanwhile, a very Merry Christmas and New Year to all.

[Eagle1]

I would have worded this a little better but time had expired so maybe it's okay as is.

Merry Christmas.

[andU]

I agree with you about this, and can't yet find a post by you that I just received an email notification for. Because of the Christmas rush I'm not posting much, only read one notification, finally, this morning. I may have to print it out and later, much later after Christmas rush, pm it to you along with brief explanation of truth, what was really going on.

We've very soundly defeated nations who "mess with" Americans, and yet, doesn't anyone notice, we tolerate being called stupid, enough to read tabloids, by a rep from one evidently, judging by what all you said, playing us against each other by pm's?


There's actually a TOS that NOBODY can bring anything here from another forum! Does anyone remember?
You're all my witnesses that I've been consistently admiring of both Results and Odette, would not have caused her any discouragement in any way.

Ask yourself, could someone else have been flat out jealous of her and making trouble behind the scenes? I especially was being accused constantly of posting tabloid stuff, and part of my defense was that nobody's doing that, and we've even gotten lazy and been letting Odette do all the work. Whatever you fell for, maybe Riviera did too? Shall we have a New Years Resolution not to believe everything we hear? Meanwhile, a very Merry Christmas and New Year to all.

The part of this that I am addressing is in red (I hope). You are the one who cross posts and carrys grudges from one board to another. Eagle, we are all co-posters; it doesn't matter what country a poster lives in nor what color their skin/hair color/eyes are. I think you have a problem, Eagle.

[Results]

I agree with you about this, and can't yet find a post by you that I just received an email notification for. Because of the Christmas rush I'm not posting much, only read one notification, finally, this morning. I may have to print it out and later, much later after Christmas rush, pm it to you along with brief explanation of truth, what was really going on.

Results says I seen your post no need to PM with any truth. The truth is in black and white I never wrote a cryptic post in my life.

We've very soundly defeated nations who "mess with" Americans, and yet, doesn't anyone notice, we tolerate being called stupid, enough to read tabloids, by a rep from one evidently, judging by what all you said, playing us against each other by pm's?

Results says you need to reread this sentence. You should be ashamed of this one out of all of them. The US fights racism everyday and our nation is built on the foundation of "IN GOD WE TRUST". So, now Americans should hate anyone that is not American?

There's actually a TOS that NOBODY can bring anything here from another forum! Does anyone remember?

Results says child molestors have to register to the sheriff dept to let the neighborhood know they have a predator in their neighborhood and I say the same things goes for this community. I want to know my neighbor and if you take my name and use it on another forum that I'm not a member of I have the right to defend myself when you accuse me of doing something on CL. Should have posted that post on CL but no you took it to another board therefore it SHOULD NOT BE AGAINST TOS RULES SINCE YOU SAID I WAS BANNED FROM CL FOR 5 DAYS! I should have the right to defend myself of allegations against me on another board if it affects this message board, CL, which it does.


My responses are in bold!

[andU]

Results, I totally agree with your post! Please know that Eagle does not speak for every American citizen.

[Scarrlett]

I will have to look it up and I don't know if I will find it in time before the closing of CL. However, I expect to see you at our new community and I will let you know where I read that. I also want to let you know that I registered on the Mirror Forum as Results (any website I join I use the same name Results) and I made one post. This post was to ask did Gerry McCann really write that in his blog and was told I was so niave. The reason that I don't post there are read there since then is because if you are making things up about Gerry's blog as a joke that is pretty sick IMO. I don't know what happened to Maddy and I don't know who done what and for someone to print false accusations of Gerry writing in his blogs as a sense of humor that person needs help. IF I did get this from a tabloid as you say I will be the first one to stand corrected and apologize for posting tabloid BS. Since I don't read at the mirror I'm sure I read it here on CL but I will try to find it for you. I know on this case you have a strong opinion that the McCann's are innocent and I don't really know. Always know Jay that when I debate a case I don't take things personally and if I disagree with you on something that just means I don't have the same opinion as you do nor do you have the same opinion of mine. JMHO

To Eagle you posted lies on another forum about me and I do not appreciate it. I saw a post in which I felt you were down and I told you on the board that to don't worry about what others think and post away in what you believe. I thought I was encouraging you to not take things so personal and then you have the gall to try to start trouble with me and Jay. That is not right at all. I don't know Jay and I don't know you. I thought that I showed respect to everyone on this forum no matter what their opinions were and when someone doesn't have the same opinion as me I try to listen to their side to see if it fits better into the case of the most probable answer of what happened to Maddy.

One more thing I did think at some point that Jay was being disrespectful and I told her that she didn't want me to get disrespectful with her. After this encounter I saw that Jay wasn't posting much and I thought it was because of me. Since I really didn't have such a strong opinion and Jay did I backed away from the case hoping she would come back if it was me keeping her from this forum. Jay cared alot about this case and I was asked to come read about it and check it out so I felt that Jay should be here and I certainly never meant for her to leave. Eagle evidently because I left you said I was banned for having it out with Jay which was a lie. I have never been banned from CL nor CTV. I also want you to know Eagle that because of the incident with the updates from Odette she stopped updating because you drug her name into something that was not true. I am furious about that because Odette is my best friend. Can you acknowledge a pattern that you are doing Eagle? If this is the way that you are going to act to cause trouble between posters that you don't even know then I hope that you stand down and don't move with us to the new community because from what I have seen that you have done is create trouble between posters and this is unacceptable in my book. You should be ashamed of yourself and if you aren't ashamed please know that I am ashamed for you.

