Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

No

[05omegav6]

Despite everyone's conjecture, and an apparent dislike of the parents, we are talking about a little girl who may well have met a horrible death here.

Terribly sad, but ultimately very likely

[chrisgixer]

Have just watched it, and it quite clearly shows the man and child walking away from the apartment, yet when he came forward he was heading back from the creche, which is most contradictory

The next sighting being 45 minutes later a couple of blocks away,  yet still no nearer the creche... snatched child, walked around for a bit to see if challenged, then vanished

The other thing that doesn't quite fit is when Matt Oldfield returns to the table and says 'Everything's ok'... first impression might have looked that way, but he wouldn't have known whether the window or shutter was closed or open beforehand he might have simply stuck his head into the apartment, heard toddler sleeping noises, shut the door and gone to check on his kids, and not actually seen the children. I doubt that three sleeping children would make much more noise than two...

Obviously he'd swear until blue (as would anyone in his shoes imho) that all three kids were there, that the door was ajar, the shutter, window and curtains were all closed and bolted, but only he knows what he did or didn't see or do that night.

Directly involved or not, the McCanns really don't interview well

Thank Christ for that, I'm not going mad. Thankyou Al.

And yes Oldfields involvement gave me the same thoughts. Did he actually see her?

[05omegav6]

I had to watch it twice to get my head around the various details though

Hopefully something positive will come from the whole sorry mess

[chrisgixer]

I had to watch it twice to get my head around the various details though

Hopefully something positive will come from the whole sorry mess

Yes so did I. Rewound a couple of times.

The original suspects movements make no sense to me, given the details disclosed.

Maybe the details of his movements where not considered important enough to air?

[Entwood]

May I make 3 simple points ...

1. It was a TV made reconstruction .. based on recollections from a long time ago..... it is not "tablets of stone" delivered on a mountain top....so it is actually a series of "guesses".....if it was totally factual it would actually answer the question ..

2. Many, many parents have done, and will do, similar to what the Mcanns did, we used to leave our kids asleep in the caravan whilst we went to another van to socialise, checking back every 30 minutes or so; when at home we've been next door and popped home to check on them; in the summer they slept in prams in the garden whilst we were indoors; ALL parents leave their children "unattended" at some point - it is impossible to watch them 24/7 -.

3. The Mcanns have been investigated more thoroughly than anyone else and found to be "innocent"

So blaming the Mcanns, whilst a nice simple solution, that might appease your conscience,  actually achieves nothing.

[chrisgixer]

Re 1.

Quite possibly, but that's all we have, sitting here. Hence my questions

[chrisgixer]

Re 1.

Quite possibly, but that's all we have, sitting here. Hence my questions

It is also based in an eye witness account. Which can be taken either way re accuracy.

[Sir Tigger KC]

I havn't seen the Crimewatch episode (  ) but I was reading about it on the Beeb's website earlier where they included an aerial photo of the area.  I was always under the impression that the restaurant was right next to the apartments, (which still wouldn't have made it OK to leave kids alone) but it's a fair distance between the two places!! 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24526934

[05omegav6]

Looking at the satellite view of the area, the creche actually makes a convincing alibi

If the abductor was stopped heading towards it, then they could reasonably claim to be taking the child there having found them wandering in the road, and equally later walking away could claim to have just collected the child from the creche

Walking east from the apartment for at least a block would also have helped to prevent being spotted from the pool area

I have a horrible feeling that she was targeted. Possibly lightly drugged in the afternoon... cold drink from the poolside bar... put to bed looking washed out... slept like a baby (such an oxymoron ) and taken from the apartment at about quarter past nine.

If the axe falls, there will be more than one head under it...

[chrisgixer]

I havn't seen the Crimewatch episode (  ) but I was reading about it on the Beeb's website earlier where they included an aerial photo of the area.  I was always under the impression that the restaurant was right next to the apartments, (which still wouldn't have made it OK to leave kids alone) but it's a fair distance between the two places!! 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24526934

Its south of the swimming pool.
Pic also shows the crèche location, which the original suspect was walking towards from the corner of the street, north of the apartment, from under the trees as I understand it.

[hotel21]

I agree with you mr LD. Not the knowing the area thing but the rest of the above. 

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

I'm especially surprised at you tbh.

EVERYTHING that's gone before is to be ignored. Put yourselves in the position of a jury. Your eventually going to pass sentence on the Evidence presented in the programme, if the case develops.

At this rate we'll be sending the parents down because they where... "NOT PRESENT" 

Everything previous to be ignored, is it?  Re-assess based on a televised reconstruction with the family and broadcasters full cooperation?

