16 Feb 2009

"MUM 21" TELLS US WHY KATE SAID "THEY HAVE TAKEN HER

Author

Message

viv

Post subject: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:17 am

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Mum21 said...

Morning Rosie, I notice Hope is still going on about the words "They have taken her". How many more times does she have to be told that Liverpudlians use the word "they" in plural...when talking about a person in singular.
This has been confirmed many times by bloggers from Liverpool. It is just the way they speak.


This is news to me, comments welcome :D<" title="Imbratisare" v:shapes="_x0000_i1026" border="0" width="42" height="18">


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:22 am

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

viv :

Just an "oh dear" from me re that curious and scraping the barrel excuse.
:)


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:26 am

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Hiya darling, not nice, is it, but clearly a remark from our Katie that seriously concerned the police and one they no doubt bitterly regret, perhaps just a little overstaged..

It would not be the first time this particular lady tried to suggest it is all a bit of a race issue though :-o


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

almostgothic

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:08 am

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Careful what you carry 'Cause the man is wise You are still an outlaw in their eyes

I'm not a Liverpudlian, but I can confirm, because I'm reasonably far enough 'Up North', that northerners do sometimes use 'they' when referring to a singular person.

Example: "That shopkeeper sold me a mouldy bread loaf. Well they're just going to have to give me a refund, aren't they?"

However ...
It's KM's sentence construction which is all wrong.
To start the sentence with 'they' implies that those she is addressing know who 'they' are (or is). But how would they know, unless they were 'in the know'?
In the previously cited example, we know that 'they' is the shopkeeper, because the speaker has informed us in the previous sentence. But KM didn't utter a previous sentence, so prior knowledge on behalf of the listeners is implied.

The use of the word 'her' also implies that the listeners would know who she was talking about. Otherwise, why didn't she say 'Madeleine'? Anyone not 'in the know' might well assume she was talking about Amelie.

KM's alert was a very botched effort to say the least. Acting does require one to remember the lines, whichever alternative state of reality one is in ...


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:30 am

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

almostgothic wrote:

I'm not a Liverpudlian, but I can confirm, because I'm reasonably far enough 'Up North', that northerners do sometimes use 'they' when referring to a singular person.

Example: "That shopkeeper sold me a mouldy bread loaf. Well they're just going to have to give me a refund, aren't they?"

However ...
It's KM's sentence construction which is all wrong.
To start the sentence with 'they' implies that those she is addressing know who 'they' are (or is). But how would they know, unless they were 'in the know'?
In the previously cited example, we know that 'they' is the shopkeeper, because the speaker has informed us in the previous sentence. But KM didn't utter a previous sentence, so prior knowledge on behalf of the listeners is implied.

The use of the word 'her' also implies that the listeners would know who she was talking about. Otherwise, why didn't she say 'Madeleine'? Anyone not 'in the know' might well assume she was talking about Amelie.

KM's alert was a very botched effort to say the least. Acting does require one to remember the lines, whichever alternative state of reality one is in ...




Hiya Gothic, well yes I think that is the sort of thing the police look for when analysing what people say. It is usual to establish firstly who it is you are talking about and then normalise with some other expression, but here as you say Kate starts with "they". I think there are two ways you could look at this. Either it was a hopelessly botched piece of staging or it was an involuntary scream of horror and when she realised what she had said, she changed it.

The simple fact is the PJ obviously did believe she may have been taken away by boat because as we have seen they have done very extensive research into boats in the area around that time. Sometimes the most simple explanation for what we know can be the best one. We know that witnesses saw someone just like Gerry carrying a child just like Maddie towards the beach and we know that from then on the trail just went completely cold..."they had taken her" away on a boat.

I think it is very crucial for Team McCann to try and stop people talking about this so I intend to just keep on talking about it and the Smith sighting. Tanner too for that matter given at first she described someone like Gerry but then several months later decided he morphed into a swarthy chap with masses of hair. This is where we have got them and this is where we should keep on hammering them, IMO.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:37 am

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

Kate could, of course, have cleared up any misunderstanding about her saying "They have taken her", during her 2nd Interview with the PJ.
They asked her in, Question 9. "When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?"
Oddily enough Kate declined to clarify the matter, nor even answer the question, nor answer another 47 Questions.
;)


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:46 am

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Hiya Skeptical

I think a decision had been reached between Kate and Gerry that he would do all the talking because he is the one who can stay cool and emotionless under pressure. He has not the slightest trace of love or concern for Madeleine, he even slipped up in the very early stages failing to mention Maddie at all and talking about how they needed to just look after their children now.

I think Kate was very emotional that night, she knew that she had allowed something really bad to happen to Maddie and Maddie had to be taken away, otherwise there would be some really bad evidence against her as well, as a mother, whose duty it is to take care of her little child. But even so, Maddie being taken away was causing her a lot of pain IMO.

Kate is ill IMO, Gerry is psychopathic.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

almostgothic

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:52 am

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Careful what you carry 'Cause the man is wise You are still an outlaw in their eyes

The PJ will have been checking boats as one option amongst many. They were checking residences and other places too.

They may well have been checking the nautical angle merely because the event took place on the coast, rather than because they had a prior suspicion. I imagine this would be an automatic thing to do at any seaside resort.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:58 am

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

viv :

I think Clarence put it best, unintentionally, when he mucked up his response to a question put re Kate refusing to answer the questions.
He stuttered, "Kate was acting perfectly within her rights by refusing to give answers which could incriminate her".


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:58 am

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

It is very sad that all of their checks failed to produce any evidence at all of where Maddie just disappeared without trace to, by boat would be the obvious way to produce that result, on the coast. Kate had a premonition about that holiday and just did not want to go, something her friend Fiona Payne is at pains to stress (no pun intended) x I get the distinct feeling Fiona feels Kate is the one who deserves some protection. Kate is not and probably never will be, well enough to ever work again IMO. On Panorama she appeared to be under the influence of drugs.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:01 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Skeptical wrote:

viv :

I think Clarence put it best, unintentionally, when he mucked up his response to a question put re Kate refusing to answer the questions.
He stuttered, "Kate was acting perfectly within her rights by refusing to give answers which could incriminate her".




Very good Skeptical!! Incriminate her of what precisely!! If you are innocent you clearly cannot incriminate yourself. What I really cannot stand about Clarence Mitchell is he clearly knows exactly what went on here but still continues to speak for these two. IN my book that makes him just as bad and I would not like him anywhere near any children at all.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

JypsyBear

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:01 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:33 pm
Posts: 1853

Morning, i agree that their are inconsictencies in this case that need keeping in the Public Domain! Along with a Video that stevo posted , i think it should be veiwed again ! for others to respond to, with their thoughts .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is6yRUA4 ... 0&start=90

Extract from 'Madeleine, One Year On' : ITV Apr 30 2008,

if this link wont get through for any reason, just writeExtract from 'Madeleine, One Year On' : ITV Apr 30 2008 in UTUBE.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:14 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Thanks for that video Jypsy and it is incredible stuff!

I love Madeleine, Madeleine knows that, I have just got to keep hold of that really...

I think Kate is very distressed and it is highly significant that she just keeps saying "I", whilst he keeps studying, gulping and hoping she does not put her foot in it.

In an normal situation, where she knew Gerry loved Madeleine as well, as I believe she does, in her own very perverse way, she would clearly be saying "we", not I.



Last edited by viv on Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

littlepixie

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:19 pm

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:15 pm
Posts: 1401

I find it hard to believe that Kate used the word taken.
She does try to hide her accent but it slips out as I remember her describing how long the twins were "wit" Madeleine.

I am a Mank and our accent is similar to scouse and I would have said "someones took her" not taken.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

enigma

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:28 pm

Hardened Criminal


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:49 pm
Posts: 1983

That phrase ''implies prior knowledge'' clears up the mystery ,for me at least ,thanks almostgothic.


Report this post

Author

Message

writer lynn

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:02 pm

On Parole


Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 1069

I would agree about 'they' being used for singular purposes in some instances, but it only makes sense when having spoken about the person previously or with previous knowledge of that person. To start the sentence with 'they' doesn't really make sense and implies more than one. I'm not Liverpudlian but am a qualified English teacher. Just my opinion.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

JypsyBear

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:08 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:33 pm
Posts: 1853

I agree writer Lynn .


