Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Madeleine McCann

1…3940424445…171

Comments

  • #1232
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Heat detectors and grainy videos. What's next in the defence of the McCanns?


  • #1233
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I refer you to comment 1229.

    Do you have a point to make somewhere, or?


  • #1234
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    :pac: This and posting a video where one of the twins is clearly awake and we can't see if the other one is or not!

    Weird stuff. Somehow this clears the McCanns of having anything negative said about them!

    I did mention on two separate occasions that I was referring to Sean, who Gerry was carrying. I never mentioned Amelie who is clearly awake, so I’m a bit baffled as to how you’re now confused and implying I said both were asleep. I said Sean was asleep.

    Watch the documentary for the extended, full length clip. Sean is clearly asleep throughout despite all the noise.

    There’s also a clip of Kate carrying Amelie into their home in the UK from the car and Amelie doesn’t rouse either, despite being lifted from her car seat and the noise of hundreds of journalists & press shouting at Kate.
    It’s there for you to see if you want to look.


  • #1235
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Do you have a point to make somewhere, or?

    Are you always this obtuse?

    Look, I'm not going to join the retro:electro McCann fan club. Sorry if that's annoying you.


  • #1236
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I did mention on two separate occasions that I was referring to Sean, who Gerry was carrying. I never mentioned Amelie who is clearly awake, so I’m a bit baffled as to how you’re now confused and implying I said both were asleep. I said Sean was asleep.

    Watch the documentary for the extended, full length clip. Sean is clearly asleep throughout despite all the noise.

    There’s also a clip of Kate carrying Amelie into their home in the UK from the car and Amelie doesn’t rouse either, despite being lifted from her car seat and the noise of hundreds of journalists & press shouting at Kate.
    It’s there for you to see if you want to look.

    You miss the point! The videos tell us nothing. They are pointless. I don't see why you posted the video. Unless to make the point that if the kids were so quiet and heavy sleepers, why the **** did they not at least have them beside them in the pram while they were boozing with their pals?


  • Advertisement
  • #1237
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Are you always this obtuse?

    Look, I'm not going to join the retro:electro McCann fan club. Sorry if that's annoying you.

    You’re the one being obtuse I’m afraid. Tripping over yourself in a hurry to make sarcastic points and then deleting them when you realise your error, if only you’d take the same liberties with the rest of the misinformation you post.
    But it’s a start.


  • #1238
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    You miss the point! The videos tell us nothing. They are pointless. I don't see why you posted the video. Unless to make the point that if the kids were so quiet and heavy sleepers, why the **** did they not at least have them beside them in the pram while they were boozing with their pals?

    It shows that it isn’t suspicious that they didn’t wake from the noise in the apartment the night Madeleine disappeared, which many here use as solid evidence that the McCanns sedated them. They clearly just sleep heavily regardless of what’s going on. That’s the point I was making. If you think it’s irrelevant then fair play to you, I think it’s very relevant though.

    If they sleep that heavily they’d have no need to sedate them in the first place, let alone accidentally give them an overdose.


  • #1239
    Steve012
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 938 ✭✭✭Steve012


    I'm well aware this point would have been made.
    The cadaver dogs, got the scent from the boot didn't they.

    Richard D Halls work was extensive.

    Was it rumors that they were swingers?, not that that has anything to do with it


  • #1240
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    It shows that it isn’t suspicious that they didn’t wake from the noise in the apartment the night Madeleine disappeared, which many here use as solid evidence that the McCanns sedated them. They clearly just sleep heavily regardless of what’s going on. That’s the point I was making. If you think it’s irrelevant then fair play to you, I think it’s very relevant though.

    If they sleep that heavily they’d have no need to sedate them in the first place, let alone accidentally give them an overdose.

    How long is this video you were watching that shows one of the kids wide awake? It tells nothing either way about any sedation on the night.

    As I said, it's more relevant to the question of why they had to leave them on their own while partying.


  • #1241
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,946 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    retro:electro wrote: »
    You’re the one being obtuse I’m afraid. Tripping over yourself in a hurry to make sarcastic points and then deleting them when you realise your error, if only you’d take the same liberties with the rest of the misinformation you post.
    But it’s a start.

