Two small bruises in a line can clearly be seen on the left arm of Kate McCann and also possibly corresponding bruise on the right arm just going under the sleeve. This is an extremely common injury to domestic violence victims where an aggressive controlling man will grab the woman by the upper arms so that she is powerless to escape from him. Notice also the very different facial expressions in this picture - Kate looking subdued and frightened, Gerry looking challenging and smug. He also "controls" her with his arms which is totally inappropriate in such a picture, just few days after Madeleine went missing. Her job to "hold" the picture, palms up, limp and submissive. Every picture tells a story - this one very explicitly...
NOTICE ALSO the sudden appearance of a Scots McPologist seeking to even deny there are any bruises on the Daily Express e.g. 3.10 pm 26.12.07: I wonder why she bothers to deny what we can so clearly see????
"Funny how it is only the Conspiracy Theorist's who see this bruise.Funny how the PJ did not see it.Funny how all the hundreds of people who have been it close, very very close contact with K, did not see it.Funny isn't it.Could you give me any explanation for that?Serious question."
• Posted by:
oldhippy 
NOTICE ALSO the sudden appearance of a Scots McPologist seeking to even deny there are any bruises on the Daily Express e.g. 3.10 pm 26.12.07: I wonder why she bothers to deny what we can so clearly see????
13 comments:
Those bruises are fingermarks.
There's one on her neckline as well, on the right hand side as we're looking at it, just above the collar of her t-shirt. There also looks like more faded fingermark bruises on her wrist, just above her watch.
I would put NOTHING past that odious little man.
Best regards
rat
Hiya Rat
Thanks for poining out the other, less noticeable bruising. I have always believed that he is the one the police should be looking more closely at.
I notice Old Hippy lives in Dumbarton - where Philomena lives. As people have correctly pointed out on the DE forum - liars often base at least part of their story on the truth. Strange the way OldHippy so quickly appeared as soon as this was mentioned.
I think they are a very odious family!
Kind Regards
Viv x
FYI - on the Mirror forum, there are several posters that believe that MADELEINE is sporting bruises in a couple photographs, as well.
I'll go back and see if I can find links to the pix in question and post them here, although someone seems to be doing quite a lot of questionable "culling" of threads over there so it may have been deleted.
Here's the link to the thread discussing bruises: http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=32723&highlight=bruises And this is a quote from one of the members:
-----START-------
[quote="vancouver1"]Just to add even more controversy to this thread, if you copy the "tennis court" photo to your computer and then enlarge it, you can see that Madeleine's arms and legs are covered in bruises - particularly her legs. I pointed this out before and was told she was a very active child and bruises like that were all a natural part of being an active three year old.
So (shrug), arrive at your own conclusions.[/quote]
----- END -----
It's the photo were Maddie is holding an armful of tennis balls, although I don't have the link handy, sorry! :(
BTW, many members on the Mirror forum are of the belief that Maddie died or was mortally injured on the 2nd (the same night that the elderly lady in the upstairs apartment, Mrs. Fenn, reported hearing a child crying "Daddy" for over an hour) and that the events on the 3rd were all about subterfuge. Any thoughts?
Hope all y'all are enjoying your holiday/s so far!
Take care,
CKH
Hi CKK
I have done as suggested and looked at the tennis ball picture by copying into microsoft word and then blowing up to 200%. I was very shocked at what I saw. The arm that is visible does not look bruised at all but particularly just above the wrist area there ia a patch of bright angry red whereas her hand is white. This looks like a scold or extreme sunburn that has never had any sun protection on or concern by parents to get her out of the sun.
Her legs are even more horrifying - they do look covered in bruises - on the shins and knees - this could be a boisterous three year old but just above the right knee there is a terrible double large area of bruising that does look like she was hit very badly with something or maybe kicked. It is extremely shocking.