This is all I have to say on the matter!

Forgot to add I did exchange PM's with Jay and asked her to post a response from me to you on that forum and I hope you read it there as well as here. Jay I do appreciate you telling me what was going on and posting my response since I could not. I think you showed your true character to PM me and ask me if I was saying things about you and what was being said about me. I have great respect for you for letting me know this was going on and I hope you do realize how much I appreciate the heads up especially since you thought I was talking bad about you. If I ever have anything bad to say to anyone they are the first to know. So, don't believe lies when it is said Results is talking about you because I promise you you will be the first one to know. Again thank you for the heads up and see ya at the new community....I'm so excited!

Everyone please have a wonderful and safe Holiday because I want to see my neighbors at our new neighborhood in 2008! God bless you all! Merry Christmas!
Dear Results,
So that is what happened to Odette!This is my first post and I joined crime library because I had stummbled onto Odettes` page.For many months I only needed to view her posts to get ALL accurate info on Mccanns.I thought she was paid to do this because it was so entailed and professional.That is alot of work for one person to do on her own with no reward.I,for one would like to thank you and hope you come back.There are lots of others who also followed you even if we do not post;we are here and appreiciate your hard work for ALL of us.
Now you are moving.How will I find our new home?Will you please let me know?
I also wish everyone a safe and happy holiday and thanks for wishing me a happy B-day. Who knows;maybe that quirky Metodo 3 guy will have Madeleine home by Xmas.I do not know what to make of that guy.What do you think? This is a good time for a miracle....Thanks again,Scarrlett

[Jayelles]

Ditto regarding all Odette's hard work. She did an awesome job in bringing us news updates this year. Not just in sourcing them, but in presenting them in such a professional format.

Regarding Metodo 3. It said in the news either yesterday or the day before that the McCanns have asked them to stop saying that they know who has Madeleine and that she'll be hmoe by Christmas. They are worried that IF indeed she is alive and IF indeed Metodo 3 are closing in on her captors, that their statements will alert the captors and that they will harm Madeleine. This had been my concern also. I thought their announcements were ill-advised.

[Babootje]

Dear Results,
So that is what happened to Odette!This is my first post and I joined crime library because I had stummbled onto Odettes` page.For many months I only needed to view her posts to get ALL accurate info on Mccanns.I thought she was paid to do this because it was so entailed and professional.That is alot of work for one person to do on her own with no reward.I,for one would like to thank you and hope you come back.There are lots of others who also followed you even if we do not post;we are here and appreiciate your hard work for ALL of us.
Now you are moving.How will I find our new home?Will you please let me know?
I also wish everyone a safe and happy holiday and thanks for wishing me a happy B-day. Who knows;maybe that quirky Metodo 3 guy will have Madeleine home by Xmas.I do not know what to make of that guy.What do you think? This is a good time for a miracle....Thanks again,Scarrlett
The same for me too, I also stumbled onto Odettes page and so became a member of CL. I followed for months only reading the update's. I highly appreciated especially the translations of the Portuguese papers. Pity she stopped. I sure will attend your new page.
I also hope for a quick outcome of the case, although I do think Maddie isn't among us anymore.
Today the Daily Mail stated that forensic tests are ongoing. Now they send new (not tested) evidence from the blood residues found in the appartment to the FSS in Birmingham.

McCanns 'back in the frame' after new Maddy apartment evidence is sent to the UK
Last updated at 11:32am on 18th December 2007

New evidence means police are convinced Maddy died in the flat
Portuguese police are sending new forensic material in the Madeleine McCann case to British scientists, it was revealed today.

The previously untested evidence is believed to come from the holiday apartment where she was last seen.

The move indicates that police in Portugal are maintaining their case that Madeleine died in the flat on the night of 3 May and that Kate and Gerry remain prime suspects.

It is believed that the latest tests are designed to bolster the original forensic results from the apartment, which are believed to have found traces of Madeleine's blood.

Experts from the Forensic Science laboratory in Birmingham will also conduct separate tests to establish where DNA already found in the McCanns' apartment came from.

To do this, further samples from the dozens of people who were in the apartment either before or after the girl disappeared are being sent to the laboratory.
Test results are believed to indicate that police in Portugal are maintaing their case that Maddy died in the flat and that Kate and Gerry remain prime suspects
The decision to submit the new forensic material was taken after a meeting in Leicestershire between Portuguese detectives and the British scientists.
Sources close to the investigation say that the aim is to "bring into sharper focus" the results previously sent to Portugal and to remove any possible alternative explanations for these findings.
Today's disclosures follow persistent claims, in the UK and Portugal, that the value of the forensic findings had been wrecked by the police failure to seal off the scene for weeks.
Sceptics have also claimed that the slow pace of the Portuguese investigation mean that the inquiry is running aground.
Sources in Britain dismiss such claims and say that although progress is methodical rather than spectacular, the new tests are intended to firm up the case being built by Portuguese detectives.
"New material is being sent and tests will be conducted to eliminate some people and to shine a brighter light on the results that have already been found," said one source close to the investigation."
"There is no dramatic change in the course of the inquiry and although progress might be slower than some people might expect, that does not mean that nothing is happening."
The new forensic tests come three months after a first batch of findings were sent to Portugal by experts from the Forensic Science Service.
The arrival of these initial results led to the McCanns being named as official suspects, although both continue to strongly deny any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
No official confirmation of what these tests found has been provided, but leaks from Portugal suggest they include spots of Madeleine's blood in the Praia da Luz apartment and traces of her bodily fluids and hair in the couple's hire car.

