24 Jun 2011

WHAT DO KATE AND GERRY TELL US BY THE LOOK ON THEIR FACES? SHE LOVES THIS MAN??

OR SHE LOVES MAKING MONEY OUT OF MADDIE JUST AS MUCH AS HIM? JUNE 2011 AMSTERDAM ON A BOOK PROMOTIONAL TOUR....SUDDENLY THIS PICTURE WENT WHOOSH CLUNK OFF THE DAILY EXPRESS, ODD THAT! 































21 comments:

Di said...

Hi Viv

How interesting to see all these pictures together. They have always looked so uneasy in each others company.

I think Gerry will do anything to save his own skin and perhaps Kate well knows this. Her comment, it's me they are after, after being interviewed by the PJ. Why when she realised this, did she not fully cooperate with the PJ, imo any innocent person would, unless she feared Gerry more.

Welcome Mar.

viv said...

Hiya Di, Wiz and Mar if you are looking in, Wow now we are four!!

I do completely agree with you, Gerry has been setting Kate up from the early stages, clearly using Philomena and her predictably big mouth until she outlived her usefullness and who knows realised she was being used.

I do think she fears him and the harm he can cause to her and her children far more than anything else. To me she looks like some conditioned robot on many of those pictures and I would not be surprised if that is what she is. Gerry just alters her meds accordingly.

viv said...

Hiya again

That picture in Rothley where GErry has got action man and something else stuck in his pockets and strides in front of Kate with that sick smirk for the cameras. I just find him so calculating and repulsive.

If Kate steps out of line she gets one of those looks...

Mar said...

It must have been really tough on Kate with three children under four to look after and a husband who (allegedly) didn't help very much at all. I can see why she would resent him and eventually suffer from depression. Heck, I sometimes resent my husband and he's a very hands on Dad and we've only got one child!

Children do test a relationship and I could imagine them rowing about childcare and drifting apart as a result.

I read somewhere back in 2007 that he was allegedly having an affair and that the holiday was 'make or break' for them - which would explain his odd remark 'I'm not here to enjoy myself'. This might just be Internet rumour though.

Gerry does come across as unfeeling and very controlling. I've always found him slightly repulsive actually, can't quite put my finger on why. I can barely watch them in action to be honest and avoid their interviews and tv appearences like the plague. They have an amazing ability to put me in a terrible mood LOL.

Kate is throwing him a right look in that first pic but Isabel Duarte isn't holding back either LOL.

viv said...

Hiya Mar

I agree the constant IVF treatment would have affected her hormones, she was not young, as mums go and two two year olds and a boisterous three year old would test the youngest and most resilient of mums.

Without a supportive husband and being ill right through the pregnancy with the twins whilst in Amsterdam, confined to bed, it is little wonder she became unwell and unable to work again.

I had not heard of him having an affair with anyone and always found that remark sinister, "I am not here to enjoy myself". But, to a man like Gerry, he may simply have meant, how can I get my me time and enjoy my sports when I will have her nagging at me she needs hand with the kids. The McCanns actually paid extra to put their kids in the creche all day, only the morning session was included in the price paid. I have always wondered if she left the children at night simply because he insisted that is what they should do. For more sinister reasons or just because he could not see the reason to fork out for a babysitter I am sure London Met will eventually find out. But I would imagine they already know what happened, it will be more a question of getting the right evidence together to put a coherent and bullet proof case before the court - unless of course Maddie was stranger abducted. Given all their lies and the complete lack of evidence of that, I find that impossible to believe.

You are right about that first pic, the solicitor too, it is a look of horror almost. Just because ID acts for them, that does not mean she has to like them. But the body language in other pics I have looked at, tells me that ID does like Kate and Kate feels safe and comfortable with her. ID is obviously a very clever lady and I am sure she knows so much more than we do.

viv said...

If I recall correctly ID said something about terrible pictures of Madeleine on the file. She seemed to be implying they were showing child abuse and that it may well be Madeleine.

Lawyers can choose to act for all sorts of reasons. Maybe she knows what a terrible situation this is and knows that one party is an awful lot more guilty than the other. The other is in fact vulnerable and needs a lot of help, that could make ID feel she wants to support Kate in this way. What made Gerry rush off, I know the obvious one is he was losing it badly, things were being said that he never intended anyone to hear.

