“Were there already fairly commonplace rumours about the children having being sedated, allegedly, at the end of July/early August? i.e. Were they making this ‘excuse’ to camera because the rumour was already in the public domain, or were they making an ‘excuse’ about something that wasn’t yet known about? ”

I’m sure there were local rumours immediately , with people whispering about how strange it was that the twins remained sleeping, etc. But the McCanns reacted to public rumours only in early October:

“McCanns may sue over Madeleine sedation claims
Oct 11 2007 by Caroline Innes, Liverpool Daily Post
THE Liverpool-born mother of Madeleine McCann is considering legal action against claims she sedated her daughter on the night she disappeared… Kate and husband Gerry said they wanted to make it “categorically clear” they have never used sedatives on any of their children.

The former Notre Dame school pupil said comments to the contrary were so hurtful she felt compelled to speak out.

The couple’s lawyers were last night studying speculation in the Portu-guese press that tests on evidence carried out in the UK suggest that their elder daughter and twins Sean and Amelie were given the drugs on May 3 – the date of Madeleine’s disappearance.”

Strange that in early August Gerry was saying that it is understandable to think the twins were sedated, and yet in early October he is threatening to sue people for suspecting that they carried out the sedation. Then in November they broadcast his earlier comments! So he thinks it is natural for people to suspect sedation, but “slanderous” for them to suspