Madeleine McCann

the_pen_turner · 06-06-2020 01:39PM

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/f/1304945653/crowflies.jpg
this is the map of where it happened. it is 50 meters as the crow flies, or 150 feet. but to get there would be longer and there would almost certainly bee lots of people around that pool that would obstuct your view.

also note the roads around the apartment

limnam · 06-06-2020 01:40PM

antgal23 wrote: »

You could be right

I read the German guy funded his lifestyle in Portugal through crime so that may include burglaries. If he intended to take her then one would conclude he was stalking the complex to which ever should be witnesses
But, then he must have been watching the place if he intended to burglar it

Anyway, I hope it him and he answers for it

The very nature of stealing from these types of complex's is you don't need to stalk them out. The majority of people are out the majority of the day as they're on holidays.

The time this happened would be a very un-usual time to be robbing holiday apartments. Especially familiy ones as there's more times than not people home.

Were during the day people / families are mostly out

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 01:42PM

limnam wrote: »

Definitely a possibility.

What's difficult for anyone doing the above is in and out without been seen.

People have said the McCanns were a stone throw away from the apartment and could see it from where they were sitting. If that's the case getting a car there 1 / 2 men in and out is difficult. You need a huge amount of luck.

The thing is that if you have ever been to one of these Iberian complexes is that

1/ it's dark at night, dimmed lights

2/ some music at the tapas bar

3/ Mc Canns were drinking and chatting,

4/ they only could see the front entrance but not the side and back windows of their apartment

5/ were the apartment windows open/ ajar due to heat?

6/ was there waiter service or did they go inside to buy drinks?

7/ did they use the toilet inside the taller bar?

limnam · 06-06-2020 01:45PM

antgal23 wrote: »

The thing is that if you have ever been to one of these Iberian complexes is that

1/ it's dark at night, dimmed lights

2/ some music at the tapas bar

3/ Mc Canns were drinking and chatting,

4/ they only could see the front entrance but not the side and back windows of their apartment

5/ were the apartment windows open/ ajar due to heat?

6/ was there waiter service or did they go inside to buy drinks?

7/ did they use the toilet inside the taller bar?

Oh that sounds like a lot more difficult to monitor the apartment

i was got the impression stones throw away it was like sitting in your garden with the kids in bed.

This sounds a lot more reckless.

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 01:47PM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/f/1304945653/crowflies.jpg
this is the map of where it happened. it is 50 meters as the crow flies, or 150 feet. but to get there would be longer and there would almost certainly bee lots of people around that pool that would obstuct your view.

also note the roads around the apartment

For the mother of sweet fcuk!

I see two roads = a getaway

Trees obscuring view

The Mc Canns might as well have been in London for fcuk sake, they were miles away

iamwhoiam · 06-06-2020 01:47PM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/f/1304945653/crowflies.jpg
this is the map of where it happened. it is 50 meters as the crow flies, or 150 feet. but to get there would be longer and there would almost certainly bee lots of people around that pool that would obstuct your view.

also note the roads around the apartment

The view was already obstructed by the plastic sheeting across the window openings of the Tapas bar .To see the patio doors from the Tapas bar you would need to stand on a chair and have an unobstructed view across the garden and pool

Note the front door ( far side , not patio side of house ) . It has a small space for cars just outside the front door .The window opens out on to that area .,It has a low wall onto a public road .You come out of the car parking area ,turn left then right are out of the village and into countryside in a few minutes .Eesy for an abductor to snatch and be gone in minutes

the_pen_turner · 06-06-2020 01:47PM

limnam wrote: »

Oh that sounds like a lot more difficult to monitor the apartment

i was got the impression stones throw away it was like sitting in your garden with the kids in bed.