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

JypsyBear

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:16 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:33 pm
Posts: 1853

I think the Videos from the very beginning have shown a very Fragile Kate in the Beginning, but within Days and just a few weeks she changes into a very Confident Kate. But in some of the Videos , they both interject each other often , in my opinion often trying to convince their audiance of their story.
I wish we had someone with experiance of reading facial and movement regocnition.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

missypuddleduck

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:20 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:08 pm
Posts: 633

Irrespestive of being Liverpudian or not, 'the'y might indicate the pural.

But if you said ''someone has taken her'' that would indicate the singular, but also that you know who ''someone'' is.

Where as, ''they'' is vague and you don't know who, or how many.

I don't think ''they'' is of any significance, other that the statement '' taken her''

Why would anyone assume, a missing child, from an unlocked apartment has been 'taken'

I think if the statement by Mrs McCann is true, the only word of conflict is TAKEN.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:39 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

Not a blogger but am from Liverpool. Yes, we do tend to say 'they' when referring to one person.

However under the circumstances we're talking about now it still sounds odd even to a Liverpudlian who admittedly uses 'they' even in the singular. It would still come out "she's gone" "someone has taken her" if it were me.

It doesn't fit in the context Kate was saying it. Can't articulate what I mean any further than that.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:41 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

writer lynn wrote:

I would agree about 'they' being used for singular purposes in some instances, but it only makes sense when having spoken about the person previously or with previous knowledge of that person. To start the sentence with 'they' doesn't really make sense and implies more than one. I'm not Liverpudlian but am a qualified English teacher. Just my opinion.



THAT is exactly it.

Thanks for articulating it!


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:42 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

missypuddleduck : "But if you said ''someone has taken her'' that would indicate the singular, but also that you know who that ''someone'' is"-(end)

missypuddleduck : "Where as, ''they'' is vague and you don't know who, or how many"-(end)

I would tend to disagree with your first quote.
If one said "someone has taken her", that does not in itself suggest that you know who that "someone" is.

I agree that the "they" is vague re who actually "took her", in that it does not state clearly who actually "took her" but it does imply that more than one "took her".

(Of course, the "They have taken her" is Kate's alleged version of events).


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

Reggie Dunlop

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:49 pm

Local Lag

User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:33 pm
Posts: 989
Location: Charlestown Chiefs

I use 'they' if I don't know the gender of whoever I'm talking about.

I wrote a piece about Top Tec last week, assuming they were a "he" ..... and then had to go back through it changing all the "he's" to "they".

Kate had several choices about how she phrased that important piece of information on the evening of May 3rd. She could have said.

"Someone's taken Madeleine."

or

"Madeleine's been taken."

or, most correctly,

"Has anyone seen Madeleine? She's not in the apartment."

Unfortunately (for her) she chose the most ambiguous thing she could possibly have said.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:54 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

Ok take Writer Lynne's explanation for the use of they in the singular in some areas...

Now, think about it...they've concocted an abductor, the plan is set, Kate is to find Madeleine missing and run back to raise the alarm...

She automatically slips into using 'they' in the singular because in their mind's this abductor took form simply because they 'created' him. The singular then becomes plural - just because it comes naturally to her to do that. Try it, create a fictious character in your own mind, then talk about him/her. One person becomes 'they' (depending on where you're from that is!). He/she doesn't exist in reality but they do to you in some way because you just conjured them up in your imagination.

That suddenly makes sense of 'they've'. If you can follow my mad thought patterns that is! A person who had genuinely just discovered a child misisng would imo, say "she's gone, somebody must have taken her" - Kate gives it away that this person was already in her head when she slipped.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:00 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

I think that it's safe to say that Kate fluffed her "lines" somewhat.
Perhaps she had been unsettled by MO not running back, from his alleged 9.30pm "check", and announcing that Maddie was "missing"


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

bestbefore

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:09 pm

You're Nicked


Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 1:26 pm
Posts: 248

Writer Lynn,

I'm not sure that Kate ever said those words, but the way it makes most sense is either in the reported form, as one can imagine from Philomena or Jon Corner:

"Someone's come into the apartment and they've taken her."

Alternatively, the scenario had been rehearsed and, as Skeptical suggests, Kate only gets the second half of her lines right.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

pakeha2007

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:11 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:57 pm
Posts: 2635

Hmmm.
Skeptical.
Could explain a great deal.
Previous to the MO check/no check, the last person to see MBM outside of the Taps group was the nanny (pace eric & cie) who allegedly checked out MBM from the creche at 5.30 pm.
And the only person to check MBM prior to MO was.. mr GM himself.
I wonder if MO has thought this through yet.
Have you read the Strongwood report which gives their idea about what happened and when? It´s tangled in a recent thread about a German Psychic, but is worth hunting out.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Reggie Dunlop

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:14 pm

Local Lag

User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:33 pm
Posts: 989
Location: Charlestown Chiefs

Emma78 wrote:

Try it, create a fictious character in your own mind, then talk about him/her.



It's a bit difficult to create a genderless ficticious character in my mind ....... usually they're one or the other.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

pakeha2007

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:15 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:57 pm
Posts: 2635

Here´s the report on Strongwood, as posted by fern:
Detectives' hunt for Madeleine was 'illegal' Timesonline

A firm of private detectives that hired psychics to help the hunt for Madeleine McCann is being investigated by police for allegedly breaking Portuguese laws on criminal cases.

The company, Strongwood, claims that it is being funded by donations from more than 100,000 people to carry out inquiries into the disappearance of Madeleine from her bed in the resort of Praia da Luz 114 days ago.

However, Portuguese detectives have contacted officers in the Netherlands complaining that the company has broken laws that mean that only police can investigate criminal cases.

Strongwood, which is registered with the Dutch Ministry of Justice as a private investigation company, said that it had received donations totalling more than ¤a team of three private detectives, an expert in children with a "special disorders" and a person with "special abilities" to Praia da Luz at end of last month.

A report of its findings concluded that Madeleine could have died before 7pm on the night that she went missing. Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, have insisted that she was alive at 9pm. The company also claimed that the child was killed in her apartment before being taken to a beach in a white van where her body was dumped.

Nico van den Dries, chief executive of Strongwood, said that the company had been sharing information with Portuguese detectives and had not been told it was an offence to investigate criminal cases.

"We were asked to look at the case because some clairvoyants from America and the Netherlands were giving evidence to the Portuguese police and they were not following them up," he said. "We are just doing it for the \ the expenses. We have been co-operating with the Portuguese and they have not said it is against the law."

Inspector Olegário Sousa, of the Polícia Judiciária, said: "The investigation in Portugal only can be done by police forces. As the collection of funds was done in a foreign country, only the police in Netherlands can pursue what is clearly a fraud. No private detectives had worked with us or with our British colleagues."

Willem Melius, from the Politie Zaanstreek-Waterland in the Netherlands, said: "In \ Netherlands the investigation of crimes is for justice and police but in case of missing persons it is different (but only inside the country). As soon as they discover it to be a crime they should alert the police. If Strongwood appears not to obey the rules the Justice Department will take steps." Dutch police are already investigating a letter and map sent to an Amsterdam-based newspaper, De Telegraaf, which claimed to identify the location of Madeleine's grave in the Algarve. Portuguese police searched the site but found no trace of Madeleine.

Madeleine's father yesterday attacked police leaks that have fuelled "preposterous" speculation about what happened to his daughter. Mr McCann said he was disappointed that so much information had made its way into the public domain


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:18 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

pakeha2007 :

MO is still listed as a "person of notable interest" in my little notepad, because of his non-check re Maddie when allegedly "checking".
Will have a gander at the Psychic's Thread.
:)


Report this post

Top

pakeha2007

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:24 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:57 pm
Posts: 2635

Out of my natural kindness, I posted the report here, just 2 or three posts above.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

almostgothic

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:27 pm

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Careful what you carry 'Cause the man is wise You are still an outlaw in their eyes

Skeptical - you could be right about what wrong-footed KM - I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall at that very moment - the moment when MO breezes back into the bar, smiles and says: "Everything's fine. Another drink anyone?"

Picture this ...
Faces going every shade of green, red and possibly white, too.
Angry whispers: "It wasn't supposed to go like this! Now you'll have to do it!
"If you think I'm doing it, you can go and **** yourself!"
"Well somebody has to do it!"


And a beer mat is produced, upon which the new script is written ...

I suppose we should be grateful that she didn't run back and shout: "Boddingtons!"


