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…8182848687…169

Comments

  • #2492
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    MonkieSocks wrote: »
    If you are talking about 3rd May 2007...

    She signed Kate McCann

    In 9am...out 12.15pm

    Back In 14.56 ...out 17.30

    She also signed Kate McCann with the two younger kids


    https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CRECHE.htm

    Not sure what day it was; but the point is she signed as McCann most days and then for some reason (I think the previous day but it can be checked) she signed Healy.

    Just one of many curiosities.


  • #2493
    Babooshka
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Babooshka


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    Not sure what day it was; but the point is she signed as McCann most days and then for some reason (I think the previous day but it can be checked) she signed Healy.

    Just one of many curiosities.

    My name is my single name on my bank card, married name on my car insurance, married name on my passport along with my single name, I order online in my married and single name, I am always interchanging my single and married name, it's just a habit that's hard to get out of for me. I had it for 30 something years before I married, maybe it's something along those lines... Especially if she used her single name to sign prescriptions etc for her patients.


  • #2494
    flasher0030
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    It is literally just an opinion. :rolleyes:

    It is literally not just an opinion. We have a legal system in place. You may not agree with it. But that's neither here nor there. Unless you want to protest about it to have it changed, then it is as it is. The parents were interrogated to see if they had any involvement in their daughters disappearance. And the evidence proved that they didn't. So they are innocent. Not an opinion.
    Like I suggested, you have no business suggesting otherwise from the comforts of your armchair. Because it's not true.


  • #2495
    flasher0030
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Not being able prove guilt is not the same as proving innocence.

    There are people far dodgier than the McCanns who got off scott free because the body was never found despite plenty of other evidence.

    Who?


  • #2496
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    flasher0030 wrote: »
    And the evidence proved that they didn't. So they are innocent. Not an opinion.

    What evidence was this?


  • Advertisement
  • #2497
    Day Lewin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Not being able prove guilt is not the same as proving innocence.

    There are people far dodgier than the McCanns who got off scott free because the body was never found despite plenty of other evidence.

    I don't know of any though I am sure it must happen. You really need to have SOME kind of evidence to convict a person in a court of justice!

    On the other hand, there have been cases where a person was found guilty even though there was NO body: you may like to look at the case of David Gilroy and the unexplained disappearance of Suzanne Pilley.
    (Not a child case; but just as a judicial curiosity)


  • #2498
    BloodBath
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    There have been plenty yes but there was usually strong forensic evidence to prove the person was killed, a confession, or a mountain or circumstantial evidence. It's a lot harder if there's no body found and none or little of the above.

    There wasn't enough of any of this to charge the McCanns. That does not prove that they are innocent though.


  • #2499
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    flasher0030 wrote: »
    It is literally not just an opinion. We have a legal system in place. You may not agree with it. But that's neither here nor there. Unless you want to protest about it to have it changed, then it is as it is. The parents were interrogated to see if they had any involvement in their daughters disappearance. And the evidence proved that they didn't. So they are innocent. Not an opinion.
    Like I suggested, you have no business suggesting otherwise from the comforts of your armchair. Because it's not true.

    That is LITERALLY your opinion. :rolleyes:


  • #2500
    flasher0030
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    BloodBath wrote: »
    There have been plenty yes but there was usually strong forensic evidence to prove the person was killed, a confession, or a mountain or circumstantial evidence. It's a lot harder if there's no body found and none or little of the above.

    There wasn't enough of any of this to charge the McCanns. That does not prove that they are innocent though.

    Who are these people that you mentioned got off scott free where no body was found but plenty of other incriminating evidence. I'm not a criminal expert, but I don't recall anybody.


  • #2501
    flasher0030
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    That is LITERALLY your opinion. :rolleyes:

    That is LITERALLY not just my opinion. It is the factual findings of the legal system.
    Whereas, what you have is an unsubstantiated opinion. Literally.


  • Advertisement
  • #2502
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    flasher0030 wrote: »
    That is LITERALLY not just my opinion. It is the factual findings of the legal system.
    Whereas, what you have is an unsubstantiated opinion. Literally.

    There is no factual findings at all , other than Maddie is missing and no one has been found to be responsible. So you are literally posting rubbish.


  • #2503
    TheW1zard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    There is no factual findings at all , other than Maddie is missing and no one has been found to be responsible. So you are literally posting rubbish.

    Is there evidence or not?

    If the dogs aren't evidence that they might have done it then theres certainly not any evidence to prove they didn't.
    People here saying theres no evidence, theres no proof thats a different thing.

    Get your stories straight!


  • #2504
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    TheW1zard wrote: »
    Is there evidence or not?

    If the dogs aren't evidence that they might have done it then theres certainly not any evidence to prove they didn't.
    People here saying theres no evidence, theres no proof thats a different thing.