By no means wanting to appear controvertial - though undoubtedly I will in some eyes - I find that concept to be quite nieve.

All the original, live, as it happens, media grabbing TV with all the statements and body language etc from the family to be instantly deleted from the memory of everyone, just as per the flashy gizmo from men in black, and thereafter reapply 'logic' based on a telly programme?

No thank you....

Yes, I feel and fear for the health of the wee lassie.

I'm not an expert but I have learned a little smattering of body language and word use from 'witnesses' over the years and....

as said in my original statement,

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

And, as another phrase goes, opinions are like arseholes.  Everyone has one.

[chrisgixer]

Again, re orientation of the map I'm calling the top of the map north. For ease of explanation. I don't actually know which way is  North, although the description of the second suspect "...to the South" would seem to confirm same.

Second suspect siting. "To the South" which seems a better escape for a planned kidnap, given the waste ground to the west at the end of the Mcanns street.


Again. The 9,15 siting was travelling towards the east. This map shows that location better.

[chrisgixer]

I agree with you mr LD. Not the knowing the area thing but the rest of the above. 

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

I'm especially surprised at you tbh.

EVERYTHING that's gone before is to be ignored. Put yourselves in the position of a jury. Your eventually going to pass sentence on the Evidence presented in the programme, if the case develops.

At this rate we'll be sending the parents down because they where... "NOT PRESENT" 

Everything previous to be ignored, is it?  Re-assess based on a televised reconstruction with the family and broadcasters full cooperation?

By no means wanting to appear controvertial - though undoubtedly I will in some eyes - I find that concept to be quite nieve.

All the original, live, as it happens, media grabbing TV with all the statements and body language etc from the family to be instantly deleted from the memory of everyone, just as per the flashy gizmo from men in black, and thereafter reapply 'logic' based on a telly programme?

No thank you....

Yes, I feel and fear for the health of the wee lassie.

I'm not an expert but I have learned a little smattering of body language and word use from 'witnesses' over the years and....

as said in my original statement,

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

And, as another phrase goes, opinions are like arseholes.  Everyone has one.

In the context of the programme. And in the context of this thread, as the questions in post 1...

Yes! Absolutely it is. Yes. Yes and thrice yes. Precisely because everyone had an opinion, is exactly why we where asked to start again. Which is exactly what the NEW investigation has had to do.

Hence, based on the contents of that programme, and that alone, I am asking you to concider post no.1 of this thread. Please.

[chrisgixer]

I would also mention, the title of the thread.

Crimewatch. (Not "The Mcanns" )

[hotel21]

I agree with you mr LD. Not the knowing the area thing but the rest of the above. 

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

I'm especially surprised at you tbh.

EVERYTHING that's gone before is to be ignored. Put yourselves in the position of a jury. Your eventually going to pass sentence on the Evidence presented in the programme, if the case develops.

At this rate we'll be sending the parents down because they where... "NOT PRESENT" 

Everything previous to be ignored, is it?  Re-assess based on a televised reconstruction with the family and broadcasters full cooperation?

By no means wanting to appear controvertial - though undoubtedly I will in some eyes - I find that concept to be quite nieve.

All the original, live, as it happens, media grabbing TV with all the statements and body language etc from the family to be instantly deleted from the memory of everyone, just as per the flashy gizmo from men in black, and thereafter reapply 'logic' based on a telly programme?

No thank you....

Yes, I feel and fear for the health of the wee lassie.

I'm not an expert but I have learned a little smattering of body language and word use from 'witnesses' over the years and....

as said in my original statement,

My personal jury is still very much out on the truth of the matter. The phrase 'methinks they protesteth too much' or similar comes to mind......

And, as another phrase goes, opinions are like arseholes.  Everyone has one.

In the context of the programme. And in the context of this thread, as the questions in post 1...

Yes! Absolutely it is. Yes. Yes and thrice yes. Precisely because everyone had an opinion, is exactly why we where asked to start again. Which is exactly what the NEW investigation has had to do.

Hence, based on the contents of that programme, and that alone, I am asking you to concider post no.1 of this thread. Please.

No.

I would much rather wade through a typewritten transcript of an extended trial than have my opinion influenced by a television company and parents who have had their views on facts deviated by time, circumstance, and a learning curve steered by a background media entourage looking after family interests based and on later interpretation and conjecture.

Yes, new evidence to light and all that but I would much rather read and understand same through as honest and third party a perspective as possible.  And that excludes a telly programme, sadly.