As I’ve said in an earlier post, there’s one precious source of information that the McCanns have so altruistically and gracefully granted humanity: the Channel’s 4 “The Cutting Edge” documentary. It’s an all-round important document. For the McCanns, it’s their opportunity to show the world the result of their work analysing all the documentation on Maddie given to them in mid 2008.
For the world, it’s a palpable register of the McCann versions of events, in their very own words, without any censorship or external vilification.
The McCanns at the time stated that the idea behind the documentary was to enable possible witnesses to, through the images, to come forward after realizing that what they’ve might have seen on that night, or preceding and following days, could and would be of crucial importance in the safe return of their abducted daughter, little Madeleine Beth McCann, known to the world simply as Maddie.
To jolt somebody’s memory one thing is essential and that is the attention paid to detail. The smallest thing, even imperceptible to most, might just trigger in someone what could turn out to be the key to this abduction, and so help bring Maddie safely back home to the arms of her loving parents.
No effort in the replication of detail was then to be spared, and we can only assume it wasn’t. So each and every second of this documentary is to be desiccated and savored with redoubled attention, for it’s the fruit of the effort of dedicated people and loving parents and friends who ALL possessed not one but all four of the following characteristics:
- lived themselves some of the events,
- had privileged access to police file information,
- it was either their daughter or their friend that had been abducted, and whose life was now at stake and that the documentary could save,
- they were being victims of a worldwide campaign of unjustified vilification worldwide, so here was the opportunity to clarify everything and enable all the investigative efforts to be refocused on recovering the little girl.
Could anyone expect any more precision in the description of events than from these people? Obviously not.
Yes, Amaral did have privileged access to the information on police files, but did he live those terrible moments the Tapas did? No.
Was Maddie his daughter or acquaintance? No.
Was he being vilified worldwide? Well, he was from some bigots in UK who think the world revolves around their own belly, so the answer to this question is a no, with minor, really minor, exceptions.
What matters is that Channel’s 4 “The Cutting Edge” is what the McCann’s had to say DID happen that night.
This was the documentary that showed the world “The McCann Truth”.
As far as I can recollect (I do have the thing downloaded but don't have the patience to watch it entirely again, so I just use it go and pick the images I desire) three things were reconstructed.
I know I said before there were only two, but have since remembered that there's another:
First, a man watching an apartment and witnesses who described how they saw him looking at it.
Supposedly, this was the BIG breakthrough of the documentary. It's been more than a year, and nothing really came out of it. Really, really lame that I’d even forgotten that he existed. If memory serves me right, it was “Pimpleman” in the tabloids, but on the documentary appeared a darkish blonde Russian looking kind of individual. Ridiculous is the word that comes to mind.
Second, the Tanner sighting. Just one tiny figment of the whole highly complex algorithm generated to calculate the comings and goings of all those who were supposed to check on their children. And also on the McCann’s triplets, by the way an egotistical couple who, as far as we’ve been told; only checked on their own.
On this sighting, the documentary was quite detailed. All those involved that night, explained to the point of tears, as expected, what had happened.
Just one personal appointment about a detail mentioned. Considering to be a “discrepancy” which side of the road were two witnesses, in a stretch less than 100 yards, is not exactly the same as not agreeing as to which side the baby stroller was turned to, but it's more like saying that WWII took place mostly in South America instead of Europe, North Africa and the Far East. Not exactly a discrepancy, but rather a blatant contradiction.
And who won the argument? That was a night that Jane Tanner learned the true meaning of two words: friendship and reciprocity. And truth is sometimes really, really bitter. To the point of bringing tears to one’s eyes. What you give is not exactly what you receive back.
We will return to this Tanner sighting reconstruction. It reveals some very interesting and telling details, like the clothing of the abductor, as an example.
The third and last reconstruction, the one I find most interesting and revealing is the Smith's Sighting.
And what this post is about.
The first interesting fact about it is that, unlike in the Tanner reconstruction just before, there are no previous explanations whatsoever about the event itself.
Yes, we know that none of the present lived it themselves (although I do have a strong suspicion that that is not exactly the case), but one would expect to see that brilliant detective that goes by the grace of Edgar, explain, in loco, exactly where, exactly what and exactly how it had happened.
So that when we saw the reconstruction all would sink in, and, who knows, someone might just remember something.
