Lying in the Sun

Reply George & Thomas

Reply George and Thomas


I believe it was in the Madeleine Was Here documentary that Gerry McCann said that 'by the Wednesday night, they had changed their routine, from using the front door to gain access when checking on their kids, to using the side/back patio door to gain access.

He/they have NEVER to my knowledge actually stated which night they changed to this open patio door routine.  Nor have they given the reason for doing so, other than, again, in the Madeleine Was Here documentary, when he said that they changed routine, from front door to side/back patio door, due to the noise.  He added that they did this as they did not want to wake the kids.

  • He never elaborated as to what was the noise he spoke of.
  • He never elaborated as to why he would think whatever the noise that it would wake his kids.  
Had this noise caused the kids to wake on nights prior to whenever they changed routine?  If it didn't, WHY change routine?

That makes no sense!

So if he's telling the truth, then there has to be a story to explain the noise!

Bet my life on it though, there isn't!

As, had the noise caused his kid/s to wake that means he THIS DOCTOR DADDY must have had to comfort them to get them back to sleep before leaving them again.  OR, he simply walked out and left them crying.

Either way, Doctor Daddy had another 'crying incident' on his hands!

And how many of those could their already far fetched tale of abduction stand! 

It has been a little trick of Kate and Gerry McCann to drop such statements into the mix when being interviewed, or in one of their PAID FOR stories which Mitchell put together for them, in press etc.

They never explain the why of it, they just make random statements, most outrageous, and expect that everyone should believe them, take them at face value.  They expect NEVER to be questioned or challenged.   No, no, no, one must never do that, question a McCann!

Now I for one would like to know EXACTLY WHICH NIGHT they changed to this patio door routine.   And I would also be interested to know EXACTLY what was the noise he spoke of.

And, I would hope that the Metropolitan Police would be interested in this also, as the movements of McCanns, their checking routines, throughout that week are absolutely crucial to the story.   Absolutely crucial to what any alleged predator (who they the McCanns claim must have been watching them all week), would have seen while they were surveying the McCanns and their buddies.

Strangely George, the McCanns have not been forthcoming with this absolutely crucial information.

More strangely, the Metropolitan Police don't appear that interested!

Strange, as for the Met for them to establish what may have happened, what any predator may have noted re the movements of the McCanns and their buddies, they will NEVER know unless McCanns come clean with the WHOLE STORY.  Even if what they tell the Met in this regard is a whole lot of who shot john like the rest of their story, it will at least allow for the Met to establish exactly that!

By telling only half a tale, it allows the McCanns breathing space shall we say, allows for them to chop and change, when they feel the net closing in, or when they are challenged by questions posed by the many very bright persons online on forums who have done some amazing and brilliant research in this case.

The many change of story by McCanns (Kate McCann in particular - the story of her check of the kids...say no more) as most know, generally are as a result, are in response, to the research, discoveries of those on forums.  It has been fascinating to watch/hear her, as she responds to same, but in doing so, digs herself a deeper hole!

As you say George, WHY can't Met see it.   Well I think it's more that they don't want to see it, as to see it is not what is their remit!

I have spoken in previous blogs too about how, not any of the private investigators employed by the McCanns, nor the Metropolitan Police have ever come up with any scenario whatsoever (that I am aware of) as to how the alleged intruder:

  • gained access to the apartment
  • exited the apartment
  • and in which direction s/he headed
In Andy Redwood's Crimewatch, he never once touched on how the alleged intruder entered or exited the apartment or spoke of any route that the intruder may have taken to reach the point where, his now main suspect, was seen by the Smith family.

Redwood never spoke of how this alleged intruder managed to get Madeleine out of the apartment without her screaming her head off.

If a burglar, as Redwood suggested, he didn't come with any drug to shut kids up.  Burglars don't do that.  And burglars don't carry off dead kids either!

