Madeleine McCann

partyguinness

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Rock77 wrote: »

Really?? I would have thought that it’s never up to someone to prove they didn’t do something..

Yes they were responsible for the children and yes they failed to care properly for them.

Like what exactly to they have to prove they didn’t do?

I was being facetious.

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

partyguinness wrote: »

I was being facetious.

Ha, my bad. Sorry

Kidchameleon

weldoninhio wrote: »

They deleted specific numbers and calls.

have you a link for that? Thanks

weldoninhio

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

You “misremembered” the whole thing, from the host to the question to the people laughing. But sure it’s not like being accurate about things is important or anything.

Ask the Tapas 7. :rolleyes:

weldoninhio

Something Else

Kidchameleon wrote: »

have you a link for that? Thanks

From https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DELETED_CALLS.htm

Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea 'wrong number'), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been 'whoosh-clunked' from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night'. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.

The first call found in Geralds mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wifes handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.

flasher0030

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

weldoninhio wrote: »

From https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DELETED_CALLS.htm

Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea 'wrong number'), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been 'whoosh-clunked' from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night'. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.

The first call found in Geralds mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wifes handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.

We've already deduced that this was written by Paulo Reis. Who was anti-McCann parents as you can get. This is an excerpt from what he wrote. Slanted into how he wants things portrayed.

Was there anything official released on this?

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

flasher0030 wrote: »

We've already deduced that this was written by Paulo Reis. Who was anti-McCann parents as you can get. This is an excerpt from what he wrote. Slanted into how he wants things portrayed.

Was there anything official released on this?

Doesn’t really matter though.. did they delete calls and txts or not? Surely they must have been questioned about this by the media? I’d love to hear the full story?

v638sg7k1a92bx

Rock77 wrote: »

Doesn’t really matter though.. did they delete calls and txts or not? Surely they must have been questioned about this by the media? I’d love to hear the full story?

The cops were leaking their info to the tabloids and concerned that they would get a hold of personal info and publish it in the newspapers.

limnam

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The cops were leaking their info to the tabloids and concerned that they would get a hold of personal info and publish it in the newspapers.

Why did they lie about it?


why not just say that?

flasher0030

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

limnam wrote: »

Why did they lie about it?


why not just say that?

What did they lie about?

limnam

flasher0030 wrote: »

What did they lie about?

Why they deleted it.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Rock77 wrote: »

Did you read my post?

I literally said ‘I’ve no idea if any of that is true, I’m assuming’

Was it you that said in an earlier that he was a detective?

I interpreted you as quoting a source then saying you didn't know if the source was accurate.

Yes I said he is probably a detective. I would have thought PDL was too small to have local detectives, so I would suspect he would be more likely based in Lagos or Portimão. However, consider that in the second of the two original images, he, if it's the same person, is in a police parade in Lisbon. So perhaps he's based in Lisbon.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

limnam wrote: »

Why they deleted it.

What is it you think is a lie?

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

cnocbui wrote: »

I interpreted you as quoting a source then saying you didn't know if the source was accurate.

Yes I said he is probably a detective. I would have thought PDL was too small to have local detectives, so I would suspect he would be more likely based in Lagos or Portimão. However, consider that in the second of the two original images, he, if it's the same person, is in a police parade in Lisbon. So perhaps he's based in Lisbon.

Sorry for the confusion..

I was just trying to figure out if I was missing something.

I don’t really find it weird that if he lives or works in or near PDL that he would be pictured in the local playground with a child relative and then be pictured when he’s at work..

A little weird he’s in the same pic as Madeline I suppose but nothing major to me anyway..

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

You're making stuff up, even indicating that they are quotes. Poor form.

I've stated numerous times that I think she was taken. This doesn't take away from the evidence available, this limited evidence points to the McCanns. It's circumstantial evidence but it's why they became official suspects. We have no other evidence available.

This is the neutral view. It's an unemotional view. It's taking the facts and nothing else into consideration.

But you voted in the poll that you think the parents did it?

:pac:

Kidchameleon

weldoninhio wrote: »

From https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DELETED_CALLS.htm

Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea 'wrong number'), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been 'whoosh-clunked' from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night'. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.

The first call found in Geralds mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wifes handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.