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/maddyPA0605_468x599.jpg
Sky News confirmed that this poor little lamb was crying for two hours the night before. I have always believed that something terrible happened to her at the hands of Gerry early evening 3 May - like he was not going to have a repeat of that performance. My heart just breaks for this poor little girl and thinking of how she must have suffered.
I hope and pray in earnest that her wicked parents are brought to justice for what they have done. I know Kate was probably very frightened of him but nevertheless she is an educated woman and should have protected this dear little soul.
God Bless Her.
JUSTICE FOR LITTLE MADDIE
I do find this very upsetting having seen the state of her poor little body which I had not noticed before - but thanks for brining it to my attention.
Kind Regards
Viv
Morning Viv
I just "blew up" the "Tennis Balls" photo at the bottom of your blog, then had to run to the bathroom to be physically sick. I am not joking. There are fingermark bruises on HER upper arm as well, just under her t-shirt, and the large bruise on her forearm - which is about a week to10 days old, going by the colour - has been made by impact, i.e. using some sort of blunt instrument. It is in no way a "normal" bruise for a three year old, no matter how hyperactive. The bruises on the legs are all different ages. Actually, they "could" be accidental, but the bruising to the upper body, no way.
And here's another thought for you. Madeleine was due to start school in September. If I were her teacher, the first thing I would have done was call in Social Services. It would be my lawful duty. And NOT something that Gerry would have been best impressed with. Makes you think.
In case you are wondering why I am such an expert on bruises, I used to have bruises like that too, but fortunately that was two husbands ago, and that's all I am prepared to say, except that Gerry's behaviour in following Kate halfway across the world and pestering her to marry him, is IDENTICAL to the behaviour of husband #1!
Season's Greetings to you and yours,
rat
Viv
Old Hippy lives 2 streets away from Trish Cameron, Gerry's other sister (Philomena lives in Ullapool) and knows her. She told us this on the DX forum once.
Regards
Rat
Addicted to something???
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5129670769228945538
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5101153304927407394
She has had so many
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5129675901714865666
Kate is a ”left hand”! So if she is defending herself or somebody, she will become her injure on the left side!
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/Grief/photo#5100133031151274770
Might anyone read lips?? What is Gerry telling Kate all the time?
Gerry was allowed to change his shirt. Kate was not!
Take a look up under her sleeves (left arm) (400-500 %)
http://dynimg.rte.ie/0000dd4d10dr.jpg
http://www.elsevier.nl/artimg/200710/gerry-kate_200.jpg
Something totally rotten heer(You do`nt even have to entlarge it!)
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5113717187542723442
Look up under her sleeves (left arm) – when she comes out the door, and during her Speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nhu5GB8sO2s
This is from May 07, 2007
Still bruces back on the May 16 (blow to 200% - I might even see some of the inner upperleg?)
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/Grief/photo#5100132064783633010
And still some left overs at August the 16 and a pjyamas too big for a 2 year toddler!
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/Grief/photo#5100138889486666738
Have you seen enough?
Remainings from a nasty ”blue eye” ? (blow it up 400-500%)? and a ”split eyebrown”
http://www.regiaosul.pt/thumb.php?file=images/news/20070918_kate.jpg&sizex=275&quality=100
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5129675901714865666
is she devoted to this man?
http://copy.pnn.pt/noticias_imagens/paisdemaddie.jpg
http://www.dcrs-online.com/uploads/news_pics/ljmo213xdj7ewho9pc21i7nbe_kate_gerry_mccann.jpg
Not sure about the dark mark at the chest. It might be a bug(microphone).
It is from a press release
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cECrprLqWwQ&NR=1
Touched by an Angel - Are you?
”whoo hoo - if a picture paints a thousand words...just spotted this pic in a news link and its GOLD!!!
I'd sure like to see this one blown up a bit!
Telling...
I'll refer back to the point i made, why the finger at Kate, this is classic control man shit and Kate sure behaves how your average abused woman does - what do those expressions say?
Gerry!