Also, if a burglar, in what way did Madeleine disturb him?  Was she OUT OF BED? (therefore not taken from her bed as her parents insist)
as I cannot see that if she was in bed crying that that would cause any burglar to then go into that room and take her from her bed.  He'd more likely hot foot it out of that apartment.

And what if it was one of the twin kids who had cried.  Is Redwood saying the burglar would have taken, one or both of them too?

What utter crap!

And Madeleine, a kid who never really slept throughout the night, and who we know often got out of bed to go look for her parents, well she would not sleep through being carted off by a stranger who appeared in the apartment.  She'd have been screaming for her parents!  Waking up the little kids, who in turn would have been screaming too!

And as for abductors who had planned it, as McCanns tell us - had watched them all week - if that was the case.  They don't turn up with nothing to conceal the kid they intend to 'take from her bed' and they sure in hell don't then plan to just walk through the streets carrying her, and certainly not the distance it was from that apartment to the location of the Smith sighting.   No siree.   Abductors don't do that.

That is just a shed load of shit that story!

But interesting don't you think George that none of the investigators or the Metropolitan Police came up with any scenario as to how Madeleine was removed, or the route the alleged abductor took thereafter.

Now if I was Gerry or Kate McCann and I had paid numerous different private investigating companies £m's, I'd have been looking for some sort of credible scenario from these investigators. 

In the McCann documentary, Dave Edgar never offered up any scenario whatsoever as to how the alleged intruder gained access/exited apartment 5A.

Now is that not the strangest of things?

Always in such programmes the investigators give some sort of idea as to how they believe it may have happened, how the intruder gained access.

Not in the case of missing Madeleine.

The Met too, they didn't come up with any suggestion, credible or otherwise as to how the alleged intruder gained access, or by which route he exited that apartment.

We were just to believe Redwood that somehow an intruder gained access.  Somehow an intruder exited the apartment, again unseen. And not seen again until possibly seen by the Smith family.  

Yip, Redwood just made one mighty leap.   Kid in apartment.  Kid taken from apartment.  Kid possibly seen by Smith family.

Redwood, simply said hey ho let's make the alleged intruder leave the apartment around 10 pm just before Kate McCann arrived as that will fit nicely in with the Smith sighting.

He gave absolutely NO evidence to support this '
just before 10pm' removal of Madeleine from apartment 5A.

The whole Metropolitan Police story is as wild, if not wilder than that of Kate and Gerry McCann and their buddies.

You are absolutely right George, as is Dr Goncalo Amaral and others, until it is established HOW AND WHEN this child was removed from apartment 5A - the rest is all who shot john!

Redwood too, we all know in his little story, conveniently ignored also Gerry McCanns little story of finding the bedroom door more widely open at just after 9pm, and also ignored Matthew Oldfield's little story of the bedroom door being more widely open at around 9.30 pm on his visit to the apartment.

Now why would the Metropolitan Police do that?

Why ignore such crucial parts of the McCann and Oldfield witness statements.  Parts which should have allowed them to establish at what time this alleged intruder gained access.   Allowed them to establish how long this guy supposedly stayed in that apartment.   

Are we really to believe that the intruder was there when Gerry McCann came moseying home to check on his kids (and what a farce that story of his check was) and are we to believe that the guy was still in there when Oldfield came along?   And are we to believe the guy then thought 'hell I've been here almost half hour, I may as well hang around another 20/30 minutes and then try and get out just before Kate McCann arrives'  as all child snatchers do, hang around for around 50 minutes, every minute increasing their risk of being caught.

Shed load, George!

Gerry McCann might think he gets out of it by stating that it was a high risk strategy by the intruder!   

Hell, McCann is one brazen fucker (pardon the french if you will) yeah the intruder thought he'd just kidnap a kid and instead of making it as easy as possible for himself, he decided to increase dramatically his chances of being caught, and sent to prison for a very long time!  Yeah right McCann!

As for the statement by Mrs Fenn.   I am not too familiar with it, other than I know that she said she heard a child cry for a very long period of time, a child who cried out for her daddy.  A child who sounded distressed.  I know too she stated as you say, that she heard the McCanns return from the bar and open the patio door, but that she did not see them.