    Okay, I'm going to do you the courtesy of spelling out what I did and then you might do me the kindness of pointing out the misinformation I've posted on this thread (btw, why haven't you picked up on it before now?)

    You posted a fantastically relevant anecdote. I didn't think it sounded right, but a quick google proved me wrong on a meaningless point.

    When another poster made a similar mistake I pointed out his error.

    Then enter the giddy school girl thrilled at pointing out an irrelevance, so quick to post that she posted garble.

    She then laboured the point in another two or three posts. I then pointed out I had corrected my deleted post and she asked did I have a point. At this point I had to throw cold water on her great her day making achievement.

    So, electro:retro, anything else you need clarified? Now, please return the favour.

    TIA


  • Advertisement
  • #1242
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    How long is this video you were watching that shows one of the kids wide awake? It tells nothing either way about any sedation on the night.

    As I said, it's more relevant to the question of why they had to leave them on their own while partying.

    The one where Sean is asleep? About 2 minutes, from the time Gerry walks down the steep airplane steps to when he finishes the media interview.

    They were out having dinner, not partying. Enough of the exaggerations.

    And again, people here are constantly raise the question of how they slept through the commotion. This clearly shows they are heavy sleepers.


  • #1243
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    retro:electro wrote: »
    They clearly sedated them with Calpol on the plane back Susie. It doesn’t take an atlas to figure that one out.

    A few blasts of crack cocaine as well


  • #1244
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    The one where Sean is asleep? About 2 minutes, from the time Gerry walks down the steep airplane steps to when he finishes the media interview.

    They were out having dinner, not partying. Enough of the exaggerations.

    And again, people here are constantly raise the question of how they slept through the commotion. This clearly shows they are heavy sleepers.

    :pac: A 2 minute video where 1 kid is clearly wide awake proves that "they" are heavy sleepers.

    And they were out partying with their pals. While the heavy sleepers were left all alone in an unlocked apartment.


  • #1245
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Okay, I'm going to do you the courtesy of spelling out what I did and then you might do me the kindness of pointing out the misinformation I've posted on this thread (btw, why haven't you picked up on it before now?)

    You posted a fantastically relevant anecdote. I didn't think it sounded right, but a quick google proved me wrong on a meaningless point.

    When another poster made a similar mistake I pointed out his error.

    Then enter the giddy school girl thrilled at pointing out an irrelevance, so quick to post that she posted garble.

    She then laboured the point in another two or three posts. I then pointed out I had corrected my deleted post and she asked did I have a point. At this point I had to throw cold water on her great her day making achievement.

    So, electro:retro, anything else you need clarified? Now, please return the favour.

    TIA

    Right.. which goes back to my point that had you not tripped over yourself trying to sarcastically undermine my point, and did a simple google first, it would have saved you the bother of having to dirty delete.

    And as for misinformation, wasn’t it you who said this in relation to leaving the kids alone:
    Deleted User wrote: »
    And yet on this very thread some still say what they did was normal.

    And when asked for proof of who these “some” are you said you weren’t going to go back and find it. So yeah.. that.

    Anyway.. moving on.


  • #1246
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    Banana Republic. wrote: »
    Answer my question, did you watch the video? If I’m wrong I’ve no issue stating that but you are giving no evidence just saying ppl are right or wrong.

    You make up things and then provide it as evidence? When you are challenged instead of admitting it was bulls**t you at at firing at the poster

    As I said don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story


  • #1247
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    :pac: A 2 minute video where 1 kid is clearly wide awake proves that "they" are heavy sleepers.

    And they were out partying with their pals. While the heavy sleepers were left all alone in an unlocked apartment.

    You are being deliberately obtuse now and it’s actually quite pathetic. If you think it’s irrelevant, fair play to you, I really couldn’t care less.

    If Sean can sleep through the noise & motion of disembarking an airplane and continue to sleep soundly while his father gives an interview, and Amelie can sleep through being lifted out of a car seat while the press roar at her mother, then I can see that it’s quite reasonable that they slept through the commotion of the aftermath the night Madeleine disappeared.

    And again, they weren’t partying, they were having dinner. Stop exaggerating facts.


