Could we please have a photo of a cadaver dog running off with Kate’s diary with Kate and Gerry in hot pursuit, followed by the priest carrying his sick mother over one shoulder and a naked altar boy over the other ?

Thanks In Advance.

Mart.

YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THIS PICTURE:

http://deco-01.slide.com/r/1/337/fp_snap/504403158283179365/504403158429247238/0/0/0

OR ANYONE ELSE? ITS JUST PERFECT FOR MATERNAL KATE

Soothsayer, people were wondering (re: Scarlett post yesterday), what your current theory is on the case. I am only asking because it came up frequently today, also that you don’t ‘agree’ with Scarlett, correct?

I think Taybie was the only one who tried to clarify it for others. Anyway, I’m just asking because your name crept into the conversation quite a bit today, and your theory may have changed?

“1241
Taybie the Saxon Says:
October 18th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
I think I am nearer understanding Soothsayer’s theory about Fr Pacheco. What Soothsayer I think is hinting at is that on the evening of May 3rd Maddy’s body was hidden in consecrated ground in PDL. This explains why Fr Pacheco can say he is “deceived” or “disappointed” while at the same time saying he would rather cut his tongue out than reveal what is said in a confession. We have all latched on to the possibility of someone making a confession, official or otherwise, to Fr Pacheco whereas what he is really annoyed about is someone misusing sacred ground and manipulating him (as he now sees it after info he has been given.)
Not sure if Soothsayer thinks that the body is still in PDL or whether it was moved later (in the Scenic? to Spain?). Guess this would follow - i.e. the PJ now know where the body WAS hidden but it’s gone now. Moving the body over any kind of distance would have been an audacious operation indeed and I can’t see how the McCanns could have done it.
This is all just my theory about someone else’s theory - I don’t claim to be “in the know”, just for the record.
Soothsayer tends to ignore my posts but maybe one of his confederates can put this to him.”

Anyway, have a good morning/afternoon/evening (well late afternoon).

You are obscuring (with needless inflammatory personal remarks, and deliberate artifice) the issue raised, which is that the McCann’s refusal to provide recnt photos indicates they are attempting to conceal information that would have been revealed in such photos. I suggested that people “use your head” on this point, not on the point of doctoring one of 2 photos that were provided.

Kris: “So , if the McCanns were trying to doctor a photo, they would be trying to PROVE their daughter was alive at 1:29 p.m. on May 3, right? Can you give me any other reason they would be trying to doctor a photo, what else they might be trying to prove? ”

On this issue, I already noted that they may have been trying to falsely establish a specific location for the girl or picture-taker. Or their may be no other reason than they did not want to show any of the real photos taken that day, and therefore provided a fake one.

“And yes, I can assure you, the police are not relying on a time/date stamp from a digital camera to confirm Madeleine was alive at that point. ”

You cannot assure anyone of anything regarding the police. Besides, I never said they were using the photo for that purpose. You’re the one who brought in that stupid idea, not me.

“All this talk about the photo is so unbelievably pointless, and proves nothing either way. But that is just like Stevo, our Anorak Brainiac, to waste so much time on this. I read yesterday that he actually sent his analysis to the PJ. I thought I’d die laughing.”

I guess you can “assure” us that the PJ is laughing too. Though by itself, nothing is “proved” it is certainly suspicious that the McCanns provided only 2 recent photos of Madeleine — when they must have had many more.

As Stevo pointed out, many of the photos used in the “search for Madeleine” were very old. This is yet another indication (of many) that the McCanns efforts to find the girl were just a scam to
1)raise money
2)deflect guilt

If they had really wanted people to instantly recognize Madeleine, they would have provided many up-to-date photos taken by their own camera.

If that still does not make sense to you, I’d guess you’re a Team McCann player here to sling personal insults. Good luck with it.

Let’s see, could you be… Ade? Mike Littorice?

A) Already Dead, or
B) At the Mark Warner Ocean Club Resort.

I think that’s correct, right? There’s no real C) possible, is there?

So , if the McCanns were trying to doctor a photo, they would be trying to PROVE their daughter was alive at 1:29 p.m. on May 3, right? Can you give me any other reason they would be trying to doctor a photo, what else they might be trying to prove?

And yes, I can assure you, the police are not relying on a time/date stamp from a digital camera to confirm Madeleine was alive at that point. They might rely on witness statements, people who actually SAW her, but as much as they have messed up the investigation, they are not stupid, and they surely know that a time/date stamp on a camera is easily changed. Of course they are not using that as any kind of real evidence Madeleine was alive at that point.

All this talk about the photo is so unbelievably pointless, and proves nothing either way. But that is just like Stevo, our Anorak Brainiac, to waste so much time on this. I read yesterday that he actually sent his analysis to the PJ. I thought I’d die laughing.