This sounds a lot more reckless.

look at the link i posted. its a lot more than a stone through. and even with noone there and in daylight you would be hard pressed to see with trees and umbrellas etc

fergiesfolly · 06-06-2020 01:48PM

splinter65 wrote: »

This is ridiculous. Do you honestly not think that the McCanns have done everything possible to prepare their surviving children for the pages and pages of total ****e they will read online about the disappear of their sister? All of the rubbish myths lies and defamation can be dispelled with evidence and will have been brought to their attention in advance of them “stumbling” upon it, or “helpful” ummm...“interested” parties of the type you’ll see posting on this thread, can draw their attention to via social media.
The level of menace directed at the twins over the years sickens me. A real desire to see them in pain, because their pain will hurt the parents. A desire to make sure that they know that their parents murdered their sister. Longing for the day when they’d be old enough to sit up at a computer and be “educated”.
Hoping they’d suffer. I keep saying it. A persons reaction to the story of Madeleine McCann was a serious revelation of that persons soul.

First of all, I have no wish to see any of that family suffer. They've suffered more than enough.
It was more a question of the dynamic of their relationship. I have a teenage daughter and the most straightforward, mundane of issues to me, have been tense, head wrecking for her. Teenagers want to find their own path and form their own opinions. It's part of growing up to adulthood.
They would of course have tried to insulate them from the nonsense and prepare them for the volumes of stories and theories they're going to encounter. But these kids will start to evaluate the facts and decide for themselves how they feel about all of it. Their parents included.

limnam · 06-06-2020 01:49PM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

look at the link i posted. its a lot more than a stone through. and even with noone there and in daylight you would be hard pressed to see with trees and umbrellas etc

As someone said, they may as well have been in London.

So so wreckless.

walshb · 06-06-2020 01:50PM

limnam wrote: »

Not dismissing anything. There's no evidence at this point he was involved in this crime.

For his previous crimes he shouldn't be alive IMO. But that's irrelevant.

There's no evidence he as involved here.

Ok, you personally..

If it turned out he was the killer, would you be at all surprised?

Do you think the parents are more likely involved or the German more likely involved? Just your feeling, with all you know in the case at this time...

Or anyone other than the parents, for that matter?

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 01:50PM

Lads and lassies, Mc Canns messed up , guy or guys

1/ stalked complex to steal stuff , didn't expect child to be there and take her= likely

2/ stalked complex to abduct child = less likely

limnam · 06-06-2020 01:54PM

walshb wrote: »

Ok, you personally..

If it turned out he was the killer, would you be at all surprised?

Do you think the parents are more likely involved or the German more likely involved? Just your feeling, with all you know in the case at this time...

No matter who it turns out to be this case has been such a sh|t show form every aspect I'll be surprised regardless. As right now I've no fcking clue who did what.

My gut tells me this will be "Major break through number X" and soon enough we'll have moved on to something else.

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 01:56PM

limnam wrote: »

No matter who it turns out to be this case has been such a sh|t show form every aspect I'll be surprised regardless. As right now I've no fcking clue who did what.

My gut tells me this will be "Major break through number X" and soon enough we'll have moved on to something else.

I hope not

The parents need answers and closure.

I couldn't imagine living without knowing where she is

iamwhoiam · 06-06-2020 02:00PM

antgal23 wrote: »

The thing is that if you have ever been to one of these Iberian complexes is that

1/ it's dark at night, dimmed lights

2/ some music at the tapas bar

3/ Mc Canns were drinking and chatting,

4/ they only could see the front entrance but not the side and back windows of their apartment

5/ were the apartment windows open/ ajar due to heat?

6/ was there waiter service or did they go inside to buy drinks?

7/ did they use the toilet inside the taller bar?

Just being pedantic on number 4
From the Tapas Bar if they could see anything it was the back door .The patio door was the back entrance .The front door and front window is on the far side side facing away from the Tapas . The side window is not accessible from the road it is placed to high as the apartment is on a slant

Number 6 /The Mc Canns and gang were not seated outside the Tapas bar they were seated inside with a plastic covering across the window are as it was not very warm that night .

the_pen_turner · 06-06-2020 02:05PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Just being pedantic on number 4
From the Tapas Bar if they could see anything it was the back door .The patio door was the back entrance .The front door and front window is on the far side side facing away from the Tapas . The side window is not accessible from the road it is placed to high as the apartment is on a slant

Number 6 /The Mc Canns and gang were not seated outside the Tapas bar they were seated inside with a plastic covering across the window are as it was not very warm that night .

i know i have asked this before. but as someone who has been there how long would to take to walk from the bar to the house. the route isnt very direct.