After all, NINE people (well, in fact just SEVEN as two were little children) had seen this man carry a little girl, whilst in the Tanner sighting only ONE person did.
Why weren't any of the Smiths invited, you may ask, and I must then remind you that if they didn’t think the Smith’s presence was necessary there, it was because it wasn’t.
They did come prepared and with all well studied, remember? And do stop being irritatingly cocky with those silly questions. So we were told that "possibly", only "possibly", another family had seen the abductor, and the director just rolled the scene.
Let's then see what they've shown us. Here are 9 pictures, taken in sequence of the portrayed event:
Let's look at each one, and what each has to tell us.
McCann Picture #1 – The Smith family, all nicely bunched up together, come up the Rua da Escola Primária. On your left, as per green S on the left, we have a stairs.
In this particular picture it's not clear its exact location, but later you will see that it's on the near side of the lamppost shown. Notice in the background (yellow arrow), the small light that illuminates the top of the stairs that leads to Kelly’s Bar.
McCann Picture #2 – The Smith family continues to come up the Rua da Escola Primária, and is now nearer. The location of the stairs on the left is slightly clearer.
Notice how they remain together as a compact group. They are almost at the S at this point. Once again do pay attention to the visibility one has of the top of the stairs that leads to Kelly’s Bar. No sign of the possible abductor at this point.
McCann Picture #3 – The possible abductor makes his appearance on scene, coming down the well illuminated Rua da Escola Primária, near or at the Y-crossing with Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz.
McCann Picture #4 – The Smith family, still a compact group and still continuing to come up the Rua da Escola Primária, have now reached a garage door, on the right of the image, signaled with G. We know that the possible abductor is near, but has yet to appear on the screen before the family.
McCann Picture #5 - The possible abductor appears before the Smiths. Notice the relative positions. The family is either in front of garage G or has just passed it, and the possible abductor is well in front of them.
McCann Picture #6 – The possible abductor has now passed the Smith family.
He seems to be between the family and the garage G.
Various members of the family look in an ostensive manner at the possible abductor, as if the fact that a man passing with a child in his arms is something so noticeable that one has to turn one's head to confirm.
As far as we could see, there was no interaction whatsoever between the Smith family and the possible abductor.
By the speed with which he walked by the family, as well as the distance between him and them, there seems that there was no occasion or time to ask a “is she asleep?” or say any other similar phrase.
McCann Picture #7 – The possible abductor now appears alone, after passing the Smith family.
We can see that he hasn’t yet reached the garage G, so the crossing with the family definitely occurred well before this landmark.
McCann Picture #8 – The possible abductor continues down the Rua da Escola Primária.
In this picture we can see the exact location of the stairs S, on the other side of the street of garage G, slightly left of its door but in exact opposite of a street sign.
McCann Picture #9 – The possible abductor heads down Rua da Escola Primária, never to be seen again.
This, according to the McCanns, was the last time Maddie was to be seen alive. A touching picture that only a heart of stone, as Gerry so well puts it in another scene of the documentary, cannot feel moved.
On my part, I feel so touched by it that I’ll use it again as you’ll see.
Allow me to introduce, besides the stairs S and the garage G, yet another landmark: the window W.
From all this information, coming from the McCanns themselves, we can deduce that the Smith family crossed with the abductor somewhere in the area on the Rua da Escola Primária, just ahead of the Y-crossing with the Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz, as shown below:
The McCanns, I remind you, were handed over the police files in late July 2008 and then meticulously translated them, for a period of time that some say was more than reasonable.
They filmed this documentary in April/May 2009.
By this time I may concede that they may not have translated ALL of the files (I, as a parent of an abducted child, would have translated double the amount of documentation in less than a week, but that’s me), but it must be assumed that they documented themselves thoroughly and adequately on anything intended to be put on film before doing so.
Any excuse of changing events for reasons of lighting, better point of view, or other, reveals an unspeakable frivolity that could result, through reckless misleading, in the endangerment of Maddie’s life.
Let’s then see what the PJ files, that the McCanns translated and read, have to say about the Smith sighting. In pictures, so no translation is really required:
PJ Picture #1 – Clearly shows, by the letters P, M and A, the exact location where the man carrying a child was seen by the Smith family.
I’ve added the location, up-street, of the where "my" garage G and window W are approximately located.
PJ Picture #2 – Shows, from the opposite angle of the previous picture, the locations of P, M and A.