    Get your stories straight!

    The dogs reacted in the apartment, that's an indicator but not evidence of anything. The is no evidence of either an abduction or a murder.
    There is however plenty of suspicion as to what happened.
    No idea what stories you are referring to , any opinion yourself as to what happened?


  • #2505
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    flasher0030 wrote: »
    That is LITERALLY not just my opinion. It is the factual findings of the legal system.
    Whereas, what you have is an unsubstantiated opinion. Literally.

    What legal system?

    Could you point me in the direction of the legal statement that show these "factual findings"??


  • #2506
    TheW1zard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    The dogs reacted in the apartment, that's an indicator but not evidence of anything. The is no evidence of either an abduction or a murder.
    There is however plenty of suspicion as to what happened.
    No idea what stories you are referring to , any opinion yourself as to what happened?

    Yeah ive loads of opinions.

    1. Kate drugged the kids, Madeline overdosed. Gerry threw her in a wheelie bin when he said he was going to check on the kids.
    2. Peedo gang watching the apartment, robbed her. Shes either dead or in Romania on the dark web somewhere.

    If I was a betting man its more likely the Peedo situation. Though there's definitely grounds for suspicion of the parents.

    For instance, he said he was using the front door in his first interview, then changed to going in the back and leaving the front. Then he said they both went in the back. How can you not remember something so elementary, yet he remembers loads of little things. Then he said he never saw Jane Tanner even though that would be impossible and he said he was on the other side of the road. Doesn't add up.
    His first statement was explained away because the interview was in Portugese and was translated.
    But he may of had to change his story because he realised if he was entering through the front, he would have noticed the window being open.

    Plenty of witnesses saying they saw sketchy people around the apartment though, I find this more likely.


  • #2507
    TheW1zard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    The dogs reacted in the apartment, that's an indicator but not evidence of anything. The is no evidence of either an abduction or a murder.
    There is however plenty of suspicion as to what happened.
    No idea what stories you are referring to , any opinion yourself as to what happened?

    Its not your stories I was referring to, sure you know yourself you cant bash the parent on this thread or the triggered folk who keep getting banned and let back in go nuts :pac:


  • #2508
    Babooshka
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Babooshka


    TheW1zard wrote: »
    or the triggered folk who keep getting banned and let back in go nuts :pac:

    Oooh careful now....or someone on my ignore list might accuse you of "being personal" :pac::pac:


  • #2509
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    TheW1zard wrote: »
    Its not your stories I was referring to, sure you know yourself you cant bash the parent on this thread or the triggered folk who keep getting banned and let back in go nuts :pac:

    ah now - that's not fair. i haven't seen anyone go nuts on this thread, but I've seen plenty of incendiary posts like this one that causes the thread to go round in circles.


  • #2510
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    I find the notion that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, gave their child such a large overdose of sedatives that they ended up killing her extremely far fetched.

    It would want to be prescription level drugs which there is no evidence of them having and at that, they are trained to assess what dosage to give and they are trained in spotting signs of overdose.
    They also know how to do CPR, stomach pumping and other life saving skills.

    I just looked up signs of a sedative overdose and as well as respiratory failure and blue fingertips and lips, two of the other most noted signs are excessive sweating and vomiting, yet no evidence of either of these fluids were ever found in the apartment.

    I find it completely implausible that this could even happen, never mind the suggestion that they would just chuck her in the bin when they realised what they had done, rather than attempt life saving CPR or stomach pumping. Why would they even do that, it just makes no sense.


  • #2511
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    She went by Healy quite a bit, she was referred to as Kate Healy in her interviews with the Portuguese police. I presume this is because her maiden name is still on her passport/ID, even if she uses McCann in every day life.
    She also used it at work so maybe she never formally changed it to McCann, even though that’s what she was known as.

    The night before was because she felt he had ignored her over dinner, wasn’t it? So she slept in with the children as protest, and he assumed it was cause of his snoring.

    yeah - i think that's the general view alright.

    this can be normal enough and i wouldn't judge anyone on that.

    TBH - i wouldn't blame her being in a huff if Gerry had invited the yoga instructor to join them - maybe he was flirting with her.


  • Advertisement
  • #2512
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I find the notion that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, gave their child such a large overdose of sedatives that they ended up killing her extremely far fetched.

    It would want to be prescription level drugs which there is no evidence of them having and at that, they are trained to assess what dosage to give and they are trained in spotting signs of overdose.
    They also know how to do CPR, stomach pumping and other life saving skills.

    I just looked up signs of a sedative overdose and as well as respiratory failure and blue fingertips and lips, two of the other most noted signs are excessive sweating and vomiting, yet no evidence of either of these fluids were ever found in the apartment.