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

zodiac

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:33 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:49 pm
Posts: 650

From the pakeha2007 post re Strongwood: 'Mr McCann said he was disappointed that so much information had made its way into the public domain'

Especially the information from the case. The information that is available freely on the Internet. Wouldn't be surprised that he thought the case file would be handed to them and them alone. :-h


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:36 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

almostgothic :

I think that you have described the possible post-MO-non-Maddie "check" scene extremely well.
Noted.
:)):))


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:38 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

pakeha2007 :

Many thanks for posting that.


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

pakeha2007

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:40 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:57 pm
Posts: 2635

Yes, zodiac, that and having investigators bruiting a pre 7.00 pm time of death.
de nada, Skeptical.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Cas

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:45 pm

Local Lag

User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:56 pm
Posts: 980
Location: North Wales

tried to listen to the video just makes me mad, K brazen enough to say she told the police incase someone had woken Madeleine up the night before, hpw brazen is that I a scouser cannot say if I would have said they, I more thanl likey been screaming a few f words, thats if I had been neglegent in leaving my babies in the first place


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

redsquare

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:09 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:26 pm
Posts: 806

It's a dangerous thing to do but I'm tempted to believe Charlotte Pennington, when she said that Kate said/screamed this on her balcony after the initial Tapas alarm had been raised.

Why? Because I believe the McCanns needed to whip up a storm, get people's adrenalin flowing and get them out searching the streets for Madeleine before the police arrived. What better way than to proclaim to everyone, within hearing distance, that a shocking and terrible crime had occured. A little girl had been 'taken' by 'they' - implying that more than one predator was involved and therefore implying group activity (and not a sad loner) and therefore, by deduction, implying sexual and/or criminal premeditation.

A terrifying nightmare by anyone's book that would get any human heart pounding. And, of course, it destroyed any possible thought that she may have wandered off - 'they' had definitely 'taken' her.

Would people stop to ask 'excuse me, could you provide me with evidence that an abduction has taken place' or would they simply switch into human survival mode to help another human being in distress? To save the life of a child.

I think Kate said it and she knew exactly what she was saying and why she was saying it.

It was the start of Hurricane McCann and it had to start before the police arrived so that they arrived into a storm that was already spiralling out of their control.

IMHO, of course.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

bestbefore

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:19 pm

You're Nicked


Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 1:26 pm
Posts: 248

@Redsquare,

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

almostgothic

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:31 pm

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:06 am
Posts: 1492
Location: Careful what you carry 'Cause the man is wise You are still an outlaw in their eyes

That's good thinking Redsquare - a perfectly believable scenario.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

notdeadfred

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:51 pm

Mafia Boss

User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 12:26 pm
Posts: 2608
Location: Dining in my back garden

Well said Redsquare


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Emma78 wrote:

Not a blogger but am from Liverpool. Yes, we do tend to say 'they' when referring to one person.

However under the circumstances we're talking about now it still sounds odd even to a Liverpudlian who admittedly uses 'they' even in the singular. It would still come out "she's gone" "someone has taken her" if it were me.

It doesn't fit in the context Kate was saying it. Can't articulate what I mean any further than that.




ah, we do have a Liverpudlian, thanks and all the other great posts. Is this all starting to make a bit more sense now?


Quote of the Day - Looking back on the Madeleine Case

"I have 150 men looking for the girl. At first it was just a missing girl case. Now I can assure you it was a kidnapping. We have evidence of this. Yes, we believe she is still alive and still in Portugal. We do have witnesses. They have given evidence but I can't reveal much more."

Guilhermino Encarnação, Joint Director and head of the Portimao Directory of the Polícia Judiciária, in 'This is London', 06.05.2007



It is a very mysterious comment and I do not think he would say he had evidence if that were not true.

I am afraid it just adds to my belief that Maddie was kidnapped and they were involved, because if they were not how come they have never chosen to mention this! As you say, rather than do that, they create one massive diversion with their around the globe tour on a private jet, taking in a visit to their friends in Amsterdam - where there have been so many odd reports and sightings. Even an anon piece to a newspaper about where her body may be found. I have an increasingly sinister view of their campaign I am afraid. It seems to me it has ultimately been a campaign where they are quite happy for people to be convinced they killed her, just so long as they do not figure out what really happened. They and their friends are also quite happy to cheerfully go on about how they seriously neglected their kids, all to cover up something far worse than that IMO.

Goncalo is not going to be made a scapegoat, he is far too smart for that and as he says, knows far more than he is prepared to tell because he does not wish to damage this case.

I have thought for a long time that Metodo 3 will provide a way into the McCanns and we can just sit back and wait IMO.

When was the last time we actually saw the Lady McCann in public? If she is feeling ill, she only has herself to blame. It is high time she faced the truth, no matter how terrible that is, for the sake of justice and her little girl, her other two children too.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:03 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

What I mean is first off you have all their friends saying Murat was around and he was involved. Look at it from the Police point of view, if you had found this group very suspect and giving inchorent stories and they seem determined on the flimsiest of pretexts to involve Murat would you think he was also involved but they are just trying to pin the blame on him. Would you be thinking well there is a link here, to Exeter etc? So first off to try and get the truth would you lay into Murat? It does make sense to me. I think they feel that someone gave them help so they started with Murat, but found he was, after all, just a patsy?


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Mairy Hinge

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:04 pm

First Time Offender

User avatar


Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:16 am
Posts: 702
Location: home at last

Funny, I always thought it was Kate treading carefully by being non-gender specific but it's just so unnatural.
Just as vague as possible in line with Gerry's policy of confusion being a good thing X(


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:09 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

redsquare wrote:

It's a dangerous thing to do but I'm tempted to believe Charlotte Pennington, when she said that Kate said/screamed this on her balcony after the initial Tapas alarm had been raised.

Why? Because I believe the McCanns needed to whip up a storm, get people's adrenalin flowing and get them out searching the streets for Madeleine before the police arrived. What better way than to proclaim to everyone, within hearing distance, that a shocking and terrible crime had occured. A little girl had been 'taken' by 'they' - implying that more than one predator was involved and therefore implying group activity (and not a sad loner) and therefore, by deduction, implying sexual and/or criminal premeditation.

A terrifying nightmare by anyone's book that would get any human heart pounding. And, of course, it destroyed any possible thought that she may have wandered off - 'they' had definitely 'taken' her.

Would people stop to ask 'excuse me, could you provide me with evidence that an abduction has taken place' or would they simply switch into human survival mode to help another human being in distress? To save the life of a child.

I think Kate said it and she knew exactly what she was saying and why she was saying it.

It was the start of Hurricane McCann and it had to start before the police arrived so that they arrived into a storm that was already spiralling out of their control.

IMHO, of course.



Good suggestion, it is almost like Gerry is the puppetmaster pulling the strings and telling Kate what to do and then he sits there smirking, he just cannot help himself. The most marked occasion I noted this was their last appearance together I think on the anniversary last year when she had that cream top on and looked like she just had a full makeover, she is sitting there trying to look agonised but watch him!
Edited to add
Here is another one where he just cannot help himself...

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/pres ... _small.png



Last edited by viv on Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Report this post

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:13 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

"It's a bit difficult to create a genderless ficticious character in my mind ....... usually they're one or the other."

Well, Reggie, give them a gender. It's your character :D


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:19 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

zodiac wrote:

From the pakeha2007 post re Strongwood: 'Mr McCann said he was disappointed that so much information had made its way into the public domain'

Especially the information from the case. The information that is available freely on the Internet. Wouldn't be surprised that he thought the case file would be handed to them and them alone. :-h



Hiya darling,

well yes he would, he is such a control freak he cannot imagine, things not going his way and us being able to read all about it :D<" title="Imbratisare" v:shapes="_x0000_i1329" border="0" width="42" height="18">

I recall him saying he was planning to stay in PDL to "control" the investigation, there have been so many little slips from him that let us know what he is really like, not to mention those two pictures on my blog, showing Jekyll and Hyde..


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Reggie Dunlop

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:25 pm

Local Lag

User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:33 pm
Posts: 989
Location: Charlestown Chiefs

Emma78 wrote:

"It's a bit difficult to create a genderless ficticious character in my mind ....... usually they're one or the other."

Well, Reggie, give them a gender. It's your character :D



That's what i mean!! I always DO give them a gender.