Notice that the man carrying a little girl had to have passed "my" window W before he ever passed by any of the Smiths.
PJ Picture #3 – Shows the Rua das Escola Primária from the T-crossing with Rua 25 de Abril.
There can only be seen the P and M locations, as A is behind the photographer.
I’ve also put in, for reference, the "my" locations of the stairs S, garage G and window W.
This picture confirms something that I’ve already stated in the previous post, and that is that from where this photograph is taken, anybody standing in the Rua da Escola Primária beyond the Y-crossing with Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz, is not seen, or, most likely, will go unnoticed, so can trace back his/her steps without anyone knowing better.
This is quite clear in the two pictures above, which Himself has gracefully sent me and whom I thank.
The pictures are NOT from the McCann documentary, I believe them to be from the Amaral one’s, which explains the adequate position in which the child is carried as well as the absence of any of the Smith family up where the McCanns decided to put them.
I think I do have to redefine my Green, Yellow and Red areas on that particular post. After all, the “safety” area is much larger than said.
PJ Picture #4 – Shows the T-crossing between Rua das Escola Primária with Rua 25 de Abril.
Only the M and A locations are visible. No other relevant landmarks can be seen from here.
On the left, just not seen, the top of the stairs that lead to Kelly’s Bar. From these PJ pictures, we can clearly deduce that the Smith’s were broken up into three parties. In a previous post, I divided them as follows:
I could, for obvious reasons, not be correct in the number of people per party, but there’s no question whatsoever, due to the distances between the locations, that there were THREE different sets of people spread along from the top of the stairs the lead to Kelly’s Bar to well into the Rua da Escola Primária.
Logic dictates that this was the route of the man seen by the Smiths as per the PJ Files:
I have, up to now, limited myself to fact exposure.
On one hand, those that the McCanns, out of their own free will, decided to show us, and on the other, those that are in the PJ files, which we believe have resulted from the various statements of the different members of the Smith family.
And, believe it or not, they did not have anything read to them before so as to refresh their memory. Very few Countries have their police do that. Very, very few, but some do.
Now let’s look at the various existing discrepancies.
A perfectly natural occurring phenomenon, as per that enlightened mind that had the luck and privilege to have found permanent residence inside Edgar’s cranium.
In my opinion there are FOUR relevant differences. Of these, TWO are intentional and purposefully misleading, while the other TWO are much more symptomatic than relevant in terms of misconstruction.
Before I go into each, I hope you noticed that when writing about the sighting under the McCann’s umbrella, I called him “the possible abductor”, while when referring to him the PJ files, it was “the man carrying a little girl”.
As from now on, as we’re comparing both versions, so let me call him by what I think he really was: “The Stroller”
Small Misleading #1 – The Route
Per McCanns version, “The Stroller“ walks down the right hand side of the Rua da Escola Primária, while the PJ files show that he may have walked on its center, but when passing the P location, he did it walking on the left hand side of it:
There may have been a car parked on the right, we don’t know, but we know that he did go on the left, according to the PJ files.
On the McCann version, there is a car parked on the right, and yet, it’s on the right that he goes.
For me, the reason for this difference is quite simple, you walk on the right hand side of the street, the furthest from the light, if you intend to be furtive, but you place yourself under the light if you wish to be seen. Simple and clear, no pun intended.
Small Misleading #2 – The Carrying
As I’ve shown in previous posts, the McCann version shows the girl being carried in a manner different from the described by the Smith’s (a living sleeping/sedated child) or from what was described by Tanner (a dead child), although more approximate to the latter than to the first.
This, together with the fact that the girl was barefooted while "The Stroller" was wearing a warm jacket, and she was blond and wearing a pyjamas, links her, without any shadow of a doubt with the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann from Apartment 5A of the Ocean Club that same evening/night.
The reason for this misleading, as I’ve also said, was to try to give credit to Tanner’s sighting.
I had an aunt who had a farm, and there’s one thing she used to say that I treasure to this day, and that is “those who fear the rain most, are usually those that end up wet”. .
In trying too much to convey the idea that Jane was speaking truthfully (yes, Jane, we both know you were) they came up with the ONLY position in which the girl couldn’t be carried and… got “wet”.
If that isn’t fate, I don’t know what is.
Big Misleading #1 – The Smith Family
The McCanns show that they were bunched up together, as one single group going up the street.
The PJ files clear and adamantly deny this.