There's no proof there as far as I can see that records were deleted. Am I missing something? Could you point to exactly where your getting the information from? The article says that the data collected from the phones was incomplete.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There's no proof there as far as I can see that records were deleted. Am I missing something? Could you point to exactly where your getting the information from? The article says that the data collected from the phones was incomplete.

Even if they did delete their phone log or text messages, so what? Everyone knows, even in 2007, that mobile phone records can and have been since recorded. Obviously the cops have recovered those phone records and there is nothing of interest. Do we really think that there was incriminating evidence in those phone records which nobody has acted upon or is that all part of the same conspiracy?

Kidchameleon

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

...

Just to be clear, I 100% agree with you. The missing phone records is one of the more ludicrous conspiracy's. Up there with the fridge theory in stupidity.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Even if they did delete their phone log or text messages, so what? Everyone knows, even in 2007, that mobile phone records can and have been since recorded. Obviously the cops have recovered those phone records and there is nothing of interest. Do we really think that there was incriminating evidence in those phone records which nobody has acted upon or is that all part of the same conspiracy?

What was on the phone records? Any source to show they were recovered?

It's important as phone records are meant to be used for the peado as well.

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Just to be clear, I 100% agree with you. The missing phone records is one of the more ludicrous conspiracy's. Up there with the fridge theory in stupidity.

It’s funny how people look at things isn’t it. Some people think the missing/deleted (I’m not sure which) phone records is evidence that points to the parents being involved in their child’s disappearance!

I honestly find the way people think fascinating, some people just default to the conspiracy theory I suppose. The thing for me with that way of thinking is I would need a lot more to get me thinking that way.. well I would need something at least!!

Spanish Eyes

The whole thing stinks. The parents were less than open about a lot of things.

If they had nothing to hide, they had nothing to fear surely. That is not to say they killed their daughter either, but come on, something doesn't sit right with this whole thing at all.

Anyway, the current suspect is probably another red herring in this saga. Oh, and did the parents get the letter from the German Police yet?

No wonder people raise an eyebrow now and then about the whole sorry saga.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The whole thing stinks. The parents were less than open about a lot of things.

If they had nothing to hide, they had nothing to fear surely. That is not to say they killed their daughter either, but come on, something doesn't sit right with this whole thing at all.

Anyway, the current suspect is probably another red herring in this saga. Oh, and did the parents get the letter from the German Police yet?

No wonder people raise an eyebrow now and then about the whole sorry saga.

Still no sign of that letter or an arrest.

Maybe the parents acted as weirdly and lied, hindered the investigation etc because they were trying to cover for the neglect of their children. Still very strange though.

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The whole thing stinks. The parents were less than open about a lot of things.

If they had nothing to hide, they had nothing to fear surely. That is not to say they killed their daughter either, but come on, something doesn't sit right with this whole thing at all.

Anyway, the current suspect is probably another red herring in this saga. Oh, and did the parents get the letter from the German Police yet?

No wonder people raise an eyebrow now and then about the whole sorry saga.

What were they less than open about? I was under the impression they co operated fully until they were being stitched up by that guy that got the sack for being incompetent..

limnam

Rock77 wrote: »

It’s funny how people look at things isn’t it. Some people think the missing/deleted (I’m not sure which) phone records is evidence that points to the parents being involved in their child’s disappearance!

I honestly find the way people think fascinating, some people just default to the conspiracy theory I suppose. The thing for me with that way of thinking is I would need a lot more to get me thinking that way.. well I would need something at least!!

I think you're going over the top a little bit.

It's not exactly 9/11 level stuff to think they may have been involved.

Regardless if they had involvement or not their behavior since that night has been all sorts of fcking odd and no matter what side of the fence you sit on. You have to at least agree with some aspects of that.

That odd behavior doesn't make them killers but it does certainly make them look suspicious and people will look into that and ask questions.

I've said on this and the other thread about 50 times.

You can explain away a lot of it, but the simple fact we have to try and explain away so many weid/odd/bizzare things I can't recall anything like it.

When you look at the sheer amount of it that itself is suspicious.

I don't care how many people said they deleted info of thier phones years ago.

