Lying in the Sun

Abductor May Strike Prt2

Abductor May Strike Again  - Part 2

Let's look first at the McCann claim that they acted, according to a legal expert with whom they consulted - within the bounds of responsible parenting.

Why would they have had need to?

We don't know who this expert is.  

We don't know if the legal expert exists.

We have an alleged abductor.

We may too have an alleged legal expert.

So what is it the McCanns would have us believe constituted their actions being within the bounds of responsible parenting?  And what is it they want us to believe were the events of the night Madeleine was reported as missing in respect of the checking of their kids, and how secure or otherwise was the apartment.

1. That for five nights in a row they left their kids alone in a holiday apartment.

2. That each night they locked the patio door (which could only be locked from inside) and then exited the apartment through the front door, locking it after they exited.

3. That every half hour they, he and Kate McCann took it in turn to return to the apartment to check on the children.   

4. That on these checks they entered the apartment through the front locked door, unlocking it with their key.

5. That they never at any time on these checks, did a visual check of their children, that they simply listened for the sound of crying.   

6. That if NO crying was heard, they assumed all was well and would then exit the apartment and return to the bar to be with their buddies.

7. That every time they went to check on their kids they took the same route.

8. That they never at any time before leaving their kids checked to see if the bedroom windows were locked.

9. That they never at any time checked to see if the shutters were in a locked position.

10. That they never at ANY time checked to see if the windows or shutters elsewhere in the apartment were locked.

Let's pause here for a moment.

These two are doctors, at that time, their three young children were aged 3 years old and 2 years old (twins)

When a family with young children first arrive at any holiday accommodation, they immediately check out all of the possible dangers to their children.

This apartment was what you may call split level.

To enter by the patio/back door a flight of stair had to be climbed, at the top of which there was a patio area with table chairs.  Patio furniture which immediately would flag up as being a danger to children, furniture they could climb on and perhaps topple over the balcony.

With this in mind any parent would ensure that there was no opportunity whatsoever for their young kids to be able to exit that patio door, out on to that patio area, and climb up on the balcony.

At the top of these stairs there was a child safety gate.  Even a child safety gate being locked, cannot prevent three tots, one 3 years of age, days off her 4th birthday and two very active two year old's climbing onto these chairs and a terrible accident occurring.

A responsible parent would ensure absolutely that this patio door was locked at all times so that their young kids could not come to all the harm which this area of the apartment presented.

At the front door of the apartment was located also the bedroom window of the room the McCann kids slept.   A window which was, unlike the windows at the other side of the apartment, it was what on ground level.

From the inside, there was a bed under this window.  A bed which a young child could have climbed on to reach the window.

A responsible parent would have checked out not only the window of the children's bedroom but the shutter also.  

They would have ensured absolutely that it was locked at all times.   So that their kids, Madeleine, could not climb on the bed and open it.

They would have ensured that it was locked so that NO intruder could gain access to the apartment, and NOT because they were planning on leaving the kids alone.   This is something that a responsible person would do if they had young children or not.

This is something a responsible person would do at night as they put their kids to bed, when at home.  

This is something absolutely a responsible parent would do when on holiday, in unknown territory.

This they would do even if they had no intention of leaving the kids.

This they would do before retiring for the night, ensure that their home or holiday apartment, was secure, that they had made their family safe.

When on holiday the McCanns had passports.

Who in their right mind leaves their passports lying in a drawer in a hotel, and walks out and leaves the door in a position whereby anyone who so desired could simply slide it open?

No one!    Absolutely no one!

So what are the chances that Kate and Gerry McCann, parents to three little ones, doctors, would not have checked the windows, the shutters, but just walked out and left, both the kids and the passports for anyone to SNATCH from the bed or the drawer?

And we know from the police files, the photos, that the McCann passports were indeed just lying around in the drawer.

Do Gerry and Kate McCann strike you as people, these two medical professionals, as persons who would be so laid back, with their kids lives, and perhaps, more especially, their passports and other personal items?

Who in their right mind thinks: 

'Oh this resort seems really nice, seems really safe, let's leave the passports in the drawer, the kids in bed, and the door open?

Not a chance in hell that this is what the McCanns did!

But they DID lock the patio door I hear you say.

Well, yes they did.  Or rather they claimed in their FIRST STORY this is what they did.

But guess what?    They changed that story.

Seems that not checking that the windows, the shutters were locked before leaving their kids each night was only the first part of their party trick.

They decided it seems, they would LEAVE THE PATIO DOOR UNLOCKED.

That is, the door which leads out onto that high balcony, the high balcony with the patio furniture. Furniture which Madeleine McCann at days from her 4th birthday could have climbed very easily, and very easily had an accident.

NO justifiable reason for doing so, placing their vulnerable little kids in EVEN MORE DANGER by deciding they would leave a door unlocked, in a position where it merely had to be slid open.

But this is what they expect the public to believe.