[Babootje]

Furthermore it is in the UK media that the waiter, who waited the McCann table the night Maddie dissapeared (key witness in the Maddie case) gone into hiding, affraid of the McCann PR machine and the Methodo 3 detectives.

One of the reactions I herewith place (check the funny nickname of Methodo 3).

WHO IS HE HIDING FROM?

18.12.07, 8:43am

The media Team McCanns private detectives that have been interfering with witneses and making stupid press statements as they bring us stories of dramatic rescues of American children, and imminent solving of the case the world best police forces have failed to solve.

Why are their so few witnesses prepared to step forward, the media pressure being applied by the McCanns and their dodgy political PR team means that any witness knows they will be the center of world wide speculation for months.

There are dozens of witnesses from that night, and to choose to step into the media circus that Team McCann created and keep rolling means that they will be scrutinised and victimised like Murat and his familly.

Are we surpprised that these people fail to step up to the plate and provide the PJ with all the evidence they have, the media circus and Retardo 3 are designed to prevent this from happening.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!" seems to be the moto of the pro McCanns and it means just that, any witness with a secret in their past will have it dug up by the press or Retardo 3 and broadcast to the world.

So this proves that one does not have to threaten witnesses with violence to intimidate them not to give evidence any minor misdemeanor committed in the past will be dug up and used to discredit or threaten witnesses.

This case has proven that witness tampering is the way to go if you have the contacts financial backers or money to carry it off.

WITH THESE STRATEGIES YOU CAN PROBABLY GET AWAY WITH MURDER but certainly escape prosecution for CHILD ABUSE / ENDANGERMENT /ABANDONMENT / NEGLECT.

Let us not forget these parents CHOSE the opportunity to socialise with their friends over the safety of their children and Madeline paid the ultimate price!

[Results]

I have contacted Odette to come by the forum and read what wonderful things were being said about her from some magnificent posters. Odette was the first person on CL to receive CL poster of the month. The first thing Odette said to me when she won that month that she was expecting any recognition that she was only doing it because she enjoyed it and wanted to. If you go around the threads at CL you will see that this isn't the only case that Odette kept updates going. Odette is the most compassionate person I know that truly cares about many cases and I'm honored that she is my friend. Odette is a loyal CL member and she will be certainly at the new forum. Hope to see everyone there! This is for you Update Queen! :rose:

I can't imagine that these people that work for the McCanns do not consult them on any new information they get about their daughter before making a public statement. The McCanns are paying them, correct?

[Jayelles]

I have contacted Odette to come by the forum and read what wonderful things were being said about her from some magnificent posters. Odette was the first person on CL to receive CL poster of the month. The first thing Odette said to me when she won that month that she was expecting any recognition that she was only doing it because she enjoyed it and wanted to. If you go around the threads at CL you will see that this isn't the only case that Odette kept updates going. Odette is the most compassionate person I know that truly cares about many cases and I'm honored that she is my friend. Odette is a loyal CL member and she will be certainly at the new forum. Hope to see everyone there! This is for you Update Queen! :rose:

I can't imagine that these people that work for the McCanns do not consult them on any new information they get about their daughter before making a public statement. The McCanns are paying them, correct?


Well I am at the stage where I simply take anything published by the newspapers with a huge pinch of salt (unless it's the Telegraph or Times or something like that and they aren't writing much about the case at all), but the daily (tabloid) newspapers said that the McCanns were apparently "furious" at the statements made by Metodo 3 and are now reviewing their contract with them because it was felt that the comments were careless. I think they are making stuff up to keep the story going and to sell newspapers.

What has been published in todays newspapers which is probably true though is that Murat translated the McCanns & co's early police interviews for the police. THAT needs to be checked out.

It's all just one huge mess. I agree that the McCanns made a huge error of judgement but I think we're all capable of making errors of judgement. Fortunately, few of us will pay the price they have paid.

With regards to the waiter who sold his story to the tabloids, there are several points:-

1) He said the McCanns never left the table all evening - how could he possibly know this? Why was he watching the McCanns all evening? Wasn't he doing his job?

2) Bear in mind that the McCanns weren't well known at this point - they were just another family who'd been there on vacation for a week. I can understand them attracting attention later - but at that point they were unknown.

3) He sold his story at the end of the season - when he'd been paid off for the winter - coincidence?

4) Doesn't anyone think it's even slightly suspicious that anyone would have been watching the McCanns at all? Why would he watch a family all evening? If I were an investigator, I'd be asking this question.

These waiters work really hard (usually). The Tapas Bar had inside tables and outside tables. I find it really hard to believe that any waiter who was doing his job properly would be a credible witness regarding whether one particular couple hadn't moved from their table all evening. There would be times when the waiter would be at the bar (back turned towards the restaurant) or outside (not seeing inside tables) or inside (not seeing outside tables) or interacting with other customers - not watching other customer.

Also, the newspaper which reported the waiter's story said he corroborated Nanny Pennington's story - but her story in her own words was completely contradictory! The newspaper claimed that the waiter said Kate McCann called from the balcony "They've taken her!" and that this supported Nanny Pennington's version of events. However, nanny Pennington was interviewed on tv and she said that she wasn't there at the very start. That she had been working in the creche and that another parent came in and told her a child was missing.

