Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 922 comments are related to the topic:
McCanns lose court case
McCanns lose court case
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 922
|
By:
Clearly.
|
|
By:
itcanbedone
03 Feb 17 19:25 No evidence to suggest any connection between Gerry and Murat. From one of the RDH documentaries, I think - Just coincidence about their mobiles being turned off within 6 mins of each other and left off for several hours before being turned back on within 6 minutes of each other? |
|
By:
Part of the phone records that are on that link that came up with the conspiracy theory, acknowledge that they all turned off their mobiles when they went for dinner.
|
|
By:
here ya go
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t320-why-were-both-murat-s-and-gerry- mccann-s-mobiles-switched-off-for-the-same-32-hours-on-2-and-3-may-2007 |
|
By:
There is a clip on the of the RDH doc's where GM is asked by a reported if he knows Murat and he refuses to answer
|
|
By:
* reporter
|
|
By:
^I think the discussion in the link about covers it George B. Even if you allow that the original assertion is an accurate interpretation (which seems unlikely according to many)..it doesn't infer that they knew each other.
|
|
By:
There is a clip on the of the RDH doc's where GM is asked by a reported if he knows Murat and he refuses to answer
This is easily explained. Murat was an official suspect at this stage and thus Gerry would not want to get drawn into discussing him. |
|
By:
and there lies the crux of the case,we cant hand on heart even establish whether the macaans actualy did or didnt no the early suspect in the case,a person put in the frame by the tapas 7 themselves
|
|
By:
I still think if Madeleine died in the flat and her death was covered up by the parents, the only plausible explanation is that she died after 6.30 and before 8.00 and was dumped in a bin that was sent to landfill. If that was the case I think it's more likely it was manslaughter, most likely by Kate, rather than an accident, which would still mean one parent covering for the other, which in itself is unlikely. If you think it was an accident, like the consensus, the reaction to dump the body is even more strange. They were the first couple down to dinner. They must have thought and reacted like the clappers and done all that without leaving a shred of evidence. I would expect them to be the last couple down for dinner. It just really doesn't add up.
|
|
By:
and there lies the crux of the case,we cant hand on heart even establish whether the macaans actualy did or didnt no the early suspect in the case,a person put in the frame by the tapas 7 themselves
That's the sort of drivel that lfc would come out with! |
|
By:
lfc1971 03 Feb 17 18:21
Does anyone else understand what I said about McCanns description of what he saw at the apt ? It is not a question of believing what he said to be true, that's not the point It is the fact that what he said would not have been said if he was guilty , McCann said that when he checked the children were there and the patio door had been moved. Now that is something that someone who was guilty And someone who wanted to cover up and pretend there had been an abduction That us something they would never say There is no scenario whereby someone guilty and hoping to convince police that the child had been abducted would have said what McCann said Only an innocent man would have said that, A guilty man, someone who was hoping to make it look like an abduction would never Under any circumstances say that when he checked the children were fine, and the door was partially moved It may seem counterintuitive, people think that McCann mentioning the moved door and the children being ok may be a way for him to suggest that someone else moved the door, but that's wrong Why is it wrong ? because there is no scenario whereby someone who had decided to try and pretend there was an abduction would have said it. That id why you don't have to believe Gerry McCanns description is true, it is not s case of believing him because what he said could have been only said by someone innocent and someone who didn't know that by saying what he said proved his innocence . Utter utter drivel. |
|
By:
Stuff about Murat (according to RDH) can be seen here from 3:52:10, including Murat's first statement where it's claimed he told 17 lies. The clip where GM is asked about Murat is shown at 3:55:40 and I don't know what to conclude from the body language!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIa5cnji2ys |
|
By:
Murat won 600K off the UK tabloids. Balls of steel to have nabbed her without leaving any evidence and then cashed in!
|
|
By:
I wouldn't put any faith in any of that RDH stuff, George B....his main shtick is UFO hunting.
|
|
By:
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2219-robert-murat-s-17-lies
|
|
By:
If it was an accident, as is being mostly claimed, the theory being that it wasn't reported because they BOTH had something to hide. Her of giving sedatives (of which there is no evidence) and him of abusing her (of which there is no evidence). How unlikely is that! If the first one was true surely the husband would talk the wife out of it, in the unlikely event the wife thought along those lines anyway. If the second one was true it doesn't explain the accident.
