Madeleine McCann: Kelsey Lynn Kudia For Hire, Paris Hilton And Propaganda
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
THE SUN front page: “’MADDIE’ FOR HIRE”
Tonight Kelsey Lynn Kudia is Madeleine McCann. Kelsey looks likes Madeleine McCann. She’s not in Morocco. She;s nopt Bouchra Benaissa. She not in Malta. But for the right fee she might be. Kelsey is a working Madeleine McCann double
Pages 4 and 5: “The boss of a lookalike agency who hopes to make a fortune out of a little Madeleine McCann double said last night: ‘It’s not sinister – it’s entertainment’. Shona Adams reckons three-year-old Kelsey Lynn Kudla’s similarity to missing Maddie could earn her £9MILLION for starring in a proposed feature film about the vanished tot”
Well, someone would have to play the missing child, unless she is found alive and well…
Says Shona, owner of London’s Juliet Adams Model Agency: “If the film about Madeleine is ever made, then the world is Kelsey’s oyster. If someone like Steven Spielberg made it, she could make £9million easily – of which I’d take 20 per cent. She will become a name in her own right and make it as a child model or actress because she’s got her foot in the door”
Just when you thought it was safe to holiday in Portugal…Dum-dum…
Of course, great acting careers have begun with less. Didn’t Tom Hanks play the baby in a Cry In The Dark?
She continues: “And from there, her earning potential is limitless. It’s not sinister. And if the McCanns are upset, there’s nothing they can do because it’s a democracy. I wouldn’t back away from it because, if a film is being made, then it’s entertainment”
Kate and Gerry McCann are “doctors”.
Says Shona: “I wouldn’t put Kelsey in a position of doing anything bad taste”
SLAP IN FACE FOR McCANNS: Sun columnist Lorraine Kelly says: “It makes you recoil to think a lookalike agency would have a Madeleine on their books alongside someone who looks like Jack Nicholson or Paris Hilton”
Whatever could she mean? Neither Nicolson nor Hilton were available to defend themselves…
DAILY EXPRESS: “The Madeleine lookalike on hire for £600 an hour”
Do you want to get your resort or country in the papers? Hire Kelsey to be a “Madeleine” and attract the world’s media to your locale as she is spotted time and time again
Kelsey is American
“PARENTS trying to ‘distract’ police
A source “close to the official police” investigation says: “Who do the McCanns think they are? The discovery of new witnesses in the last few weeks lead the authorities to believe they are at war with a gigantic propaganda machine. The McCanns have some very powerful people on their side - millionaires, celebrities, even politicians”
Says Robert Murat’s lawyer: “Robert Murat does not have millionaires supporting him, nor campaign funds. “He just wants to see his name cleared in this case as he has nothing to do with Madeleine’s disappearance, despite every day people emerging trying to forcibly incriminate him”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE – The £600 an hour lookalike”
Page 7: “MADDIE DOUBLE FOR HIRE”
“A sick mother is touting her daughter as a £600-an-hour Madeleine McCann lookalike,” says the paper, amid adverts for “adult fantasies”, “nasty sex” and FILTH”
She is an “unnamed American girl” - see the Sun above
Says Clarence Mitchell: “This is an offensive way to make money out of Madeleine’s disappearance. This is deeply offensive to parents Kate and Gerry”
MADDIE: THE MOVIE: “Yesterday, Channel 4’s head of documentaries Angus Macqueen said he had attended a meeting with the McCanns’ representatives to discuss a movie. He tells us: “Of course we are interested in making a film about this compelling story. We have a history of making quality films about crime matters”
That’s entertainment: “Meanwhile, producers of US psychic TV show Haunting Evidence have been in Praia da Luz planning their own show about Madeleine’s disappearance”
DAILY MAIL: “McCanns are ready to sack detective agency”
Says a source: “We will carry on the search for Madeleine, but not necessarily with Metodo 3. We are stuck with them to the end of the contracted period. The question of whether it is renewed or not has still to be decided. They have faced not having their contract renewed every since Francisco shot his mouth off… It was made clear what they were doing was foolish and unhelpful”
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “US TV psychics join hunt for Madeleine McCann”
“Three clairvoyants from the hit show will travel to Praia da Luz in a bid to find the missing four-year-old”
Come in Madeleine…
Kate and Gerry McCanns have received “1,500” offers from psychics hoping to find Madeleine. Like the Psychic Barber…
Says Clarence Mitchell: “We did receive an offer and chose on this occasion not to respond. We are grateful for any assistance they bring to bear in the hunt for finding Madeleine. We thank them for their concern and any demonstrably checkable fact is passed on to the police or the private detective agency”
Tune and pick up into Madeleine on the telly…
Madeleine McCann: the entertainment, speculation and lookalikes…
Posted: 11th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,399) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
January 12th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
1418
Châtelaine Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 11:24 am
1412
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 6:03 am
“[…] it has never been proven she was given a sedative or whatever - just rumours and speculation. All one would have to do it keep their hand over the child’s mouth to keep them quiet. Or one better tell them they are taking them to their parent..go willingly and quietly.”