Too many contradictions to draw a fair and accurate conclusion.

[Results]

Nothing makes sense to me in this case?

[Seashell]

Nothing makes sense to me in this case?
yup :shrug: God only knows what really happened.

[Seashell]

I already pm Odette and praised her for the work she has been doing on CL i also would like to see her back here and carrying on her good works, please Odette i know you are busy but you are a valuable member who keeps us updated as well as informed from the proper sources.

:rose:

[Babootje]

[QUOTE=Jayelles;9084679] I agree with you, that Media now is making up stories to have something to tell. However in general the feeling grows that within few weeks someting must come out.

About the waiter: I never heard he sold his story to the papers.
The news is "leaked" from sources nearby the investigation. Otherwise he (the waiter) did not know what the statement of Kate was at that time.
Ad 1.) The waiter did what he had to do. He waited their (McCanns) table. He did not say the McCanns never left the table all evening. He only said dat they did not check every 30 minutes, and when they did check only the male guests did (including Gerry at one time). Keep in mind, it wasn't a very big restaurant.

Ad 2.) The McCanns ate every evening in that restaurant. They were there already some days (a small week). They ate every evening in the same restaurant with a big group of people, who drank a lot (liquers and at least 12 bottles of wine every night.). May be that is wat attracted attention. When a big group of people comes wining and dining every evening, I think the waiter knows them.

Ad 3) I never heard he sold his story. For what I know his statement was taken by the PJ in the beginning of the investigation. It is one of the reasons (the contradictions in the statements of the waiter (who at that time had nothing to gain) and the McCanns, why the question rised: why did Kate McCann alarmed from the veranda shouting: They've taken her (because Madeleine could have been easy wandered off). And iff not: and she was sure that an abduction (without ransom, they said) took place, why let the twins alone and go to the restaurant.

Ad 4.) The waiter was simply waiting the table of the McCanns. It wasn't a very big restaurant although there were inside and outside tables. Mostly a waiter has his own (tables) on the same spot. A good waiter must be very attentive on his guests.
Furthermore I think the PJ may be have asked the question you now ask and got a reasonable answer. I don't think you become an arguido iff there is nothing.

About the Nanny Pennington's story : You could be right here. I do not believe everything that is written.
But the waiter seems a reliable witness otherwise the PJ wouldn't see him as a key witness (and Nanny Pennington is not)

But I agree, that there are too many contradictions to draw a fair and accurate conclusion. We don't know the real facts at this time and we have to do it with the media, of which there are clearly pro McCann media and contra McCann media.
But I sure think they (the PJ) has something, otherwise (when it was clear) they wouldn't still do forensic testing.

[Jayelles]

[QUOTE=Jayelles;9084679] I agree with you, that Media now is making up stories to have something to tell. However in general the feeling grows that within few weeks someting must come out.

About the waiter: I never heard he sold his story to the papers.
The news is "leaked" from sources nearby the investigation. Otherwise he (the waiter) did not know what the statement of Kate was at that time.
Ad 1.) The waiter did what he had to do. He waited their (McCanns) table. He did not say the McCanns never left the table all evening. He only said dat they did not check every 30 minutes, and when they did check only the male guests did (including Gerry at one time). Keep in mind, it wasn't a very big restaurant.

Ad 2.) The McCanns ate every evening in that restaurant. They were there already some days (a small week). They ate every evening in the same restaurant with a big group of people, who drank a lot (liquers and at least 12 bottles of wine every night.). May be that is wat attracted attention. When a big group of people comes wining and dining every evening, I think the waiter knows them.

Ad 3) I never heard he sold his story. For what I know his statement was taken by the PJ in the beginning of the investigation. It is one of the reasons (the contradictions in the statements of the waiter (who at that time had nothing to gain) and the McCanns, why the question rised: why did Kate McCann alarmed from the veranda shouting: They've taken her (because Madeleine could have been easy wandered off). And iff not: and she was sure that an abduction (without ransom, they said) took place, why let the twins alone and go to the restaurant.

Ad 4.) The waiter was simply waiting the table of the McCanns. It wasn't a very big restaurant although there were inside and outside tables. Mostly a waiter has his own (tables) on the same spot. A good waiter must be very attentive on his guests.
Furthermore I think the PJ may be have asked the question you now ask and got a reasonable answer. I don't think you become an arguido iff there is nothing.

About the Nanny Pennington's story : You could be right here. I do not believe everything that is written.
But the waiter seems a reliable witness otherwise the PJ wouldn't see him as a key witness (and Nanny Pennington is not)

But I agree, that there are too many contradictions to draw a fair and accurate conclusion. We don't know the real facts at this time and we have to do it with the media, of which there are clearly pro McCann media and contra McCann media.
But I sure think they (the PJ) has something, otherwise (when it was clear) they wouldn't still do forensic testing.

The waiter's (non) story was all over the tabloids immediately after the complex closed down for winter. He did claim that they never left the table in the tabloid story that I saw. If, as you say, he merely claimed that they didn't check every 30 minutes, then I'm afraid IMO that this only serves to make his sotry even more ridiculous - not only was he watching them, but now it seems that he was also timing them? It may not have been a huge restaurant, but it has been reported from several sources that it was a very popular and busy one and that customers used to queue up in the morning to book tables there. There is no doubt in my mind that any waiter working there would have been too busy to study the movements of one table of customers who at that point were unknown!