They also expect us to believe:

11.  That they changed this routine of locking the patio door and leaving through the front door, instead LEAVING IT OPEN/unlocked, for anyone to get in, and Madeleine to get out.

12. That they just stood somewhere in the apartment and listened for crying, NEVER popping their heads round the open bedroom door to take a look at their kids on any of their checks

But ask us to believe that on the night they reported Madeleine as missing they each DID look in on the kids.  Did their VERY FIRST VISUAL CHECKS

  • Gerry's to confirm Madeleine was there.
  • Kate's to confirm Madeleine wasn't there.


NOT what parents would do in normal circumstances - Having left three little kids in an unlocked holiday apartment, would not parents MAKE SURE THAT THEIR KIDS WERE STILL IN THEIR BEDS WHEN CHECKING ON THEM?

The other couples who went to check on their OWN kids, not the McCann kids, all stated they did visual checks.

Only the McCanns it seems (if you believe their stories) did not as part of their 'usual' checks, do visual checks.

McCanns say that BY THE WEDNESDAY NIGHT, the 4th night of leaving their kids alone in the holiday apartment they had changed THEIR routine from ENTERING THROUGH THE FRONT LOCKED DOOR, TO ENTERING BY THE UNLOCKED PATIO DOOR.

So, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, shall we say they entered by the front locked door, Wednesday, Thursday, by an unlocked patio door. 

Strangely, Wednesday and Thursday are the TWO days which the McCanns claim this alleged abductor was in their apartment.

On the Wednesday night Kate McCann has in interviews suggested, this alleged abductor, gained entry, disturbed the children, whose then crying, had this alleged abductor hot footing it out of apartment 5A, only to return the very next night!

WHAT could possibly have caused THIS PAIR to further endanger the lives of their children by doing this, changing from locking the apartment securely, to leaving the patio door unlocked, where anyone could slide it open to gain access?

  • How did that conversation go down?
  • When did they have the conversation?
  • Where were they when this decision was made to leave the patio door unlocked?

(I think most would say, this 'decision' was made somewhere between Gerry McCann giving his first police witness statement AFTER Madeleine had mysteriously vanished, and his second police witness statement - SEVEN DAYS AFTER they had reported Madeleine as missing)

McCanns say they didn't have to think about leaving the kids, it just felt so safe.

BUT THEY DID THINK ABOUT IT.  They quite clearly MUST HAVE, if they DECIDED that on the Wednesday and Thursday night that it would be a GOOD IDEA, to leave the patio door unlocked, and this despite Madeleine telling them she had been awake, crying, most likely out of bed.

Remember BOTH McCanns on the night Madeleine was reported as missing stated that they thought Madeleine had gotten out of bed and gone through to their bedroom.   So something which was normal for this kid to do.

Gerry McCann thought this when he first saw the bedroom door open.
Kate McCann thought this when she noticed Madeleine was not in bed.

Leaving that patio door unlocked, further increased the risk of their passports and personal belongings being stolen also.


Come night, when they were leaving their kids - they just threw ALL caution to the wind, just didn't bother checking doors, windows, shutters, just didn't bother locking up?

Why oh why would they NOT DO LIKEWISE in the evening when leaving the three people who should have been most precious to them.   Whose safety should have mattered more than anything else in life?

And why did it take Gerry McCann SEVEN DAYS after the disappearance of his daughter to THEN tell police that OOPS, he had made a mistake he had not entered through the front locked door using his key but had left that patio door unlocked?

Dr Amaral said that the McCanns story is a BADLY TOLD ONE!

What a generous man Dr Amaral is.

A badly told story is putting it mildly.  

No matter which way you cut it - this story thus far is a shed load of shit!

But what else do they want us to believe regarding these un/locked doors, their checking of their children?

13.  Well one of their tales which they have spouted on many occasions when being interviewed is that they had a checking system in place whereby they (the group) took it in turn to check on each others children.

Number 13 unlucky for some as they say.

And most unlucky for the McCanns as there is ABSOLUTELY NO TRUTH IN THIS.

Read the statements they each gave the police, and soon you will discover that this is just another McCann tale!

Think I'm being generous now.   Let us make that more plain.  A HUGE FAT FIB.

None of this group checked on each others kids.

We have ONLY Matthew Oldfield, the guy who had not set eyes on the McCann twins before this holiday, and who had seen Madeleine once as a baby, claiming that ON THE NIGHT Madeleine vanished, that he had taken it upon himself to listen at the shuttered window of the McCann kids bedroom and further claiming that he did a check by entering their apartment.

So NO ONE BUT NO ONE checked on each others kids all week long and SUDDENLY, Matthew Oldfield who didn't know the kids, who didn't know Kate McCann, and barely knew Gerry McCann - would you believe ENTERED THEIR APARTMENT, CHECKED ON THEIR KIDS BY DOING A VISUAL CHECK - Something the McCanns themselved NEVER did, but OOPSY, HE ONLY DID A VISUAL FOR THE TWINS!