Its written all over both of thems facial expressions - perfectly.”
http://www.thoughtsfromamuse.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1062&whichpage=9
The ”slideshow” here simply makes me cry – that man scares the shit out of me.
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/Sociopaths
”The first 30 seconds of the below video is the most suspicious looking video of Gerry McCann yet!
He smirks at the EXACT moment the interviewer mentions 'definite' sightings of Madeleine. Almost as if he's laughing in his head at the thought - he knows damn well that there couldn't possibly be a definite sighting of Maddie! Then it's as if he is about to share the joke with Kate when he realises 'oh ****, we're doing a taped interview!' and immediately goes blank and stares downward.
Frightening.”
http://video.news.sky.com/skyn.....ID=1279448
Have a look at yourself at:
http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport
About 800 photos
Luv xxxxx Marie
This one works
http://video.news.sky.com/skynews/video/?&videoSourceID=1279448
Could Madeleines bruises be caused by some medical complaint? or medication.
Her medical history has been mentioned on forums but apart from some innuendo re. autism, nothing is known.
Just a thought.
Regards eveyone
Viv said: My heart just breaks for this poor little girl and thinking of how she must have suffered.
------------------------------------------
Some of the Mirror forum members have opined that in that slo-mo video of Madeleine (close-up of her looking over her shoulder at the camera -- here’s a link, check out the footage at 53 seconds) that she’s actually looking warily at the person holding the vid-camera as though she’s wondering where and when the next blow will come from.
Regarding when and how Madeleine died, I’ve offered the opinion that she may have been shaken to death by Gerry or Kate in a rage, a la “Shaken Baby Syndrome” -- I’m sure DocMac can tell us more about the actual details of the type of injuries found in cases of SBS, but the following is my theory of what might have happened as I posted it on the Mirror Forum:
>>>>>> START <<<<<<
[quote="CKH"]I have absolutely no difficulty imagining Kate losing her temper with Madeleine and shaking her to death, a la "Shaken Baby Syndrome." It doesn't take as much force as one would think to have the child's brain sloshing around inside his/her skull like a bowl Jello.
If I were to go with the accidental death scenario, if an autopsy had been possible immediately following Madeleine's death it wouldn't surprise me in the least if SBS had turned out to be the official cause of death.
The thing is, with SBS, the incident could have occurred many hours before the child actually died. What happens with SBS is, after the brain has been sloshed around, it begins to swell from "brusing" and because the brain is in an enclosed space, the only way to relieve that swelling is to either put the victim into a medically induced coma and wait for the swelling to go down 'naturally,' or they'll drill a hole in the skull to drain excess fluid so that there is more room for the swollen brain inside the skull.
Unfortunately, the victim doesn't necessarily begin exhibiting symptoms immediately after being shaken. It's possible that Maddie appeared to be fine -- maybe feeling sleepier than usual and maybe slurring her words -- so that Kate or Gerry didn't immediately realize anything was wrong and blithely trotted down to the tapas bar for their boozy meal.
ETA: I think I remember hearing about other, more extreme cases of SBS where the child had been shaken so violently that it actually severed the child's spinal cord, but obviously the paralysis would be immediate in those cases so the person shaking the child would know right away that something was seriously wrong. Typically in these particular instances, the suspect usually turns out to be a very remorseful young father, caring for the child alone, and has anger management issues and simply lashes out at the baby because he's frustrated by the baby's incessant crying and is at the end of his rope because he's unable to make the stop crying. Obviously these incidents are terrible, tragic accidents because the father wasn't deliberately trying to harm the child but it results in a dead or mortally injured baby nonetheless and typically ends in a prison sentence.
Of course, the SBS scenario is complete speculation on my part, but I don't believe it's as daft or outlandish as some of the theories or hypotheses that have been put forth during this entire sorry episode.