So you believe the "reliable" waiter but you don't believe Nanny Pennington? Well I'll give you one good reason why in this case, I would tend to believe the Nanny and not the waiter. The Nanny said that she learned of Madeleine's disappearance from a parent who was collecting a child. That is something which can be VERY easily verified. The waiter claims the McCans never left the table all evening - yet there are witnesses who claim to have spoken to Gerry McCann on one of these trips that the waiter says didn't take place. The waiter may be saying all the things that someone wanting to frame the parents might want to hear, but his story just doesn't hold water - for the above reason and all the other reasons I gave in a previous post.

However, I'm not going to waste any more time debating tabloid fairy stories with you Babootje. There are forums which thrive on such discussions - this isn't one of them.

[Jayelles]

I googled this story to find it's source and here it is - the Daily Star!:-

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/24152/Maddie-We-find-missing-witness

The Daily Star is one of the worst tabloid rags we have here - it is renowned for publishing garbage. Don't take my word for it - Google it and see for yourself.

However, in Googling this story I found several statements attributed to the "watching waiter":-

1) They never left their table all night
2) Only the men checked on the kids
3) The never left their table between 9-10
4) They didn't check as often as every 30 minutes
5) They checked the kids every 20 minutes

This is why I sound so cynical these days. This is absolutely typical of the reporting in the McCann case and why so many Brits simply don't believe the press any more.

Let us not forget that the Portuguese police also claimed that the McCanns hid her body in a tiny fridge - not much bigger than a minibar and when the absurdity of this was pointed out, changed it to say that they must have persuaded someone local to let them hide her body in a their freezer!

Let us also not forget that the Portuguese police claimed that the McCanns had killed her with an overdose of sedative - then later changed this to her having died as a result of a fall down the stairs outside the apartment...... Then claimed that she'd died inside the apartment...

How anyone can continue to believe anything that comes from "the source close to the Portuguese police" simply defeats me.

Today's newspapers are saying that the Portuguese POlice blame the McCanns for sidetracking the investigation. The newspaper claims that the Portuguese Police say that because the McCanns were so distressed and claiming that their daughter had been taken from the apartment that this is what made them follow that line of enquiry initially - what? It beggars belief. There's another reason why the McCanns might have been so distressed and saying that their daughter had been taken - i.e. because that was what happened. They also say that they may never solve the case because the evidence doesn't support a McCann did it scenario. Ehm - could this possibly be because the McCann's didn't do it? Experts agree they had no motive and that they didn't have "opportunity".

This weeks newspapers also claimed that the McCanns left the day after they were made arguidos - like this was suspicious. In fact, the McCanns had announced their intention to leave several weeks previously. Gerry had been wanting to go home for some time and it was Kate who had been refusing to leave until they found Madeleine. We all knew they were coming home. Indeed they had been criticised for STAYING in Portugal so long! Then days before they were due to leave, they were taken in for questioning and made arguidos - but were allowed to leave AS PLANNED. Now they are trying to make out that they "fled" after being made arguidos? It's disgusting.

[Babootje]

Jayelles: please just read what I am writing:
That the waiters story was (not only in the tabloids but also) in respected newspapers in Portugal will not implicate that he "sold" the story.
Furthermore, it is use in this work that as a waiter you do not waite al the tables in a restaurant but you have your own area. The McCanns were dining in the Tapas restaurant EVERY NIGHT so you can't say they at that time were unknown. Possible that the group even had their lunches in the same spot, when they were at the pool nearby. I believe the group was well known by the waiters working in the Tapas bar.
The interrogations of people present that evening had taken place shortly after het disappearance of Maddie. The waiter involved at that time could not possibly know that his statement would not be consistent with the statements of the McCanns. The PJ reviewed three times and concluded that this witness is reliable. (Note: I do not say he is reliable, but the PJ concluded that he is reliable, based on their interrogations: they have the whole story, we do not.)

Even so I did not say I don't believe Nanny Pennington. You reacted on the article in the Britisch media that the Nanny's statement bolstered the waiters statement. Of that I said that this could be true, I also do not believe everything that is in the media without any doubt.
It is not true that the waiter claims the McCanns never left the table that evening. He claimes that only the male guests (later pointed to O'Brien, Oldfield and McCann) left at some point the table. There were no REGULAR checks. He also could tell the police about what time that was. So far the (note: independent) statement of the waiter is consistent with the witnesses (excluding Tapas Nine). The fact that the waiter could tell the time Gerry left which is consistent with the statement of the producer who met Gerry, brings the PJ to the conclusion that the statement of the waiter (pointing out that the timeframe Gerry (and O Brien) leaving the table is correct. So why wouldn't the rest be true? The waiter had nothing to gain with giving a false statement. Why would he want to frame the McCanns?
So your statement that the waiter claims no one left the table that evening is inaccurate. He only claims there were no REGULAR checks.

Note that the Nanny's statement DOES NOT contradict the statement of the waiter, simply because - as you said - she even wasn't there at the time Kate raised the alarm. (She learned of Maddie's disappearance from a parent who was collecting a child.)

Iff the McCanns are involved with the disappearance of Maddie one can not say. But I do believe that the group discussed their strategy maybe because they were affraid to be charged with neglect by leaving their children alone (of which in my opinion they certainly are guilty).