surely it would be very possible for someone to be watching them and to ring across if they decided to check on the kids

iamwhoiam · 06-06-2020 02:17PM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i know i have asked this before. but as someone who has been there how long would to take to walk from the bar to the house. the route isnt very direct.

surely it would be very possible for someone to be watching them and to ring across if they decided to check on the kids

From patio door out onto the road and back the gate to the Tapas no more than 2 or 3 minutes . From front door out on to the road and around the corner and into the Tapas about 4/5 mins
Absolutely could someone be watching as their are houses on the road with gates and big bins on the road .
I think the pattern was watched , someone knew the kids were alone . They had 30 minutes to get in and out . It could be dine in 5 minutes .

Mike3287 · 06-06-2020 02:24PM

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Well it seems very different here, changing number plates the day after, he’s calls have been traced to being close to the scene of the “crime” boasting details of the abduction & disposal of the body which a lot of these sickos would “brag” about in the right company but significant is that another case he boasted about he ended up being found guilty for so that gives this suspect credible form plus he’s burgled man houses, since he was 18 n moved to Portugal he’s been at all sorrid things. His hobo lifestyle change with that van, it’s a perfect fit plus a huge bonus if he’s not out to be able to commit these crimes again. This is as good as it’s ever gotten. Jim Gamble is very hopeful and he explains it well. Here’s the link
https://youtu.be/CeOI1HrbnmQ

This guy was up to no good 24/7

Van plates, phone call etc could be connected to different crimes he was in on

Roger_007 · 06-06-2020 02:36PM

I am a bit mystified as to why the German police seem to be leading the investigation now. First it was the Portuguese authorities, then Scotland Yard initiated a new investigation a few years ago. Now the German police are apparently pursuing the investigation themselves. Surely, if the Germans, (or anyone else), has information about the case, they should be handing it over to the British or the Portuguese.
I was surprised that the German police seemed to suggest that they were certain that the child is dead. How can they be so sure? They have also identified a person whom they believe killed her.
The whole report on this sounds like yet another high publicity story about this case with very little evidence to back it up.

the_pen_turner · 06-06-2020 02:39PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I am a bit mystified as to why the German police seem to be leading the investigation now. First it was the Portuguese authorities, then Scotland Yard initiated a new investigation a few years ago. Now the German police are apparently pursuing the investigation themselves. Surely, if the Germans, (or anyone else), has information about the case, they should be handing it over to the British or the Portuguese.
I was surprised that the German police seemed to suggest that they were certain that the child is dead. How can they be so sure? They have also identified a person whom they believe killed her.
The whole report on this sounds like yet another high publicity story about this case with very little evidence to back it up.

thats what stands out to me. up to this point its a missing child . now they are saying she was murdered and they think this man did it

Mike3287 · 06-06-2020 02:43PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I am a bit mystified as to why the German police seem to be leading the investigation now. First it was the Portuguese authorities, then Scotland Yard initiated a new investigation a few years ago. Now the German police are apparently pursuing the investigation themselves. Surely, if the Germans, (or anyone else), has information about the case, they should be handing it over to the British or the Portuguese.
I was surprised that the German police seemed to suggest that they were certain that the child is dead. How can they be so sure? They have also identified a person whom they believe killed her.
The whole report on this sounds like yet another high publicity story about this case with very little evidence to back it up.

They are only telling us what we need to know to help them, they obviously know alot more but its not relevant yet to general public

We will get more and more info soon

They've had hundreds of phone calls already from general public with more info

Everyone remembers what they were doing when Maddie went missing, biggest news story in Europe at the time, they'll get good info soon

volchitsa · 06-06-2020 02:53PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I am a bit mystified as to why the German police seem to be leading the investigation now. First it was the Portuguese authorities, then Scotland Yard initiated a new investigation a few years ago. Now the German police are apparently pursuing the investigation themselves. Surely, if the Germans, (or anyone else), has information about the case, they should be handing it over to the British or the Portuguese.
I was surprised that the German police seemed to suggest that they were certain that the child is dead. How can they be so sure? They have also identified a person whom they believe killed her.
The whole report on this sounds like yet another high publicity story about this case with very little evidence to back it up.

