Madeleine McCann

[Harry D]

Check out this interesting little clip of Gerry McCann dropping the Eff Bomb in front of his children.
Also look carefully at the body language of the children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcVncYr6xc

Yeah, I've seen this before. Sounds like he says: "F**k off, I'm not here to enjoy myself."

[louisa]

Yeah, I've seen this before. Sounds like he says: "F**k off, I'm not here to enjoy myself."

I can't hear what he's saying but I'm pretty good at lip reading and it certainly looks as though he said "F*ck off".

Not nice language when children are around.

I still think that Maddie's body was dumped far out in the sea. It's why they look so confident - complacent in the knowledge that her body will never been found, and without a body a conviction is (almost) impossible. The DNA that points in their direction would have to be overwhelming.

[DirectorDave]

I think people who believe that video is in any way relevant are too far down the rabbit hole on this one.

I'm partially deaf and I do lip read, it's impossible to tell what he is saying from that footage...it could just as easily be bog off as f-off.

[Sam Flynn]

Whatever he's saying, it's definitely not "f*ck off"; taking DirectorDave's suggestion further, I'd say that it was more likely that he was saying "bog off"... if he's saying "<anything> off" at all, for that matter.

As to the children's body language, I see nothing unusual in it at all.

[Harry D]

Whatever he's saying, it's definitely not "f*ck off"

Not sure how you have the authority to assert what he didn't say, without knowing what he did.

The body language of the children is very telling in that video. All huddled towards Kate (and away from Gerry). None of them look happy. In fact, they look afraid to be near him.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Not sure how you have the authority to assert what he didn't say, without knowing what he did.

The body language of the children is very telling in that video. All huddled towards Kate (and away from Gerry). None of them look happy. In fact, they look afraid to be near him.

I agree Harry!

The children look totally cowed.
Not the sort of behaviour you would expect from children off on a trip.

Gerry McCann is a Glaswegian, and as a fellow Glaswegian I can assert that he is in fact saying "F*** Off".

[Sam Flynn]

Not sure how you have the authority to assert what he didn't say, without knowing what he did.

And you have?

I tell you, he's not saying "F*ck off", period. Look at it again with non-conspiratorial eyes.

The body language of the children is very telling in that video. All huddled towards Kate (and away from Gerry). None of them look happy. In fact, they look afraid to be near him.

Perhaps you're reading too much into this. Never seen bored, tired-out kids travelling in warm weather?

[Harry D]

And you have?

No, that's why I said sounds like.

I tell you, he's not saying "F*ck off", period.

Yes, I heard you the first time. Repeating yourself doesn't make it fact.

Look at it again with non-conspiratorial eyes.Perhaps you're reading too much into this. Never seen bored, tired-out kids travelling in warm weather?

Perhaps you're not reading enough into it?

[louisa]

I think Gerry is a control freak. Even his wife looks washed out and weary.

I just think it's strange that Kate never managed to squeeze a tear out for their daughter. I would think that simply thinking about what may have happened to Maddie at the hands of a paedophile would be enough to destroy any mother.

And how could Gerry sit there and tell the world he feels no guilt? Surely he would feel some guilt (even if the couple were innocent) for leaving the children to their own devices while he and Kate went out on the razzle? And it probably wasn't for the first time either.

They were in charge of their childrens' safety. Children depend on their parents.
.

[Henry Flower]

I'm sure any parents here would agree with the fact that, if their story were true, Kate and Gerry could be expected to be crushed with guilt for the rest of their lives. They left three toddlers alone so they could wine and dine, and were not there when their child desperately needed them. If they genuinely believed M was abducted by a paedophile then their demeanour from the start has been inexplicable.

I've seen and read interview after interview in which they do nothing but justify themselves, try to argue their actions were completely normal, and in one instance Kate cheerfully informs the viewer that the distance from the tapas bar to the flat was only 49.6 metres according to Google maps.

As the father of a four year old girl my first response to their every interview has been that there's something very very wrong with what these people are telling us, and how. I imagine if I did what they did, and she was taken, is there any way in this or any parallel universe that I could ever countenance sitting in front of a camera and tell the world I was only 49.6 metres away, according to Google, when a sick bastard took her away to do whatever unspeakable thing he wanted to do to her.

[louisa]

I'm sure any parents here would agree with the fact that, if their story were true, Kate and Gerry could be expected to be crushed with guilt for the rest of their lives. They left three toddlers alone so they could wine and dine, and were not there when their child desperately needed them. If they genuinely believed M was abducted by a paedophile then their demeanour from the start has been inexplicable.