——
* the “abductor” seen by JT didn’t have a free hand to hold over her mouth
* keeping her quiet by telling her she will be taken to her parents would include speaking her language [English] and likely also knowing her …
______________
Good point; however, who said a Portugese may have taken her? Does no citizen of Portugal know the English language? Did not the UK send a list of their paedos known to frequent Portugal - for a relaxing vacation, of course? Or as far as that goes, were the McCanns and friends the only ones staying there who were English speaking? Doubtful. Just some possibilities as to another scenario how that young child was taken out of the apartment.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am
oops!
January 12th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Funny co-incidences…..
Whilst residing in the “lower field” and taking the opportunity to browse those expensive coffee table magazines that Mrs Peter O insists on buying.. (Odd behaviour since we don’t have a coffee table..)
I came across a consumer competition to win a “Family holiday” in a Mark Warner resort.
Sponsored by “Cherios”….
In “Good Housekeeping” – seems very apt.. Clean and tidy, what what…
The date…. May 2007…
January 12th, 2008 at 11:24 am
1412
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 6:03 am
“[...] it has never been proven she was given a sedative or whatever - just rumours and speculation. All one would have to do it keep their hand over the child’s mouth to keep them quiet. Or one better tell them they are taking them to their parent..go willingly and quietly.”
——
* the “abductor” seen by JT didn’t have a free hand to hold over her mouth
* keeping her quiet by telling her she will be taken to her parents would include speaking her language [English] and likely also knowing her …
January 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am
1355
Totje: …..I can’t remember what the family trademarked….
It was the eye logo, the coloboma that was highlighted by friends and family from the day after she went missing (ref. bbc leicestershire link already posted)
The logo:
http://tinyurl.com/2z9lrm
January 12th, 2008 at 7:24 am
1406
Tinsel Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:33 am
1403
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:08 am
1393
Daisy Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:33 am
#
___________
John Walsh has done all most miracles over here on behalf of children.
* * * *
John Walsh took a lie-detector test when his son went mission. So did Elizabeth Smart’s father. Well, Gerry? Why not you?
____________________
Well first of all, over half the US was not crying out for their heads and readying the electric chair in prejudgment.
Now, this is said rather sarcastically in a way - I’ve been surprised not to see a petition going around over there to open the Tower of London for heads to roll again.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:14 am
1413
DuncanR Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 6:46 am
1412 - Cheryl
Of course he was, Duncan, and damn good at lying even not taking a test with straight face and not blinking an eye. ! We were discussing this case as I wanted him to confirm my beliefs an innocent person can flunk. BUT he did point out if one has guilt or hiding something from way back when and is nervous about it it can affect the outcome. Why they aren’t admissible in court. I could not imagine anyone in their shape with stress and more than likely extreme guilt within themselves leaving the child alone taking that test without questionable results. He had me laughing reminding me of someone we both knew who worked at one time for him - the man you might say had a very ‘liberal’ outlook and liked his women (including his wife) and when it came time to take the yearly poly he’d right away make his statement about his activities so not to mess up the test since such conduct was frowned upon..