I have wondered in the past if they did indeed at that point enter by the patio door, or if they had entered by the front door and then opened the patio from inside?   Perhaps one of them walking to the front door to open it, entering, and then opening the patio door from the inside for the other to then gain access?  That was their routine in daytime, so they say - to lock the patio door from the inside, then then leave by the front door.    And on their return, for one of them to open the front door, then open the patio from inside to allow the others access.

It would seem strange that in daytime hours they were so careful to secure the apartment in this way when the whole family were out for the day, but that at night they would leave it unsecured (patio door unlocked/slightly ajar (it had no handle on outside, so stands to reason they would have had to leave it ever so slightly open to allow for them to slip their fingers through to slide it open ) when leaving their three little kids alone.

That makes no sense.

Why in daytime would they lock up the apartment, protecting passports and belongings, then at night not bother if they lost any of these items, and/or one, two, three of their kids?

Yes, George, how did Madeleine come to be removed from that apartment and when, because it certainly wasn't by any alleged intruder that is for sure.

If it had been, Redwood/Metropolitan Police would have given us a whole scenario as to how they believed it might have come about.

It is simply not sufficient to state that the child was taken from the apartment, and then leap to her being seen (possibly) by the Smith family.

So many lies told by the whole group, stories created by Mitchell, so many stories by the Metropolitan Police also.   It is a truly tragic case.

What interests me also is that in each of their stories we absolutely MUST NOT have anyone, having seen the intruder go in or out of the apartment, but we MUST have a sighting of the intruder at a later point.

Fascinating, that this guy who allegedly, watched and planned, who left no evidence whatsoever of having been in that apartment, no fingerprints.   The guy who closed safety gates,  stair gates, curtains, patio doors, so as not to alert anyone, that he would then leave himself wide open to being seen by wandering around the streets carrying the kid?  Shed load!

It will take as you say a proper and honest interrogation of this group of despicable doctors, holiday buddies, to get to the truth of who removed Maddie, or, for someone else connected to the case to blab!   And I do believe the group roped in someone else.

As you say also, most all that the Met need to know is jumping off the pages at them.   Impossible that they do not agree with the Portuguese Police but as Thomas said, the Metropolitan remit was to investigate the case as 'abduction' and as though it took place in the UK.

Will try and take a look later at the Fenn witness statement.


One would hope that someone at the Met involved with Operation Grange would have the courage to speak out.   I don't believe for a moment Grange don't know what happened to Madeleine.

I think both you and George are correct.  It needs for someone in the group to come clean, and someone at the Met also to do likewise.

I cannot imagine that all the officers at the Metropolitan Police investigating team are corrupt.  But it will boil down to whomever has the courage to step up to the plate for this little girl.  For sure as eggs are eggs the Met Officers don't believe Matthew Oldfield's story for starters...and they don't believe Gerry McCann FORGOT which door he used to enter that apartment on that night.   Bullshit and the Met know it!

It's an interesting statement that the Met remit was to investigate as though the crimes against Madeleine were committed in the UK.

Cannot help but feel sad for kids in the UK, if the performance by the Metropolitan Police in the Madeleine case is how they would have carried out an investigation into any other child's disappearance in the UK.

I'd be fearful if anything was to happen to my kids in UK, if what the Met have done for Madeleine (big fat zero) was all they had to offer by way of standard of investigation.

Their performance has hardly been encouraging nor professional either it would seem - ~Almost FIVE years and they have come up with nothing but a whole load of far fetched tales to pull the wool over the eyes of the public.

I mean, come on, FIVE YEARS?   Who are they kidding?

And the McCanns are happy with that they say?   Who are they kidding?

Whole lot of kiddin' going on in this case.  Whole lot of cash keeping the shit peddling by Mitchell going on!

Meanwhile the poor kid is buried under it!

Thank you both for your comments.
19th January 2016
Website Builder