Lee Rainbow suggested him as the homicide suspect not Kate. Mr Menezes said they could have been charged with kidnap and trafficking Madeleine. But did Gerry also feel that maybe this lawyer was not really helping him and on his side also. I think if that is what he felt he would probably be right about that.

viv said...

Maybe the only thing you can simply says about the pair of them as they tout their latest Maddie money spinning venture, four years later, with a huge toothy grin is PARENTS FROM HELL.

viv said...

I was doing a bit of reading on David Bret, he hates homophobia and he hates his adoptive father. He also hates racism.

His printed opinion on what happened in this case is bland, because, like others, he cannot say what he really thinks.

Mar said...

Hi Viv, on the subject of David Bret, didn't he also say that Gerry was knocking Kate about and that she was terrified of him? I don't know about Gerry abusing her, it's a serious allegation to make, but I do see a little bit of what he's talking about in that pic of them leaving the studio (the one where he's wearing the blue tie and Kate is following behind, grabbing his hand).

He has such a determined and sinister look on his face in that pic and she just looks like a frightened little child following behind. In fact, in most of the pix you have posted I see fear in her face when she's looking at him. Perhaps I'm imagining it though.

It's interesting also what he claims the editor of the Express told him. He is 'indirectly involved' in the Gaspars case (didn't know there was a 'case' though) and therfore they can't print anything. How does that sound to you? I can see it as a reason for the press to be cautious about what they print, but it certainly doesn't explain why they have been falling over themselves to please the McCanns for four years.

He seems to be infering that paedophilia could perhaps be a key element in the case and that the PJ know that. I'm not sure what to make of that. I mean, wouldn't the PJ have charged him a long time ago if that was the case? Would they let a suspected paedophile roam free? I don't know. Every time I read about this case I end up feeling sick in the pit of my stomach.

All in all, very interesting revelations coming from this David Bret character, if they are accurate that is!

viv said...

Hiya Mar

I have always thought that he displayed the typical persona of a domineering wife beater and she displays a lot of characteristics of an abused and frightened wife.

I think Kate is a cross between tough and intelligent and downtrodden and frightened, there may be just a little fight left in her, hence the book? Sometimes though I confess to thinking she is just as sick and scheming as him, but usually I get back to thinking no she is not.

I found it odd that a year later, at the rogatories, Fiona Payne, Kate's mate gives reasons as to why she was covered in bruises at the time. She was banging walls etc with anger. But I do not think so. She had a split over her eye and grab marks all down her arms and a large bruise on the one elbow, those are not self inflicted wounds.

She travelled away to New Zealand to work and he followed her, again that is typical of a man who has seen a woman that he is determined to possess and to control, by stalking her.

I think this is also the sort of man who would abuse little girls.

The Gaspar statements are not something, IMO, the PJ could have investigated and prosecuted. It refers to events prior to them even being in Portugal but may well be relevant to what was happening there. If they are part of a paedophile ring it is entirely understandable British Police would be very tight lipped about it, as they clearly have been.

I also think it is understandable they wanted Goncalo off the case given he was talking to the press. His replacement Rebelo, was not only the sole of discretion, he cracked the paedophile case in Portugal CAsa Pia and so may have been considered the ideal man to put in charge of the Portugal end of this case.

I believe this case has always had to be a joint effort but UK will prosecute it because there are so many elements of it that Portugal just could not deal with.

I think the press know they are absolutely barred from writing anything at all about the ongoing police investigation or what it is about, but will continue to write McCann crap, because it sells. I also think the Daily Express are playing with Kate and Gerry, putting some rather risque comments and pictures in but certainly not going far enough to give them another libel victory.

viv said...

Mar, I would also just say the police know of an awful lot of suspected paedophiles who they allow to roam free. Short of sufficient evidence to actually convict them all the police can do is keep an eye on them, but trust me, they do.

Getting sufficient evidence against offenders who choose to drug and abuse tiny children can be a very difficult task. But they are the sort of offenders the police will never give up on convicting.

Mar said...

Thanks Viv, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I really hope SY/Met get to the bottom of this, don't really want to think 'whitewash' that's too depressing to contemplate!

I know what you mean about Kate, thinking her the victim one minute and manipulative and scheming the next.