January 12th, 2008 at 6:46 am
1412 - Cheryl
And does anyone imagine ’spooks’ are not (as part of their training) taught how to fool (pass) a lie detector test in case the fall into the hands of an enemy?
A polygraph test does NOT detect lies. It measures tiny physiological changes in body that accompany stress. The theory is that we are all brought up to be law abiding citizens who believe it is ‘wrong’ to tell lies. Consequently, we feel guilty when we knowingly tell a lie. That guilt triggers an involuntary physiological response which is picked up by a polygraph (and is interpreted as a sign of a person lying). Trouble is these responses e.g. sweaty palms also accompany nervousness.
‘Lie’ detectors are given little credence (on their own) as an indication of an individuals guilt or otherwise because of high incidence of -
a. false positives. The situations described by your neighbour
b. false negatives. Sociopaths who don’t share our view about ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and hardened criminals, whose lifestyle is based around being successful liars can sail through a polygraph test because they don’t feel any quilt about telling a lie.
You can be sure that if anyone volunteers to take a polygraph test they will prepare themselves well beforehand - practising giving deceitful answers to anticipated questions - so that they ‘pass’ the test.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:07 am
1409
Daisy Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:51 am
1404
Tinsel Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:33 am
—–
Tinsel,
I saw on TV when Elizabeth Smart was found, buy I didn’t know that John Walsh had been instrumental in locating her. That is great work!
Regarding why GM doesn’t take a lie detector test? Don’t forget that they are probably lying about some aspects of the night in question, i.e. the time-line and the regular (apparently not so) checking on the kids.
__________
Daisy, I talked to a former neighbor I keep in touch with who was with a spook agency and he said anyone under the right circumstances could fail it for just those reasons - nervous, under great stress, has guilt say about something in their past and nervous that could be asked, etc. Then you get a pathological liar they could pass it. I bet they were advised not to take it with great stress they are under and ALSO they have to be filled with guilt leaving that child alone…that in itself one would think cause them to blow the test!
January 12th, 2008 at 6:03 am
1410
Daisy Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:57 am
1405
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:44 am
_____________
Daisy, it has never been proven she was given a sedative or whatever - just rumours and speculation. All one would have to do it keep their hand over the child’s mouth to keep them quiet. Or one better tell them they are taking them to their parent..go willingly and quietly.
January 12th, 2008 at 4:57 am
1405
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:44 am
—–
Cheryl,
Just watch the Sky report from Martin Brunt. They show how quickly someone could have taken a child and walked out. It is probably less than a minute.
Also, in response to another earlier poster, I don’t think an abductor would have worried about carrying the child’s toy. I also am of the opinion that the child did not scream (if there was an abductor) because she could have been under the influence of a mild sedative (to keep her sleeping while the T9 were having their dinner).
January 12th, 2008 at 4:51 am
1404
Tinsel Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:33 am
—–
Tinsel,
I saw on TV when Elizabeth Smart was found, buy I didn’t know that John Walsh had been instrumental in locating her. That is great work!
Regarding why GM doesn’t take a lie detector test? Don’t forget that they are probably lying about some aspects of the night in question, i.e. the time-line and the regular (apparently not so) checking on the kids.
I personally would not take a lie detector test either, because I have watched movies on TV based on fact, where the results of the lie detector test are “inconclusive” and therefore the assumption is immediatley that “well he/she must be hiding something”. It is all based on your state at the time of the test, your heartbeat/pulse, etc. Many people get more nervous than others in particular situations, their blood pressure rises considerably, their pulse is elevated, etc. It is a tool that is not recognized by the Court system and, in my opinion, it is because it is not conclusive in its results.
January 12th, 2008 at 4:45 am
1403
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:08 am
—-
Cheryl,
the program is also shown here in Australia, but we always get it on a seasonal basis and probably the episodes are a couple of years old.