I can't believe anyone creates 'genderless ficticious characters in their mind'.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

zodiac

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:39 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:49 pm
Posts: 650

Reggie Dunlop wrote: 'I can't believe anyone creates 'genderless ficticious characters in their mind'.'

Reggie perhaps bundleman is a hermaphrodite! ;;)


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Photon

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:44 pm

Mafia Boss

User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:13 pm
Posts: 3314
Location: Lancashire, UK

Do we know exactly what Kate's first utterance was on the discovery of a missing offspring? I've searched the DVD forum, but without success - if anyone can point me in the right direction, I'd be very grateful.

Relying solely on the British media, we have:

Quote:

The first eyewitness account of the frantic moments after Madeleine McCann disappeared can be revealed today.

Nanny Charlotte Pennington confirms that Kate McCann did scream: "They've taken her, they've taken her!"

The mother's precise words have become a pivotal issue in the case, with Portuguese police questioning why she would automatically assume Maddie had been abducted.

Mrs McCann's family have countered this by insisting they recall her shouting: "Madeleine's gone."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tness.html



However, when Kate rang her mum:

Quote:

Speaking on Spanish TV, Susan said: "Kate rang me and said, 'She's gone mum, she's gone,' the night Madeleine disappeared.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-wo ... -19999097/



Now the phrase Kate used with her mum (and potentially used in PdL) has three possible interpretations (IMO) in reference to the whereabouts of one's own missing offspring (and certainly in Liverpool, although possibly this is not a regionally specific phrase regarding interpretation 3):

1) she's wandered off;
2) she's been abducted;
3) she's dead.

I've never agreed with the vast majority of mum21's writing and this is no exception. IMO (born and raised in north Liverpool; educated and still work there) Liverpudlians have a tendency to pluralise the singular (you and yous being the most Scouse specific - just listen to our Cilla) rather than use the plural inappropriately.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Skeptical

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:48 pm

Lifer


Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 5:32 pm
Posts: 5723
Location: 5 Orchard House Rothley

Photon :

Paulo Reis, on the "Questions for Paulo Reis" Thread, indicated that D Payne testified that Kate had said "They have taken her".
He, (Payne), was asked to confirm once more, and he did so.


Report this post

Top

Profile

Reply with quote

zodiac

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:51 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:49 pm
Posts: 650

'well yes he would, he is such a control freak he cannot imagine, things not going his way and us being able to read all about it'

Hi Viv,

Probably did not take into account that we could read! 8-}


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

whatatangledweb

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:01 pm

On Parole

User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 9:14 am
Posts: 1149

viv wrote:

Hiya Skeptical

I think a decision had been reached between Kate and Gerry that he would do all the talking because he is the one who can stay cool and emotionless under pressure. He has not the slightest trace of love or concern for Madeleine, he even slipped up in the very early stages failing to mention Maddie at all and talking about how they needed to just look after their children now.

I think Kate was very emotional that night, she knew that she had allowed something really bad to happen to Maddie and Maddie had to be taken away, otherwise there would be some really bad evidence against her as well, as a mother, whose duty it is to take care of her little child. But even so, Maddie being taken away was causing her a lot of pain IMO.

Kate is ill IMO, Gerry is psychopathic.



Viv IMO GM loved Maddie very much, the photos of him with her when she was a baby are very touching while the photos of Maddie with KM look uncomfortable. But IMO GM went into control the situation mode as it was too late to save her after an accident. Only my opinion :(


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

jen

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:05 pm

On Parole


Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:34 pm
Posts: 1220
Location: Capital of Culture

'They've taken her' has nothing to do with Kate's accent. Yes, we do use the plural a lot in Liverpool but more specifically tend to use the (annoying!) term 'yous' instead of you. If she said 'they've taken her' then I can only add it to the 'suspicious' pile, along with the many other odd statements that have been made.

You return to your holiday apartment and find one of your children missing. What goes through your mind? I believe most of us would think/hope the little tinker may be hiding. Then, as your heart began to beat a little faster maybe you would be reassuring yourself that he/she had simply wandered off and would be found soon as. As the seconds, seeming like minutes and then hours, ticked by you would probably begin hyperventilating as the growing sense of panic enveloped; The fact that your child may have been abucted at this point would be too distressing to comprehend. To jump to that conclusion immediately is not normal IMHO.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:07 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

"That's what i mean!! I always DO give them a gender.

I can't believe anyone creates 'genderless ficticious characters in their mind'."

Using "they/they've" doesn't necessarily make it genderless.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:09 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

Photon, are you my next door neighbour? ;;)


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

newperson

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:19 pm

PR Spokesman

User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:47 pm
Posts: 8658

viv wrote:

What I mean is first off you have all their friends saying Murat was around and he was involved.



from what i read it was only FP and RO who said they saw him on the night not the rest of them - and even there RO says maybe it could have been the next morning


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Reply with quote

delta

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:46 pm

Been Cautioned


Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:37 pm
Posts: 443

Surely you would say "xxxxx isn't there"??

As a mother, you always ask "Where's Josh (or Chris, or Daisy or whatever the child's name is).

So if one wasn't there when you checked on them, it seems logical to me that you would scream out "Maddie isn't there".

"They've taken her" doesn't make sense, no matter what accent you use for English. (I have a middle class home counties accent, and the girl who nannied us when little was from Lancashire).


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Emma78

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:08 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 759

It's nothing to do with accent Delta, it's dialect.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

babsmary123

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:09 pm

Suspect


Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:12 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Liverpool

I am from Liverpool and never use the word `yous`.......I think in Kates position I would have said "someones taken her"


Report this post

Top

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:49 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Photon thanks for confirmation that Liverudians do tend to pluralise the singular inappopriately i.e. you becomes yous which I have certainly heard but they do not pluralise the singular in the way Mum21 suggests i.e. yous becomes "they"!

Thanks also for the article from Daily Mail below where Nanny Pennington also says Murat was around, which is very odd, I make that four people now who say that, including Fiona Payne, Rachel Oldfield and Russell O'Brien.

Crucially it will be seen that Nanny Pennington is saying she was there within 5 minutes and this is what Kate was THEN screaming and that she had just literally lost it. This would seem to suggest she knew who had taken her and she just could not handle it or she was deliberately screaming it to hype the situation up as her friend Rachel Oldfield who claims to have been too shocked to even set foot in the apt, on her own admission, start ringing her BBC friend Landale, senior political correspondent with the BBC. So within a few minutes they are setting all of this in action and Kate is screaming it out to the neighbourhood. It seems to be deliberate and I would say it is, apart from the description of Kate's demeanour that Nanny Pennington gives but can we trust her given she is also insisting Murat was there, this does seem odd. "I did not know his name but he was there". Well yes, and so was David Payne who looks just like him! Is she not the same one who visited them in Leicester in about September or October time and who the Mcs asked for her whereabouts not to be disclosed? I would think a young girl 20 could easily be manipulated by this lot. There is something decidedly wrong about both words used within just a few minutes of noting her disappearance, "they" and "taken". They both fit so exactly with what they were subsequently saying, over and over again. Take Panorama for example, "taken" from her bed, this has been the stock phrase used by Mum21 and Co, over and over again. "they", again on Panorama Gerry was talking about these "predators" which clearly implies males, paedophiles, stalking them and seising their "8 minute window of opportunity". I am still at a loss to work that one out.

Going back to Kate's demeanour, I have always been of the view, it just was not natural to fall to bits like this within a few minutes. Adrenaline is a very powerful chemical that pumps into the blood in times of such extreme stress and gives a massive burst of determined energy to spring into action and try to save one's child. That is what any mother would have done, she would have been straight out there on her toes looking for her. But in the first interview with Jane HIll on BBC she lamely explains how she never went out and physically searched for her at all, going on to say, "well we have been doing a lot of work trying to find her behind the scenes". This is just cobblers for want of a better word. What she means is things likes Gerry's work behind the scenes, planning to go to America to make them look better by jumping on the Amber Alert bandwagon, he said himself that had been many months in the preparation when it finally got announced, in other words he had been preparing that, as we know, almost from the moment Madeleine disappeared. Just another of their ventures, that they no longer wish to talk about.