Both of them during the same window selectivley doing it and then lieing about it. Is fcking weird. There cold be many perfectly reasonable explanations that we don't know about. But while we don't know. It's odd.

limnam

Rock77 wrote: »

What were they less than open about? I was under the impression they co operated fully until they were being stitched up by that guy that got the sack for being incompetent..

They were not been "stitched up"

Making someone a suspect is not stitching them up

Banana Republic.

Rock77 wrote: »

What were they less than open about? I was under the impression they co operated fully until they were being stitched up by that guy that got the sack for being incompetent..

Not answering more then 40 questions is not being open in a crucial time when their daughter was freshly missing, that hindered the investigation, who were they to say the investigation wasn’t going right? They are doctors by trade not professional investigators they were badly advised in a crucial time when answering these questions could of helped locate their daughter or piece the events together. How they have run the investigations with all forces by saying oh I like this Operation Grange is suspicious cause there was constraints on the investigation and a pressing officer turned it down for those exact reasons. You ask yourselves what qualified The McCanns to verify which police forces were investigating properly when they’ve no clue how that line of work works.

limnam

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Not answering more then 40 questions is not being open in a crucial time when their daughter was freshly missing, that hindered the investigation, who were they to say the investigation wasn’t going right? They are doctors by traded not professional investigators they were badly advised in a crucial time when answering these questions could of helped locate their daughter or piece the events together. How they have run the investigations with all forces by saying oh I like this Operation Grange is suspicious cause there was constraints on the investigation and a pressing officer turned it down for those exact reasons. You ask yourselves what qualified The McCanns to verify which police forces were investigating properly when they’ve no clue how that line of work works.

This is a couple that went to waste hundreds of thousands on people with no history of recovering missing kids.

Funding conmen wasting away the fund.

Banana Republic.

limnam wrote: »

This is a couple that went to waste hundreds of thousands on people with no history of recovering missing kids.

Funding conmen wasting away the fund.

I’ll never understand how they thought they could hire the right people like you say with no history of recovering missing children, ppl wonder why others are suspicious. I know there was a period when nobody was looking for her and all well and good to get investigators but they had the best money so why didn’t they give that to a police force then the public would get on their side and help with any assistance. How they ever thought they were qualified to do that is crazy, that hindered a lot of investigation time so my question is why would they do that? Nothing matches here at all. Not to say they are guilty but ask their truth isn’t out there.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Not answering more then 40 questions is not being open in a crucial time when their daughter was freshly missing, that hindered the investigation, who were they to say the investigation wasn’t going right? They are doctors by traded not professional investigators they were badly advised in a crucial time when answering these questions could of helped locate their daughter or piece the events together. How they have run the investigations with all forces by saying oh I like this Operation Grange is suspicious cause there was constraints on the investigation and a pressing officer turned it down for those exact reasons. You ask yourselves what qualified The McCanns to verify which police forces were investigating properly when they’ve no clue how that line of work works.

See this is why threads can never move on cause people insist on bringing up stuff that has been done to death over and over again.

They had already been questioned for 12 hours a day as witnesses in the lead up to being made Arguidos. They had answered extensive questioning and had been fully cooperative.

When they were made Arguidos, the tone and direction of the investigation completely changed and the PJ were no longer following up leads or exploring other avenues. Their primary focus was on implicating the McCanns. Their relationship with the Police became hostile and strained and they no longer had faith that the PJ were still trying to find Madeleine.

So upon consultation with a solicitor, they were legally advised not to answer the questions. They weren’t hindering any investigation because they had already answered all the same questions as witnesses.
They were just doing what was legally advised during an extremely stressful, unprecedented situation.

And it’s quite understandable if you look at their actions from the position of assuming they’re innocent.
If they knew they weren’t responsible for Madeleine disappearing, why would they cooperate with a police force who were trying to implicate them?

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

You see this is the kind of thinking I was talking about..

To me it is not suspicious that as soon as the parents started thinking ‘oh my god, they are trying to say it was us’ they stopped talking to them for fear of being stitched up.

As for the conman, they were conned! What’s suspicious about that? They believed he was ex MI5 or something like that, he even hired ex FBI agents to interview people.. he conned the McCanns..

What, some people think they purposely paid a guy they knew was useless so they wouldn’t get caught!!! That’s 911 stuff