I based my opinion on respected media (no sensation tabloids like the sun). I put articles from British press next to articles in Portuguese press like Diaro da Noticas, a very reliable paper. Those are no fairy tale stories.
But I see in your last sentence that clearly no one may have another opinion than that the McCanns are totally innocent or otherwise you don't like to discuss...

[Jayelles]

Here is Nanny Pennington's statement. It was in the Daily Mail, but she was also interviewed on one of the tv documentaries and repeated it there (also this is a quoted statement rather than paraphrased and that always tends to have a little more weight):-

After tea Miss Pennington went to work at the resort's evening creche, in which parents could leave their children while they went out for supper.

Just before 10pm the last mother arrived to collect her child from the creche and mentioned that she had just bumped into a man, who had been shouting a name.

"She didn't get the name, but she said it sounded something like 'Abbey, Gabby or Maddie'. We automatically went into lost-child procedure. In these situations, the first thing we do is investigate the scene.

"We knew that one of the other nanny's charges was called Maddie. We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment.

"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends.

"When we were coming out we saw Kate and she was screaming: 'They've taken her. They've taken her!'

Asked if it was the only thing she said, Miss Pennington answered: "It might not have been the first thing she said. But she definitely said it. She also repeated Madeleine's name and said: 'She's gone, she's gone'.

"I couldn't really believe what I was seeing - she was just so distraught. She was screaming out and tears were running down her face.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=483715&in_page_id=1770

One point I'd make about Kate saying "They've taken her" (and I think I've made this point before) is that it could be a colloqualism. Kate McCann has a strong midland accent and comes from a working class background. I really don't see that this is "evidence". It is a common British colloqialism to say "they" instead of "he" or "she".

On Pat Brown's website (she is the criminal profiler who considers herself to be so good that she can judge a case without interviewing the people involved or seeing the police files) she criticised Gerry McCann's use of english hinting that his use of words were "suspicious". I asked her how many British people she had profiled and in particular, how many Scots she had profiled. I was intereted in established how experienced she was in dealing with the Scots tongue. I checked back some weeks later and although she had answered other questions, she had declined to answer mine.

The fact is - Brits and particularly Scots and anyone living north of London DO use the English language in a different way from BBC english.

For example, English people would say "I have to go to the shops" - Scots will say "I've GOT to go to the shops". Scots refer to shopping as "messages". If a Scot asks you "Did you get my messages?", they aren't necessarily referring to text messages or voicemail. They could be referring to a pint of milk and a loaf of bread that they asked you to pick up on the way home!

Other common variations of english -

I was standing at the door....
I was stood at the door ...
I were stood at the door ....
I were stood standing at the door.....

These are colloquialisms - most are in common use but not proper use of English.

Gerry McCann is a Glasgow boy from a working class background who did well academically and moved to England! That is a classic recipe for peculiar use of English! Scots do tend to modify their use of language when in England in order to be understood. Also, people who grow up in working class backgrounds where the use of language is colloqial who then go on to become educated and have to speak with educated people tend to have a distinctive use of language - it never sounds quite natural. It always sounds as though they are choosing their words carefully and deliberately (they probably are because they are probably using words which they learned long after their verbal communication skills were established).

Kate doesn't sound like this. She sounds very ordinary. She sounds a "k" at the end of her "ings". Walkingk, goingk - it's her accent and it's considered "common" by many people. If she was making any effort to refine her voice, this would be one of the first things she'd address. I therefore have no reason to suppose that she'd drop other colloqualisms.

I read in the Ramsey case about the use of "bring" instead of "take" in the South. When you learn that it's a common expression, any suspicious meaning you'd take from it is lost.

Same goes in the McCann case IMO.

[Jayelles]

Jayelles: please just read what I am writing:
That the waiters story was (not only in the tabloids but also) in respected newspapers in Portugal will not implicate that he "sold" the story.


His "EXCLUSIVE" initial interviews were with tabloids. Just because these interviews were "reported" by other newspapers doesn't mean he wasn't paid by those tabloids for the "exclusive". That's generally the way it works. It's a reasonable assumption.

Furthermore, it is use in this work that as a waiter you do not waite al the tables in a restaurant but you have your own area. The McCanns were dining in the Tapas restaurant EVERY NIGHT so you can't say they at that time were unknown. Possible that the group even had their lunches in the same spot, when they were at the pool nearby. I believe the group was well known by the waiters working in the Tapas bar.

There is a world of difference between recognising a couple that you served a few times and claiming accurate knowledge of their movements when he was supposed to be working! It is an established fact that the McCanns were sitting at a table out beside the pool (even the waiter acknowledges that) - the Tapas bar wasn't so exclusive that each waiter would only have one table to serve. What about the times that the waiter was serving his other guests? What about the times when he was back at the kitchen to collect food? Is he claiming that this table of folks drank 10 bottles of wine and none of them left the table to visit the lavatory? How would he know whether they were at the lavatory or back at the apartment checking on their kids? His statement falls down on so many points that even some of the anti-McCann websites have poked fun at him. Common sense should tell us that a waiter in a very busy restaurant can't possibly testify with any accuracy about the movements on one particular couple UNLESS he was watching them all the time. A child check would have taken less than 5 minutes. I'm pretty sure that a waiter in such a restaurant could easily spend 5 minutes being otherwise occupied.