  • #1248
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    You are being deliberately obtuse now and it’s actually quite pathetic. If you think it’s irrelevant, fair play to you, I really couldn’t care less.

    If Sean can sleep through the noise & motion of disembarking an airplane and continue to sleep soundly while his father gives an interview, and Amelie can sleep through being lifted out of a car seat while the press roar at her mother, then I can see that it’s quite reasonable that they slept through the commotion of the aftermath the night Madeleine disappeared.

    And again, they weren’t partying, they were having dinner. Stop exaggerating facts.

    Ever think of becoming a detective? The evidence you've built up here is outstanding. 2 minute grainy youtube videos and people roaring no less. :pac:

    Ever been to a party involving dinner? Well the McCanns have and it was more important to them than looking after their children.


  • #1249
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    Ever think of becoming a detective? The evidence you've built up here is outstanding. 2 minute grainy youtube videos and people roaring no less. :pac:

    Ever been to a party involving dinner? Well the McCanns have and it was more important to them than looking after their children.

    What the hell is your problem? You don’t think it’s relevant, I do, stop badgering me.

    Have a flick through the thread and I guarantee you’ll find numerous posts stating how suspicious it was that the twins slept through the ruckus.
    I presume you’ll be there to make smart passive aggressive comments to those people about being Detectives too the next time one of those posts pops up. It happens every few pages, we won’t have to wait very long. I await your reaction with anticipation.

    And as for your second paragraph, absolutely riveting stuff.
    You’re a bit of an Inspector Cluedo yourself, thank god we have you to remind us they left their kids alone, lest we forget the fact for a mere 30 seconds.
    And they were out having dinner. Not partying.
    You know yourself what kind of images the word ‘partying’ conjures up and it isn’t tapas and a few bottles of wine.


  • #1250
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Susie’s video is extreme relevant actually. People on this thread have been trying to make the fact that they slept through the commotion look as suspicious as possible and all sorts of things are heavily insinuated whenever the topic comes up.

    So actually it’s very relevant and a really good point. Why didn’t they wake up that night? Well why didn’t Sean wake up while he was thrown over his father’s shoulders while his father spoke, plane engines in the background, cameras, reporters and a host of the world’s media stood in front of them. Could it be that what we have been saying all along is true and some kids are just heavy sleepers :eek:
    Na. It’s much more interesting to buy into a baseless theory that heavily suggests they were drugged and thus so was Madeleine.


  • #1251
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    What the hell is your problem? You don’t think it’s relevant, I do, stop badgering me.

    Have a flick through the thread and I guarantee you’ll find numerous posts stating how suspicious it was that the twins slept through the ruckus.
    I presume you’ll be there to make smart passive aggressive comments to those people about being Detectives too the next time one of those posts pops up. It happens every few pages, we won’t have to wait very long. I await your reaction with anticipation.

    And as for your second paragraph, absolutely riveting stuff.
    You’re a bit of an Inspector Cluedo yourself, thank god we have you to remind us they left their kids alone, lest we forget the fact for a mere 30 seconds.
    And they were out having dinner. Not partying.
    You know yourself what kind of images the word ‘partying’ conjures up and it isn’t tapas and a few bottles of wine.

    It's not relevant. It proves nothing. Move on.

    They were partying. Loads of parties involve dinner, this one involved dinner and drinking. Or do you have a 2 minute grainy video that shows them not taking a drink for that 2 minutes and that proves conclusively that they were not having a party. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #1252
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Susie’s video is extreme relevant actually. People on this thread have been trying to make the fact that they slept through the commotion look as suspicious as possible and all sorts of things are heavily insinuated whenever the topic comes up.

    So actually it’s very relevant and a really good point. Why didn’t they wake up that night? Well why didn’t Sean wake up while he was thrown over his father’s shoulders while his father spoke, plane engines in the background, cameras, reporters and a host of the world’s media stood in front of them. Could it be that what we have been saying all along is true and some kids are just heavy sleepers :eek:
    Na. It’s much more interesting to buy into a baseless theory that heavily suggests they were drugged and thus so was Madeleine.

    It's alright everyone, Cagney and Lacey are on the case! :pac:

    2 minute, grainy videos can be counted as hard evidence, that's of course unless it shows the McCanns in a bad light, then there's no way that can be counted.