I hope you're wrong and that it's just a matter of not giving out all the information straightaway. I was thinking that they could be assuming she was dead based on what this "friend" of the German suspect has told them he said.

briany · 06-06-2020 03:21PM

limnam wrote: »

I'd go out on a limb and say the vast majority of parents manage to bring up their children without leaving them alone in a foreign country in an unlocked apartment while they head out wining and dining. Just a hunch.

I'd also go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of parents could expect to go on holiday with their children, leave them sleeping soundly in the holiday apartment, which they eat around 80 metres from, with a partial view of, check regularly, and never expect to not see one of their children ever again, even if they do leave the sliding patio door unlocked.

The McCanns did not know that there was a child-snatcher, or child-snatchers, operating in the area. I'm sure if they had known this, their plan would have been much different. As it was, they were just being ordinary parents who regarded the situation to be a low risk one. Their negligence was one I suspect that all ordinary parents practice in one form or another. If it's not leaving children sleeping in a holiday apartment you're sitting within shouting distance of, it could be letting them out to play all day, or it could be allowing them to walk the 10 minutes to and from their primary school, or sleeping in their bed, or cot, with their window open just a fraction to let the cool air in (and potentially other things besides).

limnam · 06-06-2020 03:33PM

briany wrote: »

I'd also go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of parents could expect to go on holiday with their children, leave them sleeping soundly in the holiday apartment, which they eat around 80 metres from, with a partial view of, check regularly, and never expect to not see one of their children ever again, even if they do leave the sliding patio door unlocked.

The McCanns did not know that there was a child-snatcher, or child-snatchers, operating in the area. I'm sure if they had known this, their plan would have been much different. As it was, they were just being ordinary parents who regarded the situation to be a low risk one. Their negligence was one I suspect that all ordinary parents practice in one form or another. If it's not leaving children sleeping in a holiday apartment you're sitting within shouting distance of, it could be letting them out to play all day, or it could be allowing them to walk the 10 minutes to and from their primary school, or sleeping in their bed, or cot, with their window open just a fraction to let the cool air in (and potentially other things besides).

You don't need to know if there's child snatchers about or not. You do not go out to the pub with your mates every night and leave 3 kids under 4 in an unlocked apartment. This is not normal behavior. Especially when there's many options.

They could have.

Taken turns to mind each others kids.
Paid the few quid to have a baby sitter.
Stayed in the apartment with the kids.

Would eithier of these really have put them out that much?

If so, maybe parenting wasn't the right choice for them.

They were neglectful.
They were selfish.
They were very fcking stupid.

They put their wining and dining in front of the safety of their kids.

SusieBlue · 06-06-2020 03:39PM

limnam wrote: »

I think for unknown reasons you're putting words in my posts that are not there.

I don't know if they knew or not. All I know is he's a child rapist and she sat and drank brandy with him laughing how the dogs couldn't take the stand.

That's what I know

Anything else is an assumption.

If you feel it pertinent to continuously bring up the fact that they had drinks with a pedophile, in the interest of transparency it would be more honest if you acknowledged the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that the McCanns were aware of the accusations against him.

Not mentioning it makes it look like you are pushing a narrative to suit your own theory and that’s extremely disingenuous.
To anyone reading your posts it looks like they were intentionally palling around with a known child sex offender and that simply isn’t true.

iamwhoiam · 06-06-2020 03:40PM

briany wrote: »

I'd also go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of parents could expect to go on holiday with their children, leave them sleeping soundly in the holiday apartment, which they eat around 80 metres from, with a partial view of, check regularly, and never expect to not see one of their children ever again, even if they do leave the sliding patio door unlocked.

The McCanns did not know that there was a child-snatcher, or child-snatchers, operating in the area. I'm sure if they had known this, their plan would have been much different. As it was, they were just being ordinary parents who regarded the situation to be a low risk one. Their negligence was one I suspect that all ordinary parents practice in one form or another. If it's not leaving children sleeping in a holiday apartment you're sitting within shouting distance of, it could be letting them out to play all day, or it could be allowing them to walk the 10 minutes to and from their primary school, or sleeping in their bed, or cot, with their window open just a fraction to let the cool air in (and potentially other things besides).