The interrogations of people present that evening had taken place shortly after het disappearance of Maddie. The waiter involved at that time could not possibly know that his statement would not be consistent with the statements of the McCanns. The PJ reviewed three times and concluded that this witness is reliable. (Note: I do not say he is reliable, but the PJ concluded that he is reliable, based on their interrogations: they have the whole story, we do not.)

You have a credible source for when these interrogations took place? I know I've read plenty of accounts of people who claimed they weren't interviewed - even when they had information which they felt was inmportant.

Also, what brings you to suppose that this waiter would have been a priority witness when the police were looking for an abductor for the early part of the investigation? The McCanns weren't suspects then. Why would they be interested in the statement of someone who wasn't at or near the apartment?

Any defence lawyer would shoot the waiter's statement full of holes.

Even so I did not say I don't believe Nanny Pennington. You reacted on the article in the Britisch media that the Nanny's statement bolstered the waiters statement. Of that I said that this could be true, I also do not believe everything that is in the media without any doubt.
It is not true that the waiter claims the McCanns never left the table that evening. He claimes that only the male guests (later pointed to O'Brien, Oldfield and McCann) left at some point the table. There were no REGULAR checks. He also could tell the police about what time that was. So far the (note: independent) statement of the waiter is consistent with the witnesses (excluding Tapas Nine). The fact that the waiter could tell the time Gerry left which is consistent with the statement of the producer who met Gerry, brings the PJ to the conclusion that the statement of the waiter (pointing out that the timeframe Gerry (and O Brien) leaving the table is correct. So why wouldn't the rest be true? The waiter had nothing to gain with giving a false statement. Why would he want to frame the McCanns?
So your statement that the waiter claims no one left the table that evening is inaccurate. He only claims there were no REGULAR checks.

Note that the Nanny's statement DOES NOT contradict the statement of the waiter, simply because - as you said - she even wasn't there at the time Kate raised the alarm. (She learned of Maddie's disappearance from a parent who was collecting a child.)

Iff the McCanns are involved with the disappearance of Maddie one can not say. But I do believe that the group discussed their strategy maybe because they were affraid to be charged with neglect by leaving their children alone (of which in my opinion they certainly are guilty).

I based my opinion on respected media (no sensation tabloids like the sun). I put articles from British press next to articles in Portuguese press like Diaro da Noticas, a very reliable paper. Those are no fairy tale stories.
But I see in your last sentence that clearly no one may have another opinion than that the McCanns are totally innocent or otherwise you don't like to discuss...

The tabloids are claiming that Nanny Pennington corroborates the waiter's statement but she doesn't. I only gave that as an example of how these newspapers which you are citing keep getting it wrong!

The British press is just as guilty of publishing garbage as any other nations tabloids. You say you are basing your opinion on respected media - yet you cite stuff published by The Star which is probably only kept off the bottom of the tabloid heap by the Daily Sport!

My opinion in this case is that there is no evidence that the McCanns harmed their daughter. In my book, that doesn't equate to a conclusion they must have done it and been very clever about covering their tracks. Considering the witch hunt they have been on, proving the McCanns' guilt is the only thing which can save the faces of the Portuguese police. Therefore I believe that if there had been the remotest evidence that the McCanns were involved, then they would have been arrested.

[Jayelles]

BTW, I found this comment on the waiter's story and thought it was quite funny:-

“FRIENDS ‘SHARED EIGHT BOTTLES OF WINE A NIGHT’” – Says Jose Baptista.

Yes, eight bottles between nine Britons. On holiday. In the sun. Indeed, is that all?


http://www.anorak.co.uk/madeleine-mccann/177088.html

[Babootje]

My opinion in this case is that there is no evidence that the McCanns harmed their daughter. In my book, that doesn't equate to a conclusion they must have done it and been very clever about covering their tracks. Considering the witch hunt they have been on, proving the McCanns' guilt is the only thing which can save the faces of the Portuguese police. Therefore I believe that if there had been the remotest evidence that the McCanns were involved, then they would have been arrested.

You are right at that. There is no evidence that the McCanns harmed their daughter. That is not what I can not believe too. But the fact indeed is, that they left their children alone in an appartment in a strange country every evening.
The reason why I think the waiter can be right by claiming there were no regular checks other than the checks of Oldfield, Gerry and O Brien (who went at the same time, has to do with the reconstruction that had taken place of the evening, pointing out that voor an abductor there was in fact less time voor an abductor to get into the appartment, get Maddie en go out unseen.
The reconstruction was based on the testimonies of the Tapas Nine and camera footage, of people wandering by.
If the group of friends lied about the checks to avoid a charge of neglect, than there was a true possibility for an abductor to take Maddie.

[Results]

These are questions that concern me about this whole case:

There are 3 children in the room and the oldest was taken. I would think she would be more of a risk then one of the younger ones. Maddy would more than likely attract public attention by crying for her Mommy or Daddy but the younger ones would not know what was really going on if someone took them.

I have to say that the famous "they took her" does seem odd. What made them so sure that Maddy didn't leave the apartment and so sure that she was taken?

Did the security guards indeed tell the McCann’s and their friends that robberies were occurring where they were staying at?

If the McCann’s and their friends were dinning out every night and leaving the kids alone why pick that night? What was different about that night that an intruder would pick that night instead of the earlier nights when the children were left alone? That leads me to the doctor that stayed with his daughter because she was sick so the intruder would then have to worry about when he was coming out of his apartment before "they" took Maddy.