The reason they are put altogether is of minor importance, and once again, much more symptomatic than relevant: to show that there was just one single, quick contact between “The Stroller” and the Smith family, and not a repetitive and persistent one as the PJ files really show happened.
What makes this to be a BIG misleading fact is that it’s a BLATANT and INTENTIONAL distortion of information. It’s disrespecting DELIBERATELY any possibility of helping the supposedly abducted child.
No, it’s NOT attributable to mistranslation. Images are an universal language, and that is the language that we’re seeing here distorted. THAT is what makes this a very SERIOUS and ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCAL and WILFULL misleading.
You ONLY intentionally and UNEQUIVOCALLY mislead when you wish to LIE. And here the McCanns are LYING about the fate of THEIR OWN DAUGHTER.
How more explicit can their guilt be?
Are they able to deny anything I’ve said so far? Let me give you some news that you already know, they won’t also be able to deny anything I have to say next.
Big Misleading #2 – The Location
What can one say? It’s just a 40/50 metre discrepancy, in the stretch of a street that is no more 80/90 metres.
Even the McCanns, finding it completely unable to justify the contact between “The Stroller” and the Smith family as “accidental” they had to pull the encounter further up the road, so as to make any sense out of it’s intended fortuitousness. How far up?
Let’s look at our McCann picture #9 again.
It was taken from the Y-crossing between Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz and Rua da Escola Primária, around about when one becomes perceptible to anyone at the T-crossing down at the Rua 25 de Abril, where the A and M locations are as per PJ photos #3 and #4: As the “possible abductor” is about to fade away, “the man carrying a little girl” hasn’t even begun to go past the first group of the Smith’s family.
Where one version has ended, the other hasn’t even begun:
So why fake it to where it was placed?
First of all, by placing the sighting where the McCanns allege it to have occurred, TWO of the possible escape routes are rendered completely useless.
Of the other TWO, the first would then clearly show what would seem to be a suspicious movement of hiding. The second, would just simply be too late to be used.
The possible abductor just HAD, according to this McCann fiction, to proceed and act as natural as possible, much like in the documentary.
It would then be defensible to justify the whole encounter as accidental. This would remain very arguable, as it implies that the “possible abductor” must have to have been hearing his iPod in the loudest possible volume, for he was unable to hear the noises made by a numerous family of NINE just up ahead.
But it would removes the entire absurdity of it, and THAT would be one huge positive step for the McCanns.
ANYWHERE else, THERE’S SIMPLY NO JUSTIFICATION for the encounter to have happened accidentally.
And if it didn’t happen accidentally, then it could ONLY have happened intentionally.
And the McCanns realized this at once. Let me explain. Let’s look, once again (I warned that I was going to use the picture many times…) at McCann picture #9:
You’ve simply got to love this picture, especially when it was handed out to you by the McCanns themselves.
The whole of the T-crossing between Rua da Escola Primária and Rua 25 de Abril is CLEARLY visible, as is the top of the stairs leading to Kelly’s Bar.
No, no extra lighting was used, as is demonstrated by the single shadow of the road sign on the right.
Having come down from where in the Rua da Escola Primária, from where the Smiths were unable to see him, but from where could certainly hear them, he arrives at the Y-crossing.
And this is what “The Stroller” sees before him:
Now answer this in conscience, you, seeing this street filled with people, with an abducted/dead child in your arms, what option, in panic or otherwise, would you take at that moment: go down Rua da Escola Primária, straight right into those people in front of you, or go instead into the well-lit and deserted Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on your immediate left?
It’s IMPRACTICABLE, UNREALISTIC, UNTHINKABLE, INCONCEIVABLE, OUT OF THE QUESTION, UNIMAGINABLE and HUMANLY INCREDIBLE for anyone with a dead/abducted child in their arms to opt to go down Rua the Escola Primária as “The Stoller” did.
In other words, one could almost say it would be IMPOSSIBLE to someone have done that.
Impossible? No, of course not.
First because “The Stroller” DID opt for THAT, and second, almost all is possible when you set your mind to it, and he had set his mind that he had to be seen.
And he was seen. Just exaggerated a little, otherwise he wouldn’t have given anyone enough time to ask “is she asleep?”
All just a momentary lapse of reason, as only Himself could so concisely express the whole thing correctly:
Mind you, “a momentary lapse of reason” ONLY on the deciding to go strolling about, NOT about this misleading.