    I find it completely implausible that this could even happen, never mind the suggestion that they would just chuck her in the bin when they realised what they had done, rather than attempt life saving CPR or stomach pumping. Why would they even do that, it just makes no sense.

    i agree. it sounds very far fetched indeed. one theory (it may been on this thread) was that if Kate was found to have misused sedatives or anastethics, she'd be struck off etc etc. But, imo it's highly unlikely that she would misuse meds like that, she's also well aware of dosages etc. so even less likely to OD.


  • #2513
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    i agree. it sounds very far fetched indeed. one theory (it may been on this thread) was that if Kate was found to have misused sedatives or anastethics, she'd be struck off etc etc. But, imo it's highly unlikely that she would misuse meds like that, she's also well aware of dosages etc. so even less likely to OD.

    Yeah I agree. The fact that she never went back to work after Madeleine disappeared supports that, she didn’t care about her job any more.
    If she sacrificed her child to save her job as a part time GP then she surely would have gone back to work at some point if it was that precious to her, but she didn’t.

    I believe she started working part time in the last year or two, as a care assistant for patients with severe dementia. She never returned to medicine.


  • #2514
    TheW1zard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I find the notion that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, gave their child such a large overdose of sedatives that they ended up killing her extremely far fetched.

    It would want to be prescription level drugs which there is no evidence of them having and at that, they are trained to assess what dosage to give and they are trained in spotting signs of overdose.
    They also know how to do CPR, stomach pumping and other life saving skills.

    I just looked up signs of a sedative overdose and as well as respiratory failure and blue fingertips and lips, two of the other most noted signs are excessive sweating and vomiting, yet no evidence of either of these fluids were ever found in the apartment.

    I find it completely implausible that this could even happen, never mind the suggestion that they would just chuck her in the bin when they realised what they had done, rather than attempt life saving CPR or stomach pumping. Why would they even do that, it just makes no sense.

    I agree it sounds completely mad when said out loud.


  • #2515
    tobefrank321
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I find the notion that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, gave their child such a large overdose of sedatives that they ended up killing her extremely far fetched.

    It would want to be prescription level drugs which there is no evidence of them having and at that, they are trained to assess what dosage to give and they are trained in spotting signs of overdose.
    They also know how to do CPR, stomach pumping and other life saving skills.

    I just looked up signs of a sedative overdose and as well as respiratory failure and blue fingertips and lips, two of the other most noted signs are excessive sweating and vomiting, yet no evidence of either of these fluids were ever found in the apartment.

    I find it completely implausible that this could even happen, never mind the suggestion that they would just chuck her in the bin when they realised what they had done, rather than attempt life saving CPR or stomach pumping. Why would they even do that, it just makes no sense.

    Sedating their children in the first place so they could leave the house for a couple of quiet drinks seems even more far fetched.

    Hire a childminder, simple. Surely they knew they were playing with fire sedating their kids and leaving them at home alone in a foreign country. An idiot wouldn't do that, and they were certainly not idiots.


  • #2516
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    I wonder why Kate was checking the breathing of the twins?


    https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/10/fiona-payne-kate-mccann-kept-putting.html?m=1


  • #2517
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I wonder why Kate was checking the breathing of the twins?


    https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/10/fiona-payne-kate-mccann-kept-putting.html?m=1

    Who knows. Maybe she’s a worrier and was just doing it out of habit. Or maybe she was feeling guilty (we’ve let her down) and wanted to show others that she’s a good mother.

    Apparently the cops noticed that and didn’t act (they could have taken nappies away for analysis).


  • #2518
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    wanted to show others that she’s a good mother.

    Sorry but that's funny.


  • #2519
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Sorry but that's funny.

    lol

    yeah, it is in a twisted sort of way.

    lest you think i was saying she's a good mother etc


  • #2520
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I wonder why Kate was checking the breathing of the twins?


    https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/10/fiona-payne-kate-mccann-kept-putting.html?m=1

    These are the very strange things that nobody can said aren’t strange. That’s suspicious to check both kids breathing then they sleep all the way through the commotion, that isn’t normal at all. Maybe this is why Madeline was taken so easily a as s she was sedated. Not meaning the parents were involved in the abduction but the abductor came in to take Madeline and cause sure was sleep it was easier ties in with reports of a girl sleep in the arms of a man that was reported. This could easily have happened.


  • Advertisement
  • #2521
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,532 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I wonder why Kate was checking the breathing of the twins?

    https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/10/fiona-payne-kate-mccann-kept-putting.html?m=1

    No other explanation only they were sedated. Diazepam mooted as a possible medication. Sedation and accidental fall was leading model the PJ were following. It's also what the McCanns told us in their accidental embedded confessions.


Advertisement