Had I had small children and staying in that apartment I would have weighed up the risks
In fairness I doubt I would have thought immediately of a roaming paedophile
What would have entered my mind was that a child could choke , fall , have a seizure , be upset , cry , feel lonely or need a hug . As a parent we are in charge of keeping our kids safe , we weigh up the risk and we do our utmost to keep them safe yet at the same time give them guidance in how to keep safe .

No ordinary ( as you call them ) that I know would look at the risk in leaving three small kids in that apartment and view it as safe .It was vulnerable and exposed and accessible from a public road

We walked past that apartment many times and due to its location and position I would not have left my handbag or camera in it with an unlocked door .

They could neither see or hear the children nor indeed see the patio door from the Tapas bar . They were out of view and very vulnerable .
Unfortunately it seems someone probably spotted the vulnerability and pounced on the opportunity

walshb · 06-06-2020 03:51PM

briany wrote: »

The McCanns did not know that there was a child-snatcher, or child-snatchers, operating in the area. I'm sure if they had known this, their plan would have been much different. .

Not sure how to take this...

Just think about it for a second...

Two of them weighing up the options.

“Gerry, you hear of any child snatchers knocking about these parts? No, Kate. But let me check with the tour operator just to be sure. No, they, surprisingly assured me that the holiday we booked has not got any risks of your children being abducted, never to seen again.

Sweet, they’ll be grand so. Sure isn’t Maddy three now. More than old enough to look after the two wee ones. And it’s not like anything bad could possibly happen when we are not minding them. Sure aren’t there no child snatchers about.

I’m sure any other issues that arise, our Maddie will be more than capable of looking after it. Ok, let’s glam up and hit the road so.”

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 04:26PM

briany wrote: »

I'd also go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of parents could expect to go on holiday with their children, leave them sleeping soundly in the holiday apartment, which they eat around 80 metres from, with a partial view of, check regularly, and never expect to not see one of their children ever again, even if they do leave the sliding patio door unlocked.

The McCanns did not know that there was a child-snatcher, or child-snatchers, operating in the area. I'm sure if they had known this, their plan would have been much different. As it was, they were just being ordinary parents who regarded the situation to be a low risk one. Their negligence was one I suspect that all ordinary parents practice in one form or another. If it's not leaving children sleeping in a holiday apartment you're sitting within shouting distance of, it could be letting them out to play all day, or it could be allowing them to walk the 10 minutes to and from their primary school, or sleeping in their bed, or cot, with their window open just a fraction to let the cool air in (and potentially other things besides).

Mate, I'm a parent of 4 kids. When they are not in front of me they are with a blood relative or teacher.

I know where they are 24/7 365.

You refer to leaving them alone as " low risk"

Any parent worth their salt doesn't take risks with their kids, hence the definition of a good parent.

Yes, things happen that are out of our control ( kids breaking bones etc) but leaving the kids unattended is a big no-no

Not for 1 minute should it happen.

antgal23 · 06-06-2020 04:47PM

Why did Clement Freud the Lib Dem MP contact the McCanns 2 weeks after the disappearance?

There were allegations he abused kids in the 50s to 70s

I'd say there was a paedophile ring in the Algarve and he was fishing for info. He wanted to know what they and the police knew in case his name was mentioned

limnam · 06-06-2020 05:17PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

it looks like they were intentionally palling around with a known child sex offender and that simply isn’t true.

You do not know it not to be true.

We simply don't know if they knew or not.

I say what I know. Not what I assume.

SusieBlue · 06-06-2020 05:38PM

limnam wrote: »

You do not know it not to be true.

We simply don't know if they knew or not.

I say what I know. Not what I assume.

So by that logic why on earth do you keep mentioning that they had drinks with a known pedophile when the accusations against that man weren’t made until many years later?
By your own logic you shouldn’t even be mentioning the word pedophile at all, seeing as we can’t assume they knew or didn’t know.
It simply isn’t relevant.
So why do you keep bringing it up? Is it because saying ‘they had a drink with a man’ doesn’t pack as much punch as implying they kept company with known kiddy fiddlers?

Madeleine McCann

Comments