journolud
Well-Known Member
Finished watching this tonight.
Before I give my two penn’orth what’s BM’s view re the cadaver dogs / blood / corpse in the cupboard bit of the evidence?
Its hardly been covered. Why don't you start us off.
Finished watching this tonight.
Before I give my two penn’orth what’s BM’s view re the cadaver dogs / blood / corpse in the cupboard bit of the evidence?
The first thing is what the dog handler said - the positive indications given by the dogs are not enough to make a case but must be used in conjunction with other supporting evidence, the dogs give a possible lead or further areas of enquires (or words to that effect).Finished watching this tonight.
Before I give my two penn’orth what’s BM’s view re the cadaver dogs / blood / corpse in the cupboard bit of the evidence?
It’s ‘moot’ point ;)
Somebody has access to their accounts as folk have been posting them in this very thread today.
Somebody would be advising them which route to go down in the first instance as they wouldn’t have had a clue of charity vs PLC.
I tend not to get drawn into the fund as it’s pointless with regard to the Madeline mystery.
I also own a decent sized business and I have been shown by many accountants over the years how to “play the game” to minimise my tax liabilities and to maximise my income. I genuinely believe if more people knew the mechanisms of acceptable business practices they wouldn’t be that bothered about the administration of the fund as lots of businesses behave in the same way, the only issue for me if folk want to cry foul could be why not a charity like you’ve said. I don’t think we will ever know so it’s wasted energy imo.
Maybe we should let UEFA take a look into their accounts. ;)
It just doesn’t interest me at all.I've worked as an engineering contractor for 20+ years via a Ltd Co, so understand that side of things well enough but not the advantages of charity vs Ltd Co with respect to the McCanns situation.
I'm of the opinion the fund side of things is a relevant part of the overall McCann story.
When i originally looked at the McCann stuff a few years back, i looked into who were main detractors of the McCanns, or running what could be considered 'anti-McCann' forums or similar.
You had people like Tony Bennett (he set up a 'Madeline' fund to bring a private prosecution against the McCanns for negligence, and had done something similar for Barrymore & the Lubock case)
But a large number of others had once been the McCanns biggest supporters and had raised thousands through fund raising etc. Lots were still raising money to find Madeline just not directing it towards the official McCann fund. Views & feelings of those involved varied, from the McCanns were negligent while their daughter was alive, and also after her disappearance due to surrounding themselves or employing the likes Clarence Mitchell, Kennedy, the various PI firms etc.
Others felt the funds were getting mis-managed etc and the McCanns weren't doing enough to find their daughter.
Over time the McCann story has grown to more than just an unsolved missing child mystery, and to fully understand people's attitudes, views & feelings on it you need to look it all, from all the main players involved, the media etc through to the funds etc.
I’ve been thinking about the Calpol theory where she’s been doped, wakes up disoriented and bangs her head and dies before Kate arrives and panics. Where would Kate put the body? The apartment would soon be flooded with the rest of the tapas 7 and the police.
I’ve seen most of those theories over the years. I think people who staunchly think the McCanns killed her peddle most of these tbh and they present multiple theories simultaneously which can’t all be right.If you are starting to look possible theories it's a massive rabbit hole that was done to death on the various 'find madeline' forums years back. probably seen most of them and nothing particularly new over the last few years, only re-hashed stuff mainly in tin-foil hat territory
The pedo ring stuff was done, plus the McCanns & tapas 7 being part of pedo ring. Even seen Margaret Hodge MP dragged into various conspiracies.
Then you've got things like Madeline died days earlier, based on a theory that all the creche records were forged because they were signed as K. McCann rather than K. Healey (which she was still known as, and even signed her police statements as such).
Also throw in secret meetings between Gerry & Murat at a golf club way outside the resort days before the event, based on their phones pinging the same cell tower at the same time etc.
Then there's the ransom gone wrong theories, stemming from the McCanns deleted call lists and 14 text messages from an unknown number (in Swansea i think) that Gerry received the day before she disappeared (and 4 texts the day after from the same number)
Also why couldn't the McCanns provide DNA samples of Madeline from her stuff in their apartment, leaving Gerry having to fly home to get samples from their house in the UK.
Even good old Gordon Brown gets in on the act, because he flew out to Portugal, when it should have been under the remit of Milliband as Foreign Minister.
I’ve seen most of those theories over the years. I think people who staunchly think the McCanns killed her peddle most of these tbh and they present multiple theories simultaneously which can’t all be right.
Going back to the Calpol/accident cover up theory, I was wondering if that had happened Kate could’ve made up the story about Maddie crying the night before which plants the seed she was still alive the night before. I think it is an odd story considering what I’ve argued about damage limitation and public perception.
Do you know the last confirmed sighting of Maddie by someone other than the McCanns?
Nah, from memory the crying the night before story originated from the old dear who lived in the apartment above the McCanns
That rules that theory out then unless she actually heard the twins or the McCanns were killing Maddie and that’s what she heard? It doesn’t rule the Calpol out, it just means Maddie was probably alive the night before.Nah, from memory the crying the night before story originated from the old dear who lived in the apartment above the McCanns
Do you know the last confirmed sighting of Maddie by someone other than the McCanns?
So if she was alive the night before that limits the McCanns window of opportunity to do something.
I thought you said the woman upstairs heard her crying the night before?Nah, 1st of May was 2 nights before the disappearance
Confirmed in what way?
Oldfield supposedly did the 9.30 visit but in his statement he actually says he could see the twins but didn't actually physically look at Maddy, but assumed she was there and okay because it was quiet.
Prior to that it was the supposed visit by David Payne to the apartment between 5pm & 6.30pm, but there's that many holes & inconsistancies between his & Kate's versions of events it's likely bullshit.
i.e. his original statement said visit was 5pm, which later got changed 6-6.30pm because it didn't fit with Gerry & Kate's timeline of events.
Other things like she said she had to get out the shower when he knocked on the patio door, and came out of the bathroom in just a towel. Funnily in another of her police statements she said when Gerry arrived back at 7.30ish they chilled with a glass of wine and she also had a bath (so shower + bath within 1.5hr timeslot)
He said he walked into the apartment without knocking and she was sat playing with the kids etc
Watch the vid from about 7mins in.
His later stuff is proper tinfoil hat stuff but the stuff about the Payne visit is pretty spot on and can be fact checked back against the original case file statements etc.
I thought you said the woman upstairs heard her crying the night before?
Any way I’ll look at this tomorrow.
Kate spoke of it though didn’t she?Re-read the original posts. you suspected Kate might have made the story up and i was just trying to direct you where it originated from
i believe so, but pretty sure only in her book. Can't remember any statements it appeared on, but could be wrong.Kate spoke of it though didn’t she?
I thought you might have a signed copy haha.i believe so, but pretty sure only in her book. Can't remember any statements it appeared on, but could be wrong.
And before you ask, No, i don't own a copy of her book
I thought you might have a signed copy haha.
Are you about over the weekend? I might need to bounce a few things off you.