Indeed a badly told story Dr Amaral, or as I like to refer to it - a SHED LOAD OF SHIT.

A load that anyone in their right mind can see is EXACTLY THAT!

If the Metropolitan Police are buying this, they are working to an agenda, and it is not to discover WHO REMOVED MADELEINE McCANN FROM THAT APARTMENT.

And if there is some legal expert out there who has deemed the behaviour of the McCanns, their treatment of their kids in leaving them alone in a holiday apartment, with a door lying unlocked through which anyone could enter and through which Madeleine could exit, in an apartment where they HAD NOT BOTHERED to check if windows, shutters and doors were secure, where they did not do a visual check of their children, who could have been lying dead for all they knew, then this legal expert, this expert on child protection, should be making a hasty career change.

If all of the aforementioned is within the bounds of responsible parenting, I'll eat my hat.

From where I'm sitting, it is reckless, child endangerment.

14. That Madeleine told them at the breakfast table on the morning of the 3rd May 2007 (the date she was reported as missing) that she and her baby brother had been crying the previous night and asked why her mummy and daddy did not respond to their cries.

15. That the McCanns on hearing this STILL walked out on the kids again that night, leaving them in the unlocked holiday apartment.

Now WHY would they do that?

Your kid telling you that, would have you so filled with guilt and remorse, fearful for their safety, that you would NEVER in your life ever leave your kids alone again.  So guilty would you feel that they had been alone and upset needing mummy and daddy, frightened in a strange property.

So thankful would you be that no physical harm had come to them on that occasion when they had been awake, that Madeleine when she had gotten out of bed (as was usual for this child when she woke in the night) had not fallen on the tiled floors, climbed on furniture to look out of a window for mummy and daddy.   So thankful you were able to have a second bite of the cherry, and NOT harm your kids in this way again.

DIDN'T STOP McCANNS, not according to one of the several versions of their story that they have given.

I think we can all see by now that the McCanns have been leading everyone up the garden path with their account of events, with their tales of checking the children.

What else do they want us to believe?

16.  That Matthew Oldfield decided for no reason known to man, to LISTEN OUTSIDE THE McCANN BEDROOM WINDOW.

17.  That Matthew OLDFIELD then decided he would go INSIDE the McCann apartment and do a visual check of the McCann kids?  

18.  That he offered to do Kate McCanns turn checking, this woman who he didn't know.

19.  That Gerry McCann, who had a fit at Oldfield earlier having dared to listen at the bedroom window (Oldfield stating McCann made his feelings clear in this regard, he was not happy at Oldfield) now hearing that Oldfield was going to take his wife's turn of checking the kids by entering the apartment, didn't bat an eyelid.

20. That Oldfield thought it would be a nice thing to do, to go and check on kids in a dark apartment, kids who didn't know him.  Kids who would if awake, most probably, scream hysterically when this strange guy came in to the apartment.

21.  That Oldfield the one guy out of the group who didn't know the McCann kids at all, would decide to check on them.

The McCanns stories are quite obviously blatant lies.

Is it any wonder the Portuguese Police and the Leicestershire Police did not believe them?

Is it any wonder that any sane person does not believe them?

I'd bet that the McCann and Healy family DO NOT BELIEVE these tales, but are bound by blood alone in their going along with this.

Old Ma Healy is nobody's fool.   She knows when her daughter and son in law are pulling the wool.

And pulling the wood they have been doing for 8 years.

As IF these people NEVER AT ANY TIME checked windows, doors, shutters!

They might have gotten cocky as to nipping out for a while locking those kids IN making sure windows shutters were secure, but they sure in hell did NOT walk out and leave a door lying unlocked for intruders to gain access.  Did not walk out NOT knowing whether those windows or shutters were secure, and that is what they are asking the world to believe.

And who could possibly in a Court of Law defend that the McCanns acted within the bounds of responsible parenting when absolutely THEY DID NOT.

You see a good lawyer might have been able to argue this, based on the grounds that they did make the apartment secure, that they did do visual checks and on a regular basis.

BUT according to their LAST version of events, THEY DID NOT.

According to their last version, they:

  • Did not check to see if windows were locked.
  • Did not do visual checks (kids could have been lying dead)
  • Did not lock the front door.  First McCann said he did.  Then he said he probably didn't (he had to change this, when he changed his story about leaving through front door.  His reasoning was that if he now left through the patio door, he probably wouldn't have bothered to lock the front door!)
  • Did not LISTEN when Madeleine told them she and her brother had been crying. Still walked out on the kids knowing they had been awake and upset.
  • Did ALLOW a man who their kids did not know to enter the apartment to do a check on them.


Do we think for a split second that their lawyers, or spokespersons believe their story?

Hell no!

Do we think the Metropolitan Police, these 30 + crack detectives, homicide detectives believe their story?

Hell NO!

Do we think the UK MSM believe their story?

Hell NO!

Doesn't stop them printing crap though in defence of McCanns!
17th May 2015
Website Builder