  • #1253
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    callmehal wrote: »
    It's not relevant. It proves nothing. Move on.

    It proves that Sean at least can sleep through extremely heavy noise, actually. Just because you would rather deny what is clearly visible to most of us and dismiss it as irrelevant, doesn’t make it so.
    It’s quite weird how much this has wound you up. But I guess you guys can’t really afford many more holes in your fantasies can you.
    ‘Tis unravellin.


  • #1254
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    It's not relevant. It proves nothing. Move on.

    They were partying. Loads of parties involve dinner, this one involved dinner and drinking. Or do you have a 2 minute grainy video that shows them not taking a drink for that 2 minutes and that proves conclusively that they were not having a party. :pac:

    Who made you the thread police? You don’t get to decide on behalf of everyone what’s relevant and what isn’t.

    It’s not relevant in YOUR opinion. It is relevant in mine, and others. So that knocks your little blanket statement on its head.

    You are being deliberately misleading by stating they were partying, they were out having tapas and wine. If you were to go out for dinner and a few drinks would you say you were going out partying? I find it very very hard to believe you would.


  • #1255
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    retro:electro wrote: »
    It proves that Sean at least can sleep through extremely heavy noise, actually. Just because you would rather deny what is clearly visible to most of us and dismiss it as irrelevant, doesn’t make it so.
    It’s quite weird how much this has wound you up. But I guess you guys can’t afford many more holes in your fantasies can you.
    ‘Tis unravellin.

    It proves nothing! As explained in the post above.

    Pointing out the facts of the McCanns neglect upsets you and your fellow detective. Unfortunately for you, you'll just have to suck it up.


  • #1256
    screamer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,193 ✭✭✭screamer


    limnam wrote: »
    I don't see your point


    Before he made the statement he was cleared



    He still made the claim this guy would be scapegoated over 12 months ago.


    Pretty weird with what is going on considering they cleared him


    what do you think should have happened?

    All I’m thinking is just because it was predicted, let’s not discredit the line of thinking. It was after all predicted by someone with a vested interest in the case, it’s his motivation I am questioning in making that prediction a year ago.


  • #1257
    retro:electro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    callmehal wrote: »
    It proves nothing! As explained in the post above.

    Pointing out the facts of the McCanns neglect upsets you and your fellow detective. Unfortunately for you, you'll just have to suck it up.

    Wow, you’re so pissed :D


  • #1258
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Who made you the thread police? You don’t get to decide on behalf of everyone what’s relevant and what isn’t.

    It’s not relevant in YOUR opinion. It is relevant in mine, and others. So that knocks your little blanket statement on its head.

    You are being deliberately misleading by stating they were partying, they were out having tapas and wine. If you were to go out for dinner and a few drinks would you say you were going out partying? I find it very very hard to believe you would.

    It's not relevant, it proves nothing. Get over it.

    Their party was so important that even checking on the kids was a major inconvenience. In fact, the McCanns were informed that their kids were crying the night before when they were out partying. Didn't stop them going again however.


  • #1259
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Wow, you’re so pissed :D

    :pac: You're thinking of the McCanns and their pals out partying!


  • #1260
    mosii
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 332 ✭✭mosii


    If a thief, a peadophile or anybody else sneaked into the apartment, which more than likely the would do,then more then likely the children wont wake,thats only common sense, so lets move on the discussion please.


  • Advertisement
  • #1261
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    callmehal wrote: »
    It's not relevant, it proves nothing. Get over it.

    Their party was so important that even checking on the kids was a major inconvenience. In fact, the McCanns were informed that their kids were crying the night before when they were out partying. Didn't stop them going again however.

    It is relevant. It does prove something. We don’t have to agree on it as I said several posts ago, so you’re the one who needs to get over it.

    The fact that you even have to arrogance to assume the authority to tell other people what is and what isn’t relevant, when you aren’t a moderator and when it’s clearly subjective, is absolutely hilarious. The audacity :pac: :pac: :pac:

    It wasn’t a party. You repeating it ad nauseam doesn’t make it so. They went for tapas and wine, not to a party. These are facts, you might want to familiarise yourself with them.


Advertisement