January 12th, 2008 at 4:44 am
1400
Grande Finale Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:59 am
1399
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:46 am
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC ONE
DATE: 19:11:07
“According to the McCann timeline, at about 9.30 Matt Oldfield is the next to check on the children. Remember Gerry McCann says he had closed the bedroom door, but Matt Oldfield says he finds it open. He doesn’t go in the room, he sees the twins but can’t see Madeleine’s bed. Because there’s no noise he assumes everything is okay. “
_______________-
Is he the one who said he just listened at the door (according to newspapers that is)? So, if Gerry is at 9:00 everything okay, no one before 9:30?, Oldfield next - doesn’t bother to visually check all 3 - then 10:00 Kate finds her gone - then the ‘impossible’ could have been very possible from 9:05! They stalk, they wait, they take very quickly - she could have been gone from 9:05 or whatever time right after Gerry M. left the room.
You know how fast car hi-jackers take a car? Like less than a minute. We had 3 cases over here the past year of car jackers taking a car and a baby in backseat. Thank god they were ‘honest’ car jackers (only wanting the car) and babies were put out blocks away safely. One was a mother loading her groceries in her car, baby in babyseat and that fast the car jacker was in the car before she could even react and gone with her car and baby. One was a mother getting in the drivers side and the man shoved her, jumped in and took off with the baby in backseat. Like seconds is all it took!
January 12th, 2008 at 4:33 am
1403
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 4:08 am
1393
Daisy Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:33 am
#
___________
John Walsh has done all most miracles over here on behalf of children.
* * * *
Add to that, he was instrumental in one of the great miracles ever in child abduction cases–the return of Elizabeth Smart when almost everyone had given her up for dead, and the police had blamed someone else who had died in prison.
John Walsh broadcast information obtained from Elizabeth’s little sister, which led to the information that discovered where Elizabeth was being held captive.
Without the determination of John Walsh, Elizabeth and her family might have been doomed to live with that horrible tragedy of child abduction.
John Walsh took a lie-detector test when his son went mission. So did Elizabeth Smart’s father. Well, Gerry? Why not you?
January 12th, 2008 at 4:08 am
1393
Daisy Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:33 am
#
___________
John Walsh has done all most miracles over here on behalf of children. The sad side is his involvement and all-consuming drive came from his own tragedy of losing his child to one. I met him one time at a friend’s party and he is a truly ‘real’ person. The Center for Missing and Exploited Children is something else and start of the art computers like one wouldn’t believe and what they can do with them is mind-boggling. The staff is fantastic and top in their specialties. I was over there visiting someone and one of them showed me how they ‘age’ a child through the years who is missing - fascinating.
John Walsh uses that aging on his Most Wanted programs looking for criminals (and some children) gone for years. On one program he was focusing in on a man who had killed his wife and 3 children 20 year ago before. They aged the man how he would most likely look like in the present and the very next morning the man was picked up. He was down in Richmond, VA working as an accountant, I think but a more or less white collar job, and the person who worked with him at the office had watched that program night before and called in immediately - he recognized him that easily from the aging process. Then, cases of people wanted and aged and recognized by neighbors whereever and the murderers present wives were happily married only to find out their real identity and they were wanted for murder.
January 12th, 2008 at 4:03 am
#
1375
Ferdinand Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 1:37 am
1371 jo Says:
“Ferdinand
I wish to know your theory,please.If you are still around…let me know.”
It’s quite simple. Someone demands something from the UK government, and therefore takes a british child hostage.
—–
Ferdinand,
If this would be the case, do you think we will ever know the truth? Or do you think the McCanns will be made scapegoats?
January 12th, 2008 at 4:01 am
“he sees the twins but can’t see Madeleine’s bed”
Interesting because G Mccann said the twins cots were either side of Maddies Bed
January 12th, 2008 at 3:59 am
1399
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:46 am
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC ONE
DATE: 19:11:07
“According to the McCann timeline, at about 9.30 Matt Oldfield is the next to check on the children. Remember Gerry McCann says he had closed the bedroom door, but Matt Oldfield says he finds it open. He doesn’t go in the room, he sees the twins but can’t see Madeleine’s bed. Because there’s no noise he assumes everything is okay. “
January 12th, 2008 at 3:46 am
40
Ian Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 9:58 am
My latest theory is that the McCanns checked regularly on their children, well, Gerry once at 9:00 and Kate once at 10:00.