And that's just the first unlikely event in the scenario. They've still had to remain calm during the accident. They've still got to quickly hatch their plan and stick to it. They've got to dump the body without being seen. They've got to come back and presumably shower and clean up any trace of evidence. They've still got to set the scene so it looks like a possible abduction and then they are first down to dinner as if nothing has happened. Then finally the body is never found. |
|
By:
If it happened before 6, then there would have to have been no one else in the Kids Club (presumably there is an adult who looks after them) and David Payne would have to be lying when he said he saw her at 6.30.
|
|
By:
As for Hyatt, I think he is shoe horning his conclusions to fit that narrative.
|
|
By:
As for the police. The McCanns were soon their only tangible line of enquiry. They tried to get a confession out of Kate. They failed and in the absence of any decent evidence they dropped the case.
|
|
By:
Why did Gerry and Kate delete all mobile calls and messages in the 3 hours after the disappearance?
|
|
By:
Hows the Online Shop Going ?
|
|
By:
There is a log of to whom calls and texts were made and there is nothing suspicious in the timings of them and to whom they were. Messages were deleted but I've seen nothing to indicate they were deleted in the 3 hours after the disappearance.
|
|
By:
Any News on the Shop ?
|
|
By:
Ffs Clyde . Give it a bloody rest !
|
|
By:
CB
They deleted the calls they had made between each other while they were at the resort , not calls from the week before. And yet..... a call to Kate's mobile from a wrong number received whilst they were there was not deleted ! If you are going to go through your week's call history deleting stuff - itself an odd thing to do a couple of days after your child has been abducted - surely a wrong number call from someone you don't know would be the first thing you'd remove , not the only one you'd keep ! |
|
By:
It's odd, but does it advance any particular theory? As CB has said we know all the calls made anyway, none of which are suspicious.
|
|
By:
Best way they were out Pished up with their mates leaving 3 very young children unattended
in a strange Place, with the doors Open .. What ever happened Maddie paid the price .. I could not live with myself if this had happened to one of My girls .. |
|
By:
Look at it this way :
If staging an abduction what would they do. They would go out with friends They would leave the patio doors unlocked They and friends would check back occasionally Gerry would check and report back everything fine would not mention patio doors being open he may leave them a little open to be found that way by the next person to check it doesn't matter they were unlocked anyway the next person would find madaleine gone , and the doors a little open then the police interview Gerry if guilty as described would tell police that when he checked everything was fine. He would not mention the doors to police This would be for the next person who checked to say to police they found the door moved and Madeleine gone Gerry if guilty would not have said to the police he had found the girls fine and the door moved That was for the person after him to find But when Gerry was interviewed by police he said the children were fine and he thought the patio doors had moved He would not have said that if guilty, because it was to be after he had checked, and later that the child was to be seen to be missing Only if Gerry is innocent would he say that the children were fine, and he thought the patio doors had moved a guilty man would not have said that, because it wouldn't make sense for a guilty man to say it. |
|
By:
Just when you think it's gone quiet.
|
|
By:
Why if you had staged an abduction would you say that when you checked you found the children fine , but that you thought the doors had moved .
You are not going to stage an abduction eg so that when you go to check the children are fine, but someone has moved the doors and may be inside hiding. That is a ludicrous way to stage an abduction. No you would say the children were fine at that point. And then later someone else would find the child missing and the doors moved |
|
By:
However if the abduction is not staged
and you go back and disturb an intruder and he is hiding in the apt and the doors gave moved but the children are fine This is the situation that Gerry described He would not have described that situation if the abduction was staged He would have only described that situation if that is what happened , and he was innocent , and the abduction wasn't staged , but real |
|
By:
I can't say it any plainer, read it, read it a few times and try to understand it.
It's subtle but it's logical . |
|
By:
 ffsyou think Gerry was on about the patio doors ???? He was saying the door to the kid's bedroom was half open , when it had been slightly ajar when he'd left it 75 posts about a door and you have got the wrong door  |
|
By:
It's fine it doesn't matter now if you would like to read again what I said and try and understand it.
|
|
By:
The name of the door dosent matter , where the door was dissent matter. now try and look at what makes sense .
The colour of the door dosent matter the name dosent matter , it is the fact Gerry said it had moved and the children were ok that's what matters |
|
By:
This is the trouble with people who don't understand anything.
If you spell something wrong they jump on that. It makes me suspicious that sort of nonsense |
|
By:
If the parents are guilty ----
Where did they hide the body? When did they hide the body? Why hasn't the body been found? |
|
By:
now if you don't have anything sensible to say tobermorey pipe down
|
|
By:
I said they weren't guilty you idiot
|