The lapse was fruit of arrogance and misconception of reality, and that will be for a later date.
This misleading was conscious.
And criminal, as it clearly constitutes the perpetration obstruction of justice.
Independent of justice herself seeking to be obstructed, like we know she was looking to be, as the common slut she’s demonstrated she's nothing but.
Nice work!!! You've exposed AGAIN yet another blooming lie from the McScum!
ReplyDeleteHope this time the forums have the decency of not "nicking" the whole thing into their sites, and they help you to have people discover this HERE. That would be teamwork, instead of the bickering we're used to see and that the McScums just love.
Sorry Tex to insist on this, but I think respect is due where respect is due.
Lovely piece, and I'm SURE that the police is following each and every post you two write.
Thanks to you "McStroller" is a term now known to all.
Good morning Anon,
ReplyDeleteIt is a great piece of work and in case the Police, or anyone else may have missed it, we have our own employed Twitterer who goes under the name of 'Citric Acid' who Tweets to the Police , Press and reporters...plus very interested bloggers in America .
The IRONY
ReplyDeleteThis, from Gerrry’s own blog:
“There has been much reported in the media recently about Raymond Hewlett. As far as our investigators are aware, there is no evidence to link him to Madeleine –he is a person of interest to the inquiry rather than a suspect. Following the sensationalised reporting in certain sections of the media with regards to Mr Hewlett, our investigators wished to interview him in order to eliminate him from the inquiry. Despite our investigators requests via Mr Hewlett’s lawyer, their attempts to conduct an interview were unsuccessful as we were simply unwilling to pay. It is very disappointing that certain elements of the media felt it appropriate to pay a convicted paedophile (whether that be directly or indirectly) in order to obtain a ‘story’, whilst those people who are qualified to carry out such enquiries and who are genuinely looking for Madeleine were unable to do so. ”
Nice to see at last a certain forum is linking this blog.Had this been the other way around Ambersuz would have had PLENTY to say. Thankyou Annnabel for fairplay.
ReplyDeleteGerman author Daniela Prousa believes Madeleine McCann died in the apartment. http://bit.ly/dx67zh
ReplyDeletehttp://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/7933419/mccann-search-businessman-faces-court
ReplyDeleteHalligen but no one covering the story
genial!!! estou boquiaberta com a tua capacidade de análise. já está publicitado no twitter e no FB. Permites-me "roubo descarado" do artigo na integra para publicar no blog como G.Author, sff? beijinhos, xi e saudades
ReplyDeleteJoana, do feel free to use and abuse it.
ReplyDeletehttp://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/errand-boy-clarence-mitchell/
ReplyDeleteThe Lap Dog
I hope there are those who grasp how important this article of Textusas really is.It is flying around twitter like it has wings,so yes I think they do
ReplyDeleteI do not mean to be unkind but one can see where the expression 'Plain Jane' came from.
ReplyDeleteAnon 12:53,
ReplyDeleteI've called her an "oxymoron" before, but today I think she just tried to be a good friend, by "helping" out another friend. What she bitterly found out was that "friends" can be ruthless and turn their back careless if they humiliate you or not. Those are really felt tears, not faked ones.
Give her some slack, her hat is just is only really a darkish grey. There are many others reading, and hoping that their hats change colours. But they won't.
obrigada, "narizinho de cão molhado" :)
ReplyDeleteum beijinho e xi
tua amiga Joana
Quote:Now answer this in conscience, you, seeing this street filled with people, with an abducted/dead child in your arms, what option, in panic or otherwise, would you take at that moment: go down Rua da Escola Primária, straight right into those people in front of you, or go instead into the well-lit and deserted Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on your immediate left?
ReplyDeleteunquote.
It would seem to me that a REAL abuctor, upon seeing a group coming towards them would get themselves down the stairs asap. A stranger would have been nervous. Someone known to the child would have tried to act normal. (Because if the child, for example, awoke during the commotion of a group of people on the street, the stroller could get the child to confirm he/she was known to the child)
What about Kelly's Bar? Was it open or shut?
Has anyone looked at the vantage perspective from the window- from the inside....how much could someone looking out of the window see?
TC
TC,
ReplyDeleteTrying to understand your reasoning. The people seen down the road are the Smiths. The stroller, standing at the Y-crossing doesn't have any stairs near him at that point. He has one, a little further down, but doesn't have to use it, as all he needs to do is walk left.