--------------------------------------------
I believe that Maddie was mortally injured on the night when Mrs. Fenn overheard her crying out for "Daddy," but it was not immediately fatal. I believe that when K&G returned from their little jaunt that night, they were not best-pleased to discover Maddie had been crying/screaming all night because it brought unwanted attention to their "unorthodox" childcare arrangements.
I think either K or G rushed into the children's bedroom in a rage when they heard Madeleine's ruckus and grabbed her by the shoulders and gave her a vigorous shake, "What do you think you're doing? You should've been asleep hours ago..." I don't think s/he did it on purpose, I don't think s/he realized exactly how heard s/he shook Maddie.
I think Maddie died slowly, over a period of hours as a result of the swelling in her brain. As self-absorbed as K&G apparently are/were, they probably didn't notice that Maddie was listless (or more listless than usual) and sleepy. Maybe K and/or G put Maddie's behavior down to having stayed up half the night prior (when she was alleged to have been crying for her daddy) so was simply tired and worn-out. Or maybe they didn't notice it at all because she was at the daycare center for most of the day.
Presuming that Maddie was mortally injured late on the night of the 2nd or early morning on the 3rd as a result of my SBS scenario, she wasn’t feeling well on the 3rd but nobody really noticed it because she was at the daycare center most of the day. Again, whichever parent had actually shaken her hadn’t realized how hard s/he had done so.
While I don't necessarily discount that sedatives may have used by the T9 members to keep their children in a stuporous sleep to ensure the tykes didn't disrupt the adult fun and games, I don't believe that is what killed Madeleine.
I believe she experienced some type of catastrophic head injury that may not have been immediately fatal. It's even possible that K and/or G may have lead the other T7 members to BELIEVE Maddie died from an overdose of sedatives (perhaps actually administered or "prescribed" by one of the other doctors) and that is how they all become entangled in their web of lies.
>>>>>> END <<<<<<
I vacillate back and forth in deciding whether it was Kate or Gerry that did the dead because Kate apparently has quite a temper herself (witness the sounds of broken crockery coming from the McCann rental when Kate was released after PJ questioning and being named an arguido).
Regardless of who actually delivered the fatal injury to Madeleine, I believe that IF it was indeed an accidental death, that SBS is a plausible scenario, although I do admit that I harbour some suspicions that the McCanns planned in advance to rid themselves of their eldest daughter, but that’s because their behavior immediately after Maddie’s “disappearance” (I.e.: eating lunch at the Tapas bar with the other T7 members the day AFTER Maddie vanished, “couples jogging,” and Gerry’s organization of a tennis tournament a couple days later while the townspeople of PDL were out beating the bushes to search for the child), as well as the unseemly haste to setup not only a website and merchandise to solicit donations, but setting up “begging bowls” in businesses around PDL and Gerry routinely mooching booze from the tapas bar. All of that behavior junst strikes me as callous in the extreme, as well as being in very bad taste.
Anyhoo, this is a bit OT, but regarding the previous post from earlier this week with the collage of Maddie photos, here’s a link to a similar discussion on the Mirror forum: http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=33610&highlight=maddie+abused if you’d like to read other’s thoughts on the subject….
Hi Again CKH
Thanks for sharing your rather graphic thoughts with us. Personally I am struggling to see any evidence of SBS. I can certainly see however, that Gerry McCann presents as an aggressive controlling husband and as Rat points out stalking a woman is typical behaviour of such a male. WE know for a fact he followed her abroad. I can also see evidence of physical assaults on both Kate and Madeleine. I can only theorise where I can see clear evidence to back that up.
Kind Regards
Viv
Just one more thought on your post CKH - I agree it does seem very likely that Kate could have a pretty explosive temper when sufficiently aroused.
Imagine the scenario - Gerry has killed Madeleine and is insisting on an elaborate coverup where they will even make piles of money out of it. Kate has just come back from being blamed by the police for doing it herself - now just how angry do you think that would have made her? I can certainly imagine a china smashing row developing!
Kind Regards
Viv
Post a Comment