Im not sure why they didnt check other peoples kids, as the others were checking theirs for them.
________________
Who of the others did check the McCann’s children? I remember the one changed his story (according to the newspapers that is) that he really didn’t go in to the room just listened at the door! What time of the shift did he have and not fulfill it totally? In other words - 9 Gerry covered it, 10 Kate McCann found her gone - who actually went into that room and checked the children in that hour inbetween the parents?
January 12th, 2008 at 3:45 am
1391
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 2:45 am
—–
Cheryl,
I totally agree with you.
Jo,
I’m also not from English background (Chilean) and therefore I fully understand what you say about missing on bits and pieces of the language and subtleties, etc.
January 12th, 2008 at 3:39 am
1394
veritablequandary Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 3:35 am
—–
Veritablequandary,
was my post address to you???? NO. If you don’t like what I write, then just skip my post and don’t read them ….. EASY!
January 12th, 2008 at 3:37 am
Azahria Chamberlaine’s case is one where the whole World thought that the mother had killed her and that the dingo story was not true.
She spent 6 years in jail for a crime she did not commit. The public had judged her and they were wrong! Very similar to this case, isn’t it?
January 12th, 2008 at 3:37 am
If Madeleine was abducted, wouldn’t it have been a smart move on the part of the abductor to have taken Cuddlecat as well! Madeleine would have cried, if Cuddlecat had been taken from her and alerted people around….nah…..she must have been drugged not to have called out. To take a toy from a child would upset them no end. Or, she was not there.
January 12th, 2008 at 3:35 am
Daisy says
“I am a very dominant person and with extremely strong personality, but I don’t shove my theory down someones’ throat . . ”
But you go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on.
You are really a dim bulb.
January 12th, 2008 at 3:33 am
#
1384
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 2:06 am
1376
jane Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 1:38 am
The case against Lindy Chamberlaine - Wikipedia
_________________
Jane, hello there! That case has been on my mind! They weren’t even guilty! John Walsh was interviewed months ago live on TV morning news about the McCann case and with him he had parents who had children missing and never found and other parents who had been crucified by the police and public and not guilty. What a program that was and listening to the parents talk and say how their lives had been changed forever and the hell those went through persecuted by the public and they were not guilty of their child’s disappearance. His child, by the way, was abducted by a paedophile, who has never been caught all these years, and too gruesome to put on here what happened to his young boy and then killed. Anyhow, he came out and said he felt they were innocent in her actual disapperanceand this was the work of an abductor and his heart broke for them. He and his wife had been through it, some of the parents on had been and who would know the signs of the work of such creatures than those who had been victimized by one.
——
Hi Cheryl,
I like what you posted about John Walsh’s program. I feel for those parents whos lives have been ruined by public speculation, when they were not guilty of the crime. This is what I’m about in this case also. I don’t want to accuse the parents when I have not seen all the evidence that the police might have.
January 12th, 2008 at 2:54 am
1389
Totje Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 2:32 am
Cheryl,
In case you’re still around. I really can’t recall whether you expressed your opinion about Metodo 3. Someone asked why they rented M3. I made a list about what was discussed already about the motives. I know what motive you choose. Same as I did. Ferdinand offered another motive.
So now I would be interested to hear your opinion about the investigation by Methodo3.
___________
If my memory is correct, I believe I heard they were referred to that group by someone else who may have used them. Personally, I think that group sold them a ‘bag of goods’ they knew they couldn’t produce but knew the parents were desperate to find the child. Now what I did think was quite stupid was not to have fired them long ago when they started making outlandish statements when they’d be finding the child. But once again, we have to keep in mind everything we’ve heard about statements, etc. has been from the newspapers. I keep in mind that old saying ‘believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you read.’ Well, right now this is big money making time for the papers covering this story, so I don’t believe anything much of what I read except the ‘today’s date’ on the paper.