Kelly's Bar is open, as the Smiths just came from ther, but honestly I don't see the connection.
Don't you find it amazing that not one person in the bar saw anything? (through a door or even a window)
ReplyDeletePlus, the stroller reasonably could have passed the Smith's and then gone down the stairs.
Just some ideas....
TC
TC... now I understand (or at least I think I do...), you're getting ahead into future postings. As a foreword, as soon as The Stroller confirmed that he was seen, he no longer needed to parade himself in front of any Bar, so most likely waited in the middle of the stairs until he thought safe to return from where he came from. Or was called to come back in a hurry...
ReplyDeleteBut that TC, in due time, in due time.
http://twitpic.com/27ky5t
ReplyDeleteFollowing Halligen
During this evening there were four phone calls between Kate and her dear husband...Gerry deleted his but Kate forgot and left one which is what made PJ suspicious of them.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, not one of these calls were to tell her husband Madeleine had gone...she according to her, left the twins alone AGAIN to rush to the tapas... a football pitch size away.
BUT then we must thank Mitchell for he explains NONE of the group had a phone or watch with them.
I am left asking why the calls?
It is very clear Mccann has fiddled with the facts and changed witness statements...only the guilty would need to do this..plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteWhat is an 'employed Twitterer'??
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteTwitter is one powerful tool by which information is dissiminated nowadays through the internet (www.twitter.com)
Fortunately for this blog, we have a few faithfull twitterers that gracefully spend some minutes of their day spreading "our" word around. Which Iron and I so much thank.
About them being "employed" or not all I can tell you is that the highest paid person in this blog is Ironside.
And the last check I sent, three months ago via my most power-boosted snail I had at the time, was three months ago. Although I cannot reveal the actual amount, I can confide that I took off all the zeros, and all other numbers, so as to lighten the load of the poor animal...
Anon,
ReplyDeleteTwitter is one powerful tool by which information is dissiminated nowadays through the internet (www.twitter.com)
Fortunately for this blog, we have a few faithfull twitterers that gracefully spend some minutes of their day spreading "our" word around. Which Iron and I so much thank.
About them being "employed" or not all I can tell you is that the highest paid person in this blog is Ironside.
And the last check I sent, three months ago via my most power-boosted snail I had at the time, was three months ago. Although I cannot reveal the actual amount, I can confide that I took off all the zeros, and all other numbers, so as to lighten the load of the poor animal...
Textusa, a great peace of work.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree, Jane's tears are not faked ones.
maren
Forum myth or fact, but rumoured Tanner and O'Brian have parted ways. O'Brian, the only one not seen on the Court room 'facade' steps and Tanner in the photograph not wearing a ring on her left hand.
ReplyDeleteAnon 6.32...I have to say the words of Textusa are true and when the Snail did arrive, I only felt a 'shell' of my former self.
ReplyDelete'Citric Acid' needs help.
ReplyDeleteAmazing. You have finally convinced me. Until now it was too complicated for my simple mind to follow, but you've made it very clear.
ReplyDeleteThank you once again for your devotion and hard work.
Justice matters. I await the day Goncalo Amaral is vindicated, and the day those who had the audacity to steal millions from a compassionate public finally face prosecution.
Had there been no lies, we'd certainly feel the opposite toward the McCanns and the loss of this lovely little child.
Their version of events is completely illogical, not simply the Smith sighting, which you have so brilliantly explained here, but their entire timeline makes no sense.
The cadaver dog, Eddie, "spoke" the truth of the night and Keela confirmed it. The McCanns are liars and they are being helped by the British government to get away with their crimes.
Justice will come. It will...
Astounding work. Logical and convincing. Thank you for your dedication. Have linked to this article elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteThank you docmac.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing the McCanns and Edgar did not bother to reconstruct, despite having hired an actress all the way from the Hollywood to do it!) was the events inside 5A, Kate's 10pm check. One would expect that this crucial and emotional filled moments would be one of the most important parts of the documentary, but no...apparently it was not all that important. Remember Kate's outburst outside the Lisbon courts, lashing out at a reporter that laughed at their mentioning of "the abduction" and asked challenging questions? "I know, I was there!"... Humm, indeed Kate? If she knows(what? as she told the police what she knew?), if she was there, then why wasn't it included in the film? Why let go of this golden oportunity to show the world what it was that Kate saw and found that left her with no doubts that Madeleine was taken by a stranger???