I can recall Kate and Gerry offering an excuse some six week later in the News of the World as to why they knew Maddie had immediately been "taken", cuddlecat had been placed on a high shelf. This was timed for the Sunday press as we so very frequently seen happen and it turned out to be yet another of their lies, trying to cover what they knew was a very serious mistake. Why do they keep saying "taken" anyway, does it make them a bit more nervous still to say "abducted" or "kidnapped". And what is more why could they never bring themselves to mention that massive reward, we all know if that was our child, we would have been begging every newspaper every day, to just keep on and on and on about that! But not the McCanns, they are somethings they are unnaturally shy about mentioning, but not of course her apparent eye defect.



Kate McCann DID scream 'They've taken her' claims new nanny witness
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 16:41 25 September 2007


The first eyewitness account of the frantic moments after Madeleine McCann disappeared can be revealed today.

Nanny Charlotte Pennington confirms that Kate McCann did scream: "They've taken her, they've taken her!"

The mother's precise words have become a pivotal issue in the case, with Portuguese police questioning why she would automatically assume Maddie had been abducted.

Mrs McCann's family have countered this by insisting they recall her shouting: "Madeleine's gone."

Scroll down for more

kate mccann

Kate McCann: 'She was a 'broken woman' in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance
Read more...

* Madeleine 'spotted holding hands with Muslim woman in Morocco'
* 'No charges for McCanns': British police believe Madeleine's parents will be cleared
* McCann's eyewitness nanny: 'Murat WAS near apartment the night Madeleine disappeared'
* Comic booed off stage after 'tasteless Madeleine and Rhys jokes'
* 'McCanns could be prosecuted over hiring private investigators' say Portuguese police

Miss Pennington, however, one of the first people to set foot in the couple's apartment after the disappearance, says she heard the mother use both phrases.

The 20-year-old Briton, who tended children for the Mark Warner holiday complex in Praia da Luz, firmly believes the McCanns are innocent.

Speaking publicly for the first time yesterday, she described Mrs McCann in the aftermath as "a broken woman" who was shuddering and unable to move.

Charlotte Pennington

The vital witness: Nanny Charlotte Pennington

"We are trained to comfort people in this type of situation but she was just inconsolable," she said.

Miss Pennington is considered a vital witness by Portuguese detectives with whom she spent more than four-and-a-half hours giving a statement.

She also claims British expat Robert Murat, the first suspect in the case, was in the area of the Ocean Club complex that night. He has repeatedly denied that he was there.

Talking from her mother's home in Leatherhead, Surrey, yesterday she told the Daily Mail: "I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone.

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

"I was standing right in front of her outside the apartment's back door, in the alleyway. I was very close to her. It might not have been the first thing she said. But she definitely said it.

"I was one of three Mark Warner staff who saw her shouting it. They have all given statements to the Portuguese police saying that."

The "they've taken her" version of events was first given in the Portuguese press two days after Madeleine disappeared on May 3.

It remained unchallenged until last Thursday when a source close to the McCann family claimed Kate had actually shouted: 'Madeleine's gone!'

Miss Pennington flew out to start work at Praia da Luz on April 28 - the same day that the McCanns arrived. She had worked for Mark Warner on two previous occasions.

She was employed as a nanny in the Ocean Club resort's Baby Club, looking after children aged four to 12 months.

However, she also came into close contact with Madeleine, her two-year-old sister and brother Amelie and Sean, and their parents, both doctors aged 39.

She dismissed claims that the McCanns were not seen for six hours leading up to the disappearance.

She said: "I was helping give the children high tea. The twins were there and Madeleine and both parents.

madeleine

Madeleine McCann: Missing since May 3rd

"It was supposed to finish at 5.30pm but because they were a big group and really social, it didn't finish until about 6pm. There was nothing out of the ordinary at all."

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.

"Everyone else was running around trying to help.

"Kate and her friend, who was looking after her, were the only ones who weren't out looking for Madeleine."

While Gerry McCann leapt into action and began frantically searching the resort, she said his wife remained outside the apartment, shuddering with tears and unable to move.

Asked why she thought Mrs McCann might have shouted "They've taken her", Miss Pennington said:

"I'm not really sure. But maybe she saw some people looking at Madeleine earlier that day, and she immediately thought that they must have taken her."

The nanny was one of three staff who steered Mrs McCann to the nearby reception area, where they asked her to describe what Madeleine was wearing.

But she remained so hysterical that she could hardly communicate.

"We get missing children all the time, and I have seen plenty of hysterical mothers. But none of them were like Kate."

She confirmed reports from the McCanns' friends that Murat was at the scene.

"He was outside the lobby just before we started on our big search," she said.

"He was adamant that he wasn't there. But he was. He was there in the road, he was just looking. It was about 10.30. He was just watching

"I didn't know his name then. But the next day he was our interpreter and I met him then. He didn't take part in the searches, but he was there."

Murat has insisted that he was at his home nearby throughout the evening of Madeleine's disappearance. Portuguese sources have claimed that he will soon be told that he is no longer a suspect.

Miss Pennington explained that she spent the rest of the evening searching for Madeleine, before finally going to bed at 4am.

The following afternoon she was one of the first people to give witness statements to the Portuguese police.

Since then, she said, she has spoken to a Portuguese detective once and to two British detectives.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Brit Abroad

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:54 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:58 am
Posts: 1731

Great thread, VIV .... thanks. And I agree with your previous post absolutely. I was just about to post this ... so will go ahead, but you have said it all much better that I!!!!!

Quote:

Photon posted:

QUOTE -
Speaking on Spanish TV, Susan said: "Kate rang me and said, 'She's gone mum, she's gone,' the night Madeleine disappeared.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-wo%20...%20-19999097/



I find the "she's gone mum, she's gone" as incongruous as "they've taken her", ........ I cannot imagine anyone saying these phrases after discovering their child was not to be found in their apartment.

Surely "she's missing, mum" or "she's disappeared, mum" would be a more descriptive and appropriate way of putting it? "She's gone" implies knowledge that "she is gone for good" IMO.

And having read all the discussion here over the phrase "they've taken her" I certainly haven't changed my opinion that it is a very strange (and suspect) phrase to have used. If she really thought Madeleine had been abducted the appropriate words would have been "someone's taken her", ..... that I could accept, but "they" never! And I don't really think Liverpudlian comes into it ..... IMO, that is! :(


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

rainbowwarrior

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:58 pm

New In Town


Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:45 pm
Posts: 73

I wonder what Kate's first words were when she found Maddie was missing. These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. Her first words would have been spoken in the appt, or just outside.
Wonder what they were.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

DIBarlow

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:59 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:25 pm
Posts: 2248

almostgothic wrote:

The use of the word 'her' also implies that the listeners would know who she was talking about. Otherwise, why didn't she say 'Madeleine'? Anyone not 'in the know' might well assume she was talking about Amelie.

KM's alert was a very botched effort to say the least. Acting does require one to remember the lines, whichever alternative state of reality one is in ...



As you say, in that mind-blowing instant of 'knowing' that Maddie 'had been taken' why would one use the word 'her' and not her name?


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:00 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Hi Brit and thanks :D<" title="Imbratisare" v:shapes="_x0000_i1456" border="0" width="42" height="18">


Speaking on Spanish TV, Susan said: "Kate rang me and said, 'She's gone mum, she's gone,' the night Madeleine disappeared.


There is a terrible air of finality to those words, from someone who was just broken, frozen, sat on her bed, could not move and insisting she wanted a priest. Kate knew "they" had taken her IMO, and that she could not have her back, but I still have this awful feeling that little Maddie was taken alive. Kate sounds to me as though she is absolutely wracked with guilt and horror, Madeleine knows I love, I love her...

I just get this horrible feeling that Madeleine is "secreted away" as Mrs Justice Hogg so solemnly put it, the same lady who pondered about this "one person". I just have a distinct feeling I know what she meant...


added:

I think she uses that strange word "they" because she knows who they are but she is simply not allowed to say...and taken means off on a boat, goodbye..


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:06 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

rainbowwarrior wrote:

I wonder what Kate's first words were when she found Maddie was missing. These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. Her first words would have been spoken in the appt, or just outside.
Wonder what they were.



Hello Mum :D<" title="Imbratisare" v:shapes="_x0000_i1464" border="0" width="42" height="18">

I was wondering when you would arrive ;;)

Edited:

What do you think Kate meant exactly, when she said "she's gone mum"



Last edited by viv on Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

Brit Abroad

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:07 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:58 am
Posts: 1731

Quote:

rainbowwarrior wrote:

I wonder what Kate's first words were when she found Maddie was missing. These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. Her first words would have been spoken in the appt, or just outside.
Wonder what they were.