January 12th, 2008 at 2:45 am
1385
jo Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 2:06 am
1380
Cheryl Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 1:51 am
*******************
Thank you.
You know much more than I do. I havent been able to really follow the whole case and whatever I think comes out of so many sources,english and foreign,there is so much info that at the end I am truly lost.,torn between the media,my feelings and trying to gret a big puzzle to come together with a happy ending….if possible(?).
Also I am not english and I do miss a lot of the spirit of the culture through language and metalanguage…..not easy!
_____________
You are welcome, Jo. We have so many cases of paedophiles taking children over here it is horrible. Some have taken the children right of homes with the parents home and in bed. One took a little child out of her front yard, which was fenced in, while playing with other small children, her mother inside and didn’t get outside in time. They like to target children at bus stops; children standing apart from their parent - one case near me years ago grabbed a small 5 year old child from a neighborhood Xmas party and everyone was standing around and didn’t notice it happening (he had gotten her near the door and quickly got her out of it); years ago 2 sisters, ages 12 and 13, went home after school dropped off by the school bus about 10 miles from here, her parents arrived home from work and the girls were gone. Their abused bodies were found a day or so later laying in the shallow waters of the river side by side. This summer over in MD a mother and some others were cleaning the church in the evening and the children were playing around inside, a paedophile grabbed a young girl right there at the church. As an expert said one time - if a paedophile focuses on your child they will find a way to take them. An FBI Agent said who specializes in such cases - they can take your child faster than you can snap your finger.
There are those on here who say it was ‘impossible’ - far from it!
January 12th, 2008 at 2:44 am
584
Stevo Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
—-
Stevo,
I am the sort of person that does not believe everything that has been written in the press, therefore, I try and draw my own conclusions taking into account everything I am aware of about this case. My opinions are not ludicrous and neither are yours. We just differ. That doesn’t, in my opinion, give anybody the right to “shoot down” someone just because they disagree or because they don’t see the World around them the same way.
I find it very difficult to believe that people could go to such an extent as to set up a fund (company) to accept donations from the public (all in plain view of the whole World!) and continue with the alleged cover-up for so long without one of the T9 cracking and telling the truth about what happened in May ‘07. I believe they are all lying, I just don’t know why at this point.
I have never said that my views about this case are right, nor have I said to anybody else that their opinions are wrong. I’m merely reading and taking in what other posters think and sometimes giving them my views about their speculation. This is what this forum is all about, isn’t it? To try and find out the truth! But, why the need to “attack” someone? Those people have serious anger management problems, in my opinion, and I personally wouldn’t like to be acquainted with them. I am a very dominant person and with extremely strong personality, but I don’t shove my theory down someones’ throat, do I? I welcome someone disagreeing with me and putting their point across in a civilized manner (like Ian did last night), but someone like RedRooster leaves a lot to be desired!
Leeza even came out with a silly comment about me, that I was in a forum and not in a Court of Law. As if I don’t know that! I don’t think she read the whole “conversation” before she made such a statement.
You, Stevo, have some very interesting points and sometimes I agree with you, but most of the time I don’t. I think the extent to which you went to study the Baby Grace case is admirable, but in the end, what appeared so possible to you and everybody else following that scenario, was totally wrong. This is what I am about: sometimes things are not the way they appear to be and I want proof that the parents are in fact the perpetrators of, allegedly, multiple crimes before I will be convinced.
As stated yesterday, I’m trying to look beyond the case itself to see if there is something else that is commanding the McCanns behaviour and their abnormal reactions to the disappearence of Maddie. I hope you will respect that.
January 12th, 2008 at 2:32 am
Cheryl,
In case you’re still around. I really can’t recall whether you expressed your opinion about Metodo 3. Someone asked why they rented M3. I made a list about what was discussed already about the motives. I know what motive you choose. Same as I did. Ferdinand offered another motive.
So now I would be interested to hear your opinion about the investigation by Methodo3.
January 12th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Nite nite Fair.