I certainly have no sympathy for her whatsoever. Whatever her personal circumstances she should have protected Madeleine, be it from an abduction or from something worse.

And if she is indeed covering up something sinister of her own doing or somebody else's then there are really no words. Being afraid of Gerry, if that's the case, really is no excuse. She should do the right thing by her daughter and tell the truth once and for all.

I really do think she's as bad as him. She *might* be the weaker half but still just as bad IMO.

viv said...

Thanks Mar, I just do not think I could add to your comments other than to say I could not agree more!

xxx

viv said...

I see "Brenda Ryan" former proprietor of the 3 Arguidos has thrown a hissy fit and admitted what I have known for a very long time, she is a Pro McCann just like her former stable mate "Bonnybraes".

But there are still many die hard doggy fans who do not want to admit they have been had or that they were posting on a site intended to show the "antis" up for being a bunch of stupid "haters", some of them are worthy of that title, IMO. They never have been concerned about what happened to little Maddie or searching for the truth, they have been more concerned to write their sick theories about Madeleine's body and insist she is dead, not that they can know that for a fact of course, they just tell us it is a fact because Tony Bennett says so or Goncalo Amaral or or or...how utterly sickening.

Di said...

Hi Viv & Mar

Well said Mar, totally agree.

Interesting Viv, thanks for the info re: Brenda.

viv said...

Hiya Di

I am pretty certain this spin has been to portray the image it was all a bit of an accident, neglect, Bren always slated the police and CEOP and told us the dogs confirmed Maddie died an "accidental" death. Nasty piece of work. There is nothing accidental about anything the scheming McCanns do IMO.

viv said...

The picture of Kate and Gerry above, recent, she is holding the Maddie book in pretty pink floral dress and cardy.

Her arm goes across the back of Gerry as though in an embrace, but notice the open hand sticking out? I do not think she can bear to touch him. She even looks as though she is trying to flinch away from him.

I wonder how long it will take London Met? It could be weeks or years, we just do not know but I am sure they intend to get a result now.

viv said...

Speaking exclusively to mccannfiles.com today, Gonçalo Amaral revealed the reasoning behind the decision.

He said: "I want you to know that I made the decision to get paid for any interview given to any British media, but that doesn't apply to anywhere else in the world.

"Its quite simple. I have given so many "free" interviews to the British media that were never published. They were censored and thrown to the trash. Next time they do it, I'm sure they will think twice about the money they pay."

-----

but a real police investigation into what really happened is always "censored".

Mar said...

That's a fair point Viv but Goncalo isn't part of the investigation anymore.

I can understand his reluctance to give his time for free if what he has to say never makes it to print anyway. Or if it does it's only to discredit him and his theory further.

I don't understand why he would bother to talk to the British media anyway (other than to make money), he's flogging a dead horse.

viv said...

Hiya Mar

I think British Police would have complained about him very strongly when he spoke to the media and asked for his removal from the case.

I have to confess I do not approve of police officers who talk to the media, unless there is a specific reason for that and they are authorised to do so. It can alert suspects and harm the investigation.

I like Goncalo, I think he is a maverick who does not suffer "rules" too easily and wants to do things his own way. But I just do not believe he really has any serious faith in that particular theory. At best I think he is making sure the public answer back to the McCanns and they suffer the way they made him suffer.

Of course there is no point in him talking to the British press, they will only print what they are legally allowed to print and what they know will sell papers. I do think it is appalling that in doing so they created a racist divide between UK and Portugal. In the world of the real investigation I do not believe that divide actually exists. I believe officers like Stu Prior at Leicester and Ricardo Paiva in Portugal are all very hungry for just one thing, locking them up for what IMO they planned to do to little Maddie on that "holiday" which they, beyond any doubt, excluded their children from so they could cry "stranger abduction".

viv said...

Hiya again Mar, Goncalo does say in his book that he made unfortunate comments to the media about British Police and that is what caused his removal from the case.

British Police know that if they do that they can be prosecuted for breaching the Official Secrets Act and of course disciplined and dismissed from the force.

Interestingly, on the files there are details of a British Officer who was talking to Murat, I am willing to bet he found himself in very hot water for that, regardless of whether or not Murat actually is involved in her disappearance. Had he been, that officer could have put Maddie's life at risk.