"These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. " .... actually there are inconsistencies in the witness statements as to WHERE and WHEN Kate uttered these words.

Did she even "arrive back" at the Tapas bar? And what time was M discovered to be missing? and the alarm raised? There is actually no concensus if you compare the statements of the Tapasniks to those of the Tapas staff, other diners and nannies.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

DIBarlow

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:08 pm

Mafia Boss


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:25 pm
Posts: 2248

Miss Pennington wrote:

"We get missing children all the time, and I have seen plenty of hysterical mothers. But none of them were like Kate."


Sometimes even the most simple of statements can be quite telling.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

Brit Abroad

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:10 pm

Hardened Criminal

User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:58 am
Posts: 1731

Quote:

Viv wrote:

There is a terrible air of finality to those words, from someone who was just broken, frozen, sat on her bed, could not move and insisting she wanted a priest. Kate knew "they" had taken her IMO, and that she could not have her back, ........



Sadly, it would seem to be so.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

zodiac

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:14 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:49 pm
Posts: 650

rainbowwarrior wrote: 'I wonder what Kate's first words were when she found Maddie was missing. These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. Her first words would have been spoken in the appt, or just outside.
Wonder what they were.'


Well I would hope her first words would be calling out for the daughter that was supposedly missing.


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:17 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Been a few weeks since you have been on here mum21:


Forum: Maddie McCann - The Way Ahead - Maddie's Voice Topic: Did Gerry abduct Maddie?
rainbowwarrior
Post subject: Re: Did Gerry abduct Maddie?
Posted: Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:54 pm

Replies: 50
Views: 1843


Skeptical wrote:
rainbowwarrior :

If you're really concerned, it would be best your asking viv that on the other blog, wouldn't you think ?


That would be a very reasonable thing to do but Viv's blog is strictly limited to those who totally agree with her .


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

rainbowwarrior

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:19 pm

New In Town


Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:45 pm
Posts: 73

[

Quote:

quote="zodiac"]rainbowwarrior wrote: 'I wonder what Kate's first words were when she found Maddie was missing. These words were spoken as she arrived back at the tapas bar. Her first words would have been spoken in the appt, or just outside.
Wonder what they were.'


Well I would hope her first words would be calling out for the daughter that was supposedly missing.

[/quote]


Well perhaps they were.
Viv, I do not want to get into a round of pathetic name calling (something you have had a lot of practice with) but I am not Mum


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private messageE-mail

Reply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:22 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

We are not doing any pathetic name calling on here, we are looking at the anguish of Kate McCann, why do you think she said to her mum:

"she has gone mum"?


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

viv

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:26 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

DI Barlow: "Miss Pennington"]"We get missing children all the time, and I have seen plenty of hysterical mothers. But none of them were like Kate."
Sometimes even the most simple of statements can be quite telling.
Viv
Kate knew that Maddie was not merely missing, she had gone, she said so herself, they have taken her. Pity Kate cannot get around to finally admitting who "they" are because that is clearly the key to the mystery of little Maddie McCann, her daughter..


Report this post

Top

Profile Send private message

Edit postReply with quote

zodiac

Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:29 pm

First Time Offender


Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:49 pm
Posts: 650

rainbowwarrior wrote: 'Well perhaps they were.'

FFS perhaps! Her child was supposed to be missing from her bed do you not think she would call out for her? Or maybe her first words were used with the presence of mind on her mobile to cancel her shopping!


Report this post

viv

WELL WE AND OUR COLLEAGUES ON 3 ARGUIDOS BEG TO DIFFER!



Post subject: Re: ANY LIVERPUDLIAN BLOGGERS ABOUT

New postPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:32 pm

Local Lag


Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 872

Maybe we are just being completely illogical here Zodiac, let us put ourselves in kate's place of course you would not scream Madeleine, Madeleine, you would just scream "they have taken her" all within five minutes according to Nanny Pennington who is convinced she is completely innocent, of course.


29 comments:

nancy said...

Hi Viv - thanks for that thread, although I had been reading it myself yesterday.

If it is true Kate's words were:

"They've taken her" - as I've said before, if you have two daughters, you wouldn't scream out 'they've taken her' - you would scream out the name so everyone knows who you are talking about.

If I was one of the group she was screaming at, I would respond with "they've taken who Kate?" or "whose been taken?".

What you would scream out is -

"Gerry, come quickly, Maddie's gone and I can't find her" - perhaps hoping against hope that she had wandered off. So everyone would get up and help search the immediate area for Maddie.

"They've taken her" suggests that those she was talking to must have known who she was talking about!

As for the Liverpudlian's saying 'they' instead of he or she - I don't see what difference that makes because it still doesn't explain who 'her' is does it?

I still think that is one of the more incriminating utterances if it is true.

viv said...

Hiya Nancy

I think a lot of people have been following this one judging by the views on 3 As and just thought I wanted to record it here as well because it is such a fundamental issue in this case and one that demonstrates guilty knowledge and planning beyond any doubt.

It is amazing the thread is still running and the quality of many of the comments are very high, a really helpful read.

Gerry quick, Maddie is missing, yes that sort of thing, normal, nothing normal about Kate and Gerry, as we know.

Poor Maddie and her little brother and sister born into this horror and one massive bloody fund!

xx

bath theory said...

My issue is with the 'her' as well. Kate had two daughters and thus she would instinctively name the child who it was.

'They have taken Madeleine' or
'They have taken Amelie'

In order for 'They have taken her' to stand up in my opinion then the McCanns would have had to have had a specific threat that Madeleine and specifically Madeleine was in danger of being taken. If that was the case then they would have mentioned this to Amaral etc and those specific people would have been hunted down and charged.

Given the above comments it is my understanding :) that what she stated as her first few words was designed to completely slant any investigation to believe an abduction to have taken place from the off. It could also be a clever use of words because she may well know a group of adults did take her and thus feel she is telling the truth from her perspective.

In any case GCHQ would have taped them and know all about the text messages etc so a group of people in UK will know exactly what happened that night. Gaining evidence to convict guilty criminals is not easy is it in these days of rasied consciousness of how one can defend oneself.

Time will tell all when Brown leaves office.

bath theory said...

Why when he leaves ? because he is obsessed by ego. That is why he cannot simply say sorry and cannot bear to admit he has gone down dodgy angles. Better to brazen everything out and ensure he is not humiliated yet again in his unelected stay as head of our country. He is a laughing stock abroad amongst everyone I know who do not even realise us British have had no say in him taking over the helm. It is such a shame spitting image is no longer around

viv said...

Hiya BT!

I think you summed things up very well here: They do say the best lies are based on the truth and when they have repeatedly insisted she was taken from her bed etc, and "they have taken her" this was certainly based on reality IMO.

Now whilst I can definitely agree Gordy would make a fantastic spitting image puppet and cannot agree on the rest. IMO he was approached by a schemer who got himself right to the top, that is what they were all about that night, and Gordy simply felt sorry for him, naturally and said he would do his best to help, unwise perhaps but if you had the wailing Gerry on the other end of the phone how would you have reacted, certainly at that stage they clearly just had to be given the benefit of the doubt. We have now read how Rachel Oldfield was immediately ringing her Chief Political Correspondent for the BBC friend, this just stinks of them trying to firmly embed an abduction by stranger no more than that, having Gordy on side was bound to be a tad helpful. If Gordy was on side would they still be getting the stick they are now or would he have made an announcement in the Commons all this speculation and nastiness about the McCanns just has to stop, they have suffered enough! Maybe he would even have got MI5 to put me down:-)))

slant any investigation to believe an abduction to have taken place from the off. It could also be a clever use of words because she may well know a group of adults did take her and thus feel she is telling the truth from her perspective.

viv said...

Copying from other thread as think they are helpful to this issue, perverting the course of justice as they were obviously doing just like Rhys Jones killer's rotten mother, and showing no emotion, just like rotten psycho Foxy Knoxy.

hope4truth said...

Perverting the course of justice is a serious matter...

"The mother of Rhys Jones's killer has been warned she faces jail after admitting lying to police investigating the schoolboy's murder."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7892457.stm

It really is not worth lying for people is it...
Monday, 16 February 2009 22:35:00 o'clock GMT
viv said...