ReplyDeleteInstead, they (Gerry, for sure) decided to cut those scenes off, or maybe those were not even filmed, who knows? My feeling is that they realized that they would not be able to reproduce the scenes in a convincing way, in a manner that would make sense, lots of inconsistencies and impossibilities.
How I would like to know what Lisa Canning (the actress) thought of her scenes ending up in the editing room floor...if she ever played those scenes, that is...
If Gerry was taking Tanner daughter to cross the street to be seen by anyone how did they've moved Maddie body from the apartament to a safe place?
ReplyDeleteThe Psychopath
ReplyDelete"I have all the characteristics of a human being: flesh, blood, skin , hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip"
xxxxxxxxxx
Disturbing words but they remind me of Mccann during a Spanish interview.
The narcissist is a mental three-year-old who knows only one trick: "Throw a temper tantrum whenever people aren't doing what you want them to do, and keep throwing it until they get it right"
ReplyDeletePeople are perplexed by off-the-wall reactions to things, they cannot imagine why anyone would do that. Even seeing it happen doesn't quite make them believe it because it's too crazy to really have happened so we go into denial about it.
Normal people would never degrade themselves by behaving in this childish manner, they don't realize that the narcissist is different - a being with a towering ego and zero self respect , who therefore is not above behaving childish, irrationally, or insanely on purpose..... just to get his way with you.
Because he never has to know he's doing that. He can forever not know he's doing that. That's what his Magical Thinking Machine is for.....Playing Pretend.
The Rule Of Three. The Assessment Phase, The Manipulation Phase & The Abandonment Phase
ReplyDeleteThe psychopathic approach includes three phases: the assessment phase, the manipulation phase and the abandonment phase.
Psychopaths are often voluble and verbally facile. They can be amusing and entertaining conversationalists, ready with a clever comeback, and are able to tell unlikely but convincing stories that cast themselves in a good light. They can be very effective in presenting themselves well and are often very likable and charming.
Some psychopaths are opportunistic, aggressive predators who will take advantage of almost anyone they meet, while others are more patient, waiting for the perfect, innocent victim to cross their path. In each case, the psychopath is constantly sizing up the potential usefulness of an individual as a source of money, power, sex or influence
Once the psychopath has identified a victim, the manipulation phase begins. During the manipulation phase, a psychopath may create a persona or mask, specifically designed to ‘work’ for his or her target. A psychopath will lie to gain the trust of their victim. A psychopath’s lack of empathy and guilt allows them to lie with ease - “they don’t see the value of telling the truth unless it will help get them what they want
As interaction with you proceeds, the psychopath carefully assesses your persona. Your persona gives the psychopath a picture of the traits and characteristics you value in yourself. Your persona may also reveal, to an astute observer, insecurities or weaknesses you wish to minimize or hide from view. As an ardent student of human behavior, the psychopath will then gently test the inner strengths and needs that are part of your private self and eventually build a personal relationship with you by communicating (through words and deeds)
To further "seal the deal" the psychopath instigates the luring stage, he uses his best listening and communication skills. He wears his "respectful mask" his "loving mask" his "Listening mask" and so on.
You feel he is bonding with you. The attraction and chemistry blows you away , he is paying you so much attention and you feel that you "Seem to connect" this is not because the psychopath wants to bond with you. The psychopath is hoovering information from you in order to further seduce you into believing "He is the one for you" and so he can use the information gleaned from you to use it against you in the future.
Manipulation is the key to the psychopath's conquests. Initially, the psychopath will feign false emotions to create empathy, and many of them study the tricks that can be employed by the empathy technique. Psychopaths are often able to incite pity from people because they seem like "lost souls" as Guggenbuhl-Craig writes. So the pity factor is one reason why victims often fall for these "poor" people.
----------
Poor, poor Mccanns..its everyones fault but their own.
McCann, does not like to be questioned and must be forever in control, no wonder then they only seek to be interviewed by women..Mccann knows how to control them.
ReplyDeleteI am a hypocrite, what I say and what I do are two very different things. You must learn I am always right. I know how to do everything better. I know the answer to all of the world's biggest problems.
My public image is everything to me, how I am perceived by others is extremely important. I am admirable, gentle, kind, loving, humble and successful.
I twist the facts to suit myself, I rewrite history where I see fit and you must believe it at all costs. I embellish, Omit and dramatise everything to suit my needs.