IF (and I do say IF this is true) all the other nights that they went out to dine and the women did not go to check on their children why did Turner and Kate go this night? Again, what was so different about this night? Also, if this is true and this intruder had been watching the McCann’s then the intruder knew this group broke their habits of what they had been doing and this would be more of a risk for them to take Maddy that night.

JMHO

[Jayelles]

These are questions that concern me about this whole case:

There are 3 children in the room and the oldest was taken. I would think she would be more of a risk then one of the younger ones. Maddy would more than likely attract public attention by crying for her Mommy or Daddy but the younger ones would not know what was really going on if someone took them.

There was a discussion about this on one of the documentaries (or it was a radio programme). Madeleine was toilet trained - the twins were in nappies. That might have made her more attractive to a paedophile or to a opportunist who was unprepared for a baby in nappies. The twins OTOH would have been more appealing to child traffickers according to the people on this programme.

I have to say that the famous "they took her" does seem odd. What made them so sure that Maddy didn't leave the apartment and so sure that she was taken?

We don't know that this was her first words. There are conflicting reports about this. However, as I said above, some dialects in the UK say "they" instead of "he/she/someone". e.g. "Who was last out - because THEY left the door unlocked". "they" doesn't necessarily mean plural in the UK and is often used in reference to a single person of unknown gender.

I just don't think this is a crucial piece of evidence.

Did the security guards indeed tell the McCann’s and their friends that robberies were occurring where they were staying at?

No idea but what I will say is that hotels are unlikely to tell you about robberies - bad for their image. The holiday destinations where we've gone to which were most unsafe were Mainland Spain and Tenerife. There were 4 break-ins at our apartments in Tenerife and we had our video camera stolen on the bus. There were gypsies in the street and I just felt really unsafe. In Spain there were pickpockets who came into the complex and stole purses and wallets from guests who were relaxing by the pool - also someone got mugged just outside the hotel one evening. We never went back to either of these destinations. We go to Majorca which is very safe. Portugal also had a reputation for being safe. We have several friends who never went anywhere else. If anyone is likely to tell you about local crime, it's the holiday reps (who are not employees of the hotels).

If the McCann’s and their friends were dinning out every night and leaving the kids alone why pick that night? What was different about that night that an intruder would pick that night instead of the earlier nights when the children were left alone? That leads me to the doctor that stayed with his daughter because she was sick so the intruder would then have to worry about when he was coming out of his apartment before "they" took Maddy.

I understand that the McCanns didn't dine in the Tapas Bar every night. I can't remember the specific details, but the children dined with them on at least one of the evenings.

You could ask the same question about a burglary - why does any cirminal choose a particular time to strike? I'm sure opportunity plays a big part.

IF (and I do say IF this is true) all the other nights that they went out to dine and the women did not go to check on their children why did Turner and Kate go this night? Again, what was so different about this night? Also, if this is true and this intruder had been watching the McCann’s then the intruder knew this group broke their habits of what they had been doing and this would be more of a risk for them to take Maddy that night.

JMHO

Again, we don't know that this is the case. The only people who know the answer to this for sure are the McCanns and their friends and they are bound to silence. What I will say is that my husband and I always took turns when the kids were small - turns at getting up during the night, turns at getting up in the morning. If the fathers had been playing tennis late that afternoon leaving the wives to bath and jammy the kids, maybe the agreement was that they would check on the kis and let the wives have a break in the evening?

My husband and I never had a particular pattern - we just tried to keep a balance. It worked fairly well.

Also - this was the groups' second last night. Departure times vary on these holidays with buses coming morning, noon and night to collect groups of holidaymakers and take them back to the airport. Sometimes you get 7 nights at the hotel, sometimes it works out at only 6 - it depends on the flight times. Maybe the abductor knew that the McCanns might be the following day or night and knew that this might be the last opportunity. Some people spend their last night packing.

[Results]

There was a discussion about this on one of the documentaries (or it was a radio programme). Madeleine was toilet trained - the twins were in nappies. That might have made her more attractive to a paedophile or to a opportunist who was unprepared for a baby in nappies. The twins OTOH would have been more appealing to child traffickers according to the people on this programme.



We don't know that this was her first words. There are conflicting reports about this. However, as I said above, some dialects in the UK say "they" instead of "he/she/someone". e.g. "Who was last out - because THEY left the door unlocked". "they" doesn't necessarily mean plural in the UK and is often used in reference to a single person of unknown gender.

I just don't think this is a crucial piece of evidence.



No idea but what I will say is that hotels are unlikely to tell you about robberies - bad for their image. The holiday destinations where we've gone to which were most unsafe were Mainland Spain and Tenerife. There were 4 break-ins at our apartments in Tenerife and we had our video camera stolen on the bus. There were gypsies in the street and I just felt really unsafe. In Spain there were pickpockets who came into the complex and stole purses and wallets from guests who were relaxing by the pool - also someone got mugged just outside the hotel one evening. We never went back to either of these destinations. We go to Majorca which is very safe. Portugal also had a reputation for being safe. We have several friends who never went anywhere else. If anyone is likely to tell you about local crime, it's the holiday reps (who are not employees of the hotels).



I understand that the McCanns didn't dine in the Tapas Bar every night. I can't remember the specific details, but the children dined with them on at least one of the evenings.

You could ask the same question about a burglary - why does any c