What a terrible woman Hope, I just cannot believe people could do this, if I had sat with one of my son's in a police interview and heard this I would have just broke down and sobbed to think my son could do such a terrible thing, when she gets 4 years *or thereabouts, I would say*, she will sorry the wicked cruel woman, prolonging the terrible misery for parents who lost their lovely little boy:

Mrs Mercer admitted being present in a police interview with her son when he claimed he did not own a bike which matched the description of the one officers were looking for.

She was later involved in the negotiations with an insurance company to replace her son's bike, but did not tell police.

She also admitted lying to police in a statement she made in September 2007 when she claimed her son only owned one bike and that she had no idea how long he owned it for.
Monday, 16 February 2009 23:19:00 o'clock GMT
viv said...

It also goes to show how wicked people think they are conning the police but over time, the police are merely building a case against them...who do they think they are!!
Monday, 16 February 2009 23:21:00 o'clock GMT
viv said...

Witnesses said Knox did not appear distressed and was cuddling Sollecito at the police station while waiting to be questioned.

"I found Amanda's behaviour very strange and I found it quite difficult to be around her," said Robyn Carmel Butterworth, a prosecution witness who was a friend of the victim.

"Everybody was upset and she didn't seem to show any emotions. We were all crying. I didn't see her crying."

The witness said Knox and Sollecito were fooling around as they waited to see police.

"I remember Amanda sticking her tongue out at Raffaele," the British witness said. "They were talking and joking, kissing and cuddling."

Rudy Guede in court

Guilty: Rudy Guede

Amy Frost, another witness who was also at the police station, said Knox "made faces," such as crossing her eyes and sticking her tongue out. She was "giggling" and kissing Sollecito, said Frost.

Wizard said...

Why did Kate McCann say ‘they’ve taken her’ it’s very simple. As you know I believe Madeleine was already dead before the Mc’s went to dinner. However she died it would have been traumatic for both parents, add to this the fact they try to conceal what happened and stage an abduction. They would have been highly emotionally charged, nervous and desperate. Kate was chosen to raise the alarm imo because it looked less threatening if a woman does so. Kate has had to sit in the apartment going through how best to stage this horrendous event then has to sit for a further hour and a half at the tapis bar making small talk, continually wondering if anyone is detecting any thing odd about her behaviour and no doubt having a number of drinks for Dutch courage. At 10.00pm she leaves to return to the apartment to stage the finding and announce it. Well quite frankly it was a little too much for her and perhaps she had also a little too much to drink - quite simply she fluffed her lines. She was looking to Gerry for support when she makes “they’ve taken her” statement, who knew exactly what she was talking about, but alas she temporarily forgot this announcement was for a wider audience.

Kate couldn’t do any searching that night because she was physically, mentally and emotionally drained by the events leading up to raising the alarm. We are told by witnesses Kate couldn’t walk and couldn’t string a sentence together shortly after she raised the alarm which they note as unusual. What they were viewing imo was nervous exhaustion and her system shutting down due not to an abduction but the death of her daughter and the staging that followed. It amazes me she pulled it off with only fluffing a few lines.

bath theory said...

Here Here Wizard jolly well said

hope4truth said...

Hello

I think she messed her lines up as well the whole thing is sickening but hey they have to live with the lies and with perverting the course of justice being high in the news at the moment their friends must be feeling very ill at the moment as well...

All it takes is for one of them to crack or M3 to tell all (which looks like it is happening) and goodbye freedom for all those who have knowingly lied for them..

viv said...

Phew, according to witnesses Gerry was at his jovial best at dinner, that must make him one heck of a psycho, particularly if Maddie was already dead. I think we will have to wait for the police to tell us, but they will, in the end!

I do agree though that Kate's described reaction is like her shutting down in deep shock and despair, she had already used up all her adrenaline and must have been in a terrible state.

We have a really good independent witness Ms Batista that she just sat on her bed, that is the truth!

viv said...

Aha, another great blow for sound common sense from one of my favourite posters on 3 As, Weary, so are the Mucks getting any help from the government, you bet, go to jail, do not pass go, do not..(!) In short just as much help as any other child abusing money grabbers..but this investigation is costing the government a heck of a lot more than average, and has damaged relations with Portugal and that will not make them best pleased with the Mucks! Are the government bailing them out, well does it look like it! Keep running back to your lawyer in Portugal Gerry, that will not shut anyone up, you had it mate!

Weary wrote:
I spent more years at a university than you could shake a stick at, and I didn't meet people who became movers and shakers, or people whose relatives are movers and shakers. Maybe they were different. If they knew powerful people who were able to sweep everything under the carpet they wouldn't have been left with an irritating blowhard like Clarence, who came to be despised by the press, and the McCanns would have held Madeleine Day, never have been named arguidos, no DVD incriminating them would have been released, Murat would be behind bars, and Kate would be the head of a Centre for Missing and Exploited Children.

If Gordon Brown was asked why he championed the McCanns and he looked uncomfortable and said "Friends in common" it may just have been a politician's embarrassment at having tried to get some good PR for himself by aligning himself with people Britons adulated at first but later turned on. In some two years of the MF and 3A's, I don't remember anyone giving a clear indication of who these friends-in-common are. Brown was trying to avoid answering "Yes, why DID I try to hitch my wagon to these people who turned out to be pond scum? Because I made a stupid choice and backed the wrong horse." He's hardly likely to say "Well, at first they had my pity but later I got very, very suspicious" any more than any other celebrity who bailed on them has said that.

Instead of looking like the innocent parents of a child who was snatched, despite their sterling care of her, the McCanns have lost all but a lunatic fringe of their admirers and are a little more popular than the delusional narcissist who had eight babies a couple of weeks back. (She thought everybody would think she was a great mother too. It hasn't worked out as she planned.) When the PJ asked the McCanns and T7 to return to Portugal and they refused we heard all about it. Social Services made a visit to the McCanns shortly after they returned home, right in front of the press. Murat's arguido status was dropped and he has stopped being hounded, but the public like the McCanns less and less the more we know about them. Kate seems so uncomfortable in a world of people who don't admire her that we don't hear of her leaving the house often.

The case against them was shelved, not dismissed, and a DVD full of information that tends to make it clear that the McCanns lied and can't keep their stories straight was lobbed straight into the hands of the press. The McCanns had plans to make a bundle by suing everybody who looked at 'em funny, but they haven't been able to mount a successful in-court suit (and I suspect they tried very hard.) They were also going to make money off of a book, TV show, and movie (just like that nut job who had IVF to get her 14 kids) but they can't, because as long as the DVD is out there, they can't lie about what they did, how little they checked, and how sleazy they look. If they had really powerful friends they'd be sitting pretty, making even more money off Madeleine, and seen as Parents of the Decade. I don't think they really have powerful friends. They had well-wishers who latched onto them when they still looked like decent people whose child had been snatched from under their noses.

Wizard said...

Following my earlier post I think Gerry, who imo was orchestrating the alleged abduction, didn’t do much searching either that night because his main priority was to be with his wife to ensure she didn’t crack and spill the beans. I think this is the most logical reason as they must have known not to search would look very odd.

Viv – witnesses say Gerry was very jovial at dinner, well imo he was just a more convincing actor than his wife. We know he compartmentalises so he was probably able to carry this part of the plan off by hamming it up. Nerves affect people in different ways.

viv said...

Hi Wiz

I copy below extract of that really helpful stmt of Ms Batista a senior employee who the police interviewed several times, her evidence is vital to this case IMO.

As you say she paints a very clear picture of Gerry the action man going into the bedroom with the police and glibly inventing a quick lie as to why he tampered with an apparent major crime scene. He says he closed the windows and shutter again because the twins were sleeping in there. It just could not be much more bizarre really, could it? They immediately know Maddie has been abducted from that room and rather than leaving it completely untouched and removing the twins, they put the windows and shutters back down. Gerry McCann you are the worlds most pathetic liar!

Whilst he, Payne, OB, Rachel are all racing around putting things into place and ringing the press, Kate sits there on her bed, devastated, frozen. Now that could be because she killed Madeleine and Gerry is just putting everything right for her, there is no doubt about that, but I seriously have my doubts as to whether that is the reality. Did she have this fear, this premonition about going because she thought she may do that? I will continue to think she may be unfairly copping the flack for all of this, it is where I started out and I am still struggling to move from that position. Because I see two people and one I see in a much worse light than another. She is ill, distraught and distressed, him never!