I refuse to listen , if anyone did anything wrong it was you and not me. I am always the victim and never the abuser.
I am a great big projection machine and I will deflect and project any evil or bad behaviour back onto you, because you see , You are the problem not me.
You will seek my approval in everything 24 hours a day , 7 days a week. You have no personal identity, you are what I make you. You are to back down and keep quiet and doubt yourself daily. You will hold the belief that you have to try harder to please me. Any opinions you hold will have to match mine. I will accept nothing less.
I am unable and unwilling to behave any differently. I am judgmental, slanderous , fickle and critical. I am haughty, arrogant and envious. I am seductive , repulsive , an addict.
I covet success, power, brilliance and beauty. What I haven't already acquired I will take from others. If I want it, it's mine.
I am special, unique and above punishment, reform or repentance. I cannot and will not be judged.
Let me tell you that there's no blogger today that feels greater pride in their commentators than we're feeling here.
ReplyDeleteMany may feel as great, but greater, no way!
Our sincerest thanks!
My interest is not with what happened to Madeleine, my interest, with the parents. I have no love nor hate for them but I am like a rabbit caught in a cars headlights, frozen, as I make a case study of their minds .
ReplyDeleteIn the future, this case will be used as an example of what the human mind is capable of as it tried to deceive the world.
Truly remarkable. Notice how Mccann in the past has used his hands when not telling the truth, he has been told about this and now makes sure he keeps his hand gripped to his wifes...she maybe gives it a little squeeze to remind him to be calm...
The hand holding is not one of love but a very usefull way to communicate with each other...Kates parents did the same when they were interviewed..never seen before or after holding hands....
McCann, blinks in rapid session before answering, even he cannot control rapid eye movement, another sign of deceit.
Kate, also uses her hands a lot..the grabbing with fists demonstration of 'Why did you not come when we were crying' incident..an incident to my mind did not take place...Why did she say it? ONLY Kate can tell you, because for her this was very important...BUT Kate could not show her soft side even when not telling the truth...the 'Grabbing' motion is not of a gentle caring mother.
The Mccanns called for a 'Media Frenzy' and the proof is now there for people like myself to study,. There are U Tubes galore with all the body language an expert could ever wish for.
I leave you with this comment of a study and once again Gerry Mccann comes to mind but more Kate McCann as and when she grabs at the air to demonstrate her fantasy.
They really are both AMORAL, no question about it.
Another extremely interesting study had to do with the way psychopaths move their hands when they speak. Hand movement can tell researchers a lot about what are called "thought units." The studies indicate that psychopaths' thoughts and ideas are organized into small mental packages. This is handy for lying, but makes dealing with an overall, coherent, integrated complex of deep thoughts virtually impossible.
Narcissists don't volunteer the usual personal information about themselves, so they may seem secretive or perhaps unusually reserved or very jealous of their privacy. All these things are true, but with the special narcissistic twist that, first, their real life isn't interesting to them so it doesn't occur to them that it would be interesting to anyone else and, second, since they have not yet been transfigured into the Star of the Universe, they're ashamed of their real life. They feel that their jobs, their friends and families, their homes and possessions aren't good enough for them, they deserve better.
ReplyDeleteMcCanns life was dull and boring, he looked the picture of misery on the bus, even told his friend to 'Fuck off'...
Then suddenly, a tragedy while on holidy, one of his children died in an accident...BUT we must remember the Mccanns are not you or I, we would have called the police without a moments thought...this is a natural reaction.
The Mccanns reaction was something we only see in movies...they covered it up and along with this came fame....FAME and money...their child no longer died in a domestic accident which happens every day in thousands of homes and would have had a couple of days media coverage, sad but true.
We have been told by Kate Madeleine was 'Special'there is nothing 'Special' about having a domestic accident but very 'SPECIAL' to be abducted from your bed...and there the story began....The Narcissists in Mccann rose to the surface and the rest is history.
The Narcissists thought would be 'It's not my fault she died' because these type of people are blameless, it would be the sofas fault if indeed the sofa was to blame.
From reading the above posts I can see the McCanns thought Madeleine was theirs and no one elses, they could do with her whatever they pleased,she was their property.
ReplyDeleteThey gave her life, maybe took it away and dealt with it. One of them said 'This is no ones business but ours'.
I see that now, thank-you.