I've seen and read interview after interview in which they do nothing but justify themselves, try to argue their actions were completely normal, and in one instance Kate cheerfully informs the viewer that the distance from the tapas bar to the flat was only 49.6 metres according to Google maps.

As the father of a four year old girl my first response to their every interview has been that there's something very very wrong with what these people are telling us, and how. I imagine if I did what they did, and she was taken, is there any way in this or any parallel universe that I could ever countenance sitting in front of a camera and tell the world I was only 49.6 metres away, according to Google, when a sick bastard took her away to do whatever unspeakable thing he wanted to do to her.

And presumably that 49.6 metres was 'as the crow flies', not the actual distance that somebody would need to walk from the hotel room to the tapas bar?

[Henry Flower]

And presumably that 49.6 metres was 'as the crow flies', not the actual distance that somebody would need to walk from the hotel room to the tapas bar?

Absolutely, and that's before we decide which version of the night's events we decide to measure for - entry through the locked front door (original story) or unlocked French Windows (revised version).

I recently watched statement analyst Peter Hyatt going through McCann statements, and while I don't think statement analysis is fool-proof, the cumulative effect of some of his observations is absolutely damning for the McCanns. Madeleine is talked about always as a person to be remembered, reminisced about, nostalgically. She is never talked about as a living person. She is never, ever addressed personally by her parents in an interview. As a parent I would find it impossible not to do that, "Madeleine, our beloved daughter, we miss you, we love you, we will never stop looking until you're home" - but nothing of the sort has ever passed their lips.

I am torn between two scenarios:

1: the sedative leading to an accident, cover-up to hide their criminal neglect scenario, as supported by Kate checking the breathing of the twins when none of the tumult that night wakes them up.
2: something more vile, hinted at by the Gaspar statement concerning Gerry and David Payne's disturbing conversation. Food and wine, sadly, might not be the only reason an adult would want a child safely sedated.

I have almost no doubts about the following:

Madeleine was not abducted, there was no abductor.

They changed their story several times to adapt it to the facts as the investigation progressed.

She died in the apartment. Very highly regarded dogs found cadaverine from her body in several spots in the apartment, and in one instance blood in the same spot behind the sofa.

The DNA in the car was likely hers. My understanding is that it could have been a mixture of both parents, or it could have been hers. Legally inconclusive, but taken with the totality of the physical evidence...?

The curtains did not "whoosh" up only to then tuck themselves neatly back down behind the bed and the chair as per the photos.

She died probably earlier in the week. The weather conditions in the "last photo" match the weather from earlier in the week, not from the day of her "abduction".

The Portuguese police investigation wasn't a botched job. I've read the files and they did not simply ignore leads. Amaral did a good job in impossible circumstances.

The parents were not grieving. People say "you don't know how you'd act in extreme circumstances" - true, but I've seen more than enough interviews with grieving parents to know that there are triggers in sentences, thoughts that well up, words that overwhelm, even years after the event, leading to unmistakable emotional overloads whenever they discuss the subject. It is, in my opinion, the greatest pain a human can feel, the biggest fear an adult can have. I have never seen a flicker of it in either parent, at any point, ever. I've seen only defiance, defensiveness, aggression, sentimentality, and transparent story-telling.

The parents grossly over-use the word "we" when describing things that would more naturally require either an "I", a "he", or a "she". Why? Because the events being described are things that didn't really happen, things that "we" (ie both of them together) concocted, and because they each feel the need to be in it together, knowing that that if they stick to their story they will likely get away with it.

Child neglect is their alibi. Let that one sink in...

[Ginger]

Not sure how you have the authority to assert what he didn't say, without knowing what he did.

As a disclaimer, I have never been able to lip-read (a great annoyance to me, as everyone seems to expect that you should, and then just keep making more and more exaggerated mouthings at you when you don't get the message). However...

I should think that it's more than possible to rule out some things being said, even if one doesn't know exactly what was said. As a trivial case, one can be sure that he's not reciting Lincoln's Second Inaugural in that span of time. In a more general sense, I think it should be possible to estimate the number of syllables and perhaps even phonemes in the statement by watching the motions of the mouth and lips. That should rule out some words.

[Ginger]

Can anyone recommend to me a good book on this case? I'm hoping for one that's thorough in expounding the known facts, lists the major theories and speculations, but tries to remain neutral. I know that's a tall order, but if anyone has suggestions, I'd be grateful.

[Henry Flower]

Can anyone recommend to me a good book on this case? I'm hoping for one that's thorough in expounding the known facts, lists the major theories and speculations, but tries to remain neutral. I know that's a tall order, but if anyone has suggestions, I'd be grateful.

The fact that I really can't think of one fitting that description tells you just how effective the McCanns' lawsuits have been in dampening the public expression of scepticism about their story.