When she came close to the elements of the GNR she found that behind her was
Gerry, Madeleine's father, accompanied by another man whose identity she doesn't remember. Then Geny kneeled down, hit the floor with both hands, positioning himself as if he were a praying Arab, and screamed twice of anger, what he said being impossible to understand. Then Gerry stand up and accompanied her (the witness) and the other man in the car of the GNR to the apartment A5. SO IT WOULD APPEAR GERRY PUT ON A FIT OF HISTRIONICS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE GNR

She entered the apartment and asked for the passports of all elements of the family, and also photographs of the missing girl. She went with Gerry to the GNR car to hand over the requested documents. SO IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH PHOTOGRAPHS OF MADDIE WERE IMMEDIATELY HANDED OVER, HOW COME HE HAD THOSE?

She mentions she did this, as well as other tasks, at the request of the GNR Commandant, because she could translate their questions and the missing girl's family's answers.
She remembers Gerry gave the Commandant of several photographs of the missing girl. They were postcard-like pictures, taking into account their size and shape and seemed all the same to her.


She understood also that since the very beginning either Gerry or the others insisted on stating that Madeleine had been snatched, all using the word "abducted" instead of missing, and all showing much interest in informing the press of the situation.

She also recalls entering in the room where Madeleine should be sleeping and remembers now that the door was closed. The room was dark. The blinds were down, some light entering through their holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who followed her and the elements of the GNR, said he did close the window because of the babies sleeping in the room, a fact she confirms.
Gerry said that when he discovered the disappearance of Madeleine he noticed that the window and the blinds were open and the curtains fluttering.
She recalls that the beds which were in the middle of the room and used by the babies
were aligned and therefore found it strange that someone had taken Madeleine from the bed where she would be sleeping and had gone to the window because there was no space to pass.
She opened the wardrobes of that room in order to confirm that Madeleine wasn't eventually hiding there.
Then everyone left the room and someone shut the door. She remained for some time in the living room, near the GNR elements, Gerry and other elements of the group
who got in and out and spoke on their cellular phones.

She observed that none of the elements of the group including the father and mother of the child was concerned with looking for her.

The mother was sitting on the bed of her room, the father was with her (the witness) and the elements of the GNR, and other elements of the group got in and out
and spoke on the phone, anxious, in her opinion, to tell the press what happened.

She thought that the child's mother was devastated, the father was worried and
also asked to notify the press and to get dogs to search.
About the others she only remembers that Fiona and her husband, Payne, were hysterical with the situation.


At a certain time, after the arrival of the PJ elements, the parents removed the twins from the beds in which they were still sleeping and took them to the first floor flat.

At the request of Kate she (the witness) to remove their puppets (CUDDLECATS??) drink and a blanket that she took to the first floor flat. Only the mattresses remained.

She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest. ONE CAN SERIOUSLY UNDERSTAND GONCALO AMARAL'S THINKING HERE!

Wizard said...

Well Viv – Gerry says he closed the window in the children’s room – what was he wearing gloves- the only finger prints found on that window were Kate’s.

Wizard said...

‘Then Gerry kneeled down, hit the floor with both hands, positioning himself as if he were a praying Arab, and screamed twice of anger, what he said being impossible to understand.’
A good example of hamming it up imo.

viv said...

Well exactly Wiz, he did not close the window and shutter because they were never open!

viv said...

Hi Wiz

Kate is a very good suspect as they say, there is no doubt about that! But she was covered in bruises and Gerry and Philomena were immediately pointing the finger at her and saying how unbalance she is. I think she is unbalanced because she is married to him! I am always going to feel the need to defend her to an extent, I just cannot help that because I see very clearly what she is married to.


xx

Wizard said...

Viv – I think Gerry has proved his is a control freak – that of course may only be the half of it.

viv said...

sex offenders are invariably terrible control freaks..I think he destroys an awful lot of things including what was formerly a bright bubbly intelligent woman, jmo..

viv said...

Kate repeatedly sobbing according to Mrs Fenn "we have let her down" .. guilt, despair, remorse.

What we have never seen from Gerry McCann is anything the least bit normal, just like that!

xx

Wizard said...

Viv – I think you could be right. It wouldn’t surprise me if Kate was not doing as she was told, hence the bruises. High stakes and the control freak loses control.

viv said...

Wiz

One of the most classic injuries on domestic violence victims are grab marks to the arms, which Kate most clearly had.

The control freak is grabbing hold of the woman and telling her in no uncertain terms exactly what she must think, say and do. I think this case is so terrible she knows she will go down for a long time as well for failure to protect Maddie from serious harm. She is in an agonising situation IMO.

The Fund, Gerry's baby, and what matters most of all to a control freak, wealth, fame, fortune.

xx

Wizard said...

I would think, and of course I’m only speculating, that the hold he has over Kate is the twins. If she doesn’t keep to the script she would never have the care of the twins again. A very strong argument to a mother who has just lost one child and a fear that would certainly make her toe the line.

viv said...

Hiya Wiz

Well obviously yes if she does not keep her mouth shut she loses the twins as well and I am sure he would not hesitate to point that out, him being such a nice chap. Prison and losing the twins, he has got her where he wants her but if she was really smart she would take him on because the prison he has her in is even worse and there is no end of term!

xx

viv said...

Please see link to this thread last year, McCanns being investigated in respect of two scenarios involving both kidnapping and homicide and the fact the Times wrote a report suggesting they were only being investigated for neglect. Clarence Mitchell glibly announced he was pleased abduction was being looked at, what he forgot to mention is abduction the McCanns themselves were involved in! When insisting on only looking at the death in the apt scenario people seem to have overlooked this!

http://justiceformaddie.blogspot.com/2008/06/kidnapping-murder-concealment-of-corpse.html

bath theory said...

A smart move for Kate would be to get her own lawyer discreetly and tell all, and mitigate circumstances by also being frank about their relationship if such bruising and psychological bullying is/was taking place. He is unlikely to woe a jury with his complete lack of charm and rather sinister air.

bath theory said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wizard said...

An interesting comment from Jon Clements Mirror crime reporter.

Who was listening to Kate and Gerry McCann ?
BY JON CLEMENTS ON FEB 18, 09 02:55 PM IN DAILY MIRROR
A few days ago I received an interesting letter from Leicestershire police about the Madeleine McCann investigation.
I had asked them, in July, if they had got any warrants (under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) to use surveillance powers - such as phone tapping and email interception on behalf of the Portuguese police.
The force initially stalled saying it needed to "consult other Agencies" before replying.
After a six month delay, Leicestershire has now claimed it is exempt from Freedom of Information laws in this case due to "national security".
I've put in dozens of FoI requests to police forces over the years, some you get and some you don't but "national security" is a new one on me.
To make matters even murkier, Leicestershire claimed a second exemption because the information I requested could relate to "the Security bodies".
A quick look at the FoI Act reveals "Security bodies" are MI5, MI6, GCHQ (pictured above), special forces (such as the SAS) and the Serious Organised Crime Agency.
Hmm.
Despite claiming these exemptions, Leicestershire seem at pains to neither confirm nor deny they hold any information relevant to my request anyway.
Check out (slowly I suggest) the tortuous conclusion to the three page letter explaining their stance.
"It is our decision that the Leicestershire Constabulary must maintain a position of neither confirming nor denying that any relevant information is held and that this response, which neither confirms nor denies that information is held, should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the information you have requested exists or does not exist".
Thanks, but I think that is a rather long-winded way of saying Foxtrot Oscar.
However, it does beg the question just who was bugging the McCanns after they returned from Praia da Luz ? And what has the answer got to do with national security ?
Link
http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/anything-you-say/2009/02/who-was-listening-to-kate-and.html

viv said...

Hiya BT

If Kate wants to grasp the nettle I get the feeling she may not have too much longer to think about that. She would be very wise to do so IMO and greatly mitigate any penalty, with a really good QC of course!

Wizard

Well it might be very quiet on here but what a fantastic piece of news and thank you so much for bringing it to me but I only just got back home.

I think it just once again confirms everything I have been trying to say but many people did not want to believe me. Is it so bad to actually believe Maddie may be alive, I do not think so.
Gerry recently stated that finally he wanted to co-operate with the authorities in the search for Maddie, I am convinced that search is on, in earnest and the McCanns, yes I am going to say it again, are in big, big trouble.

JUSTICE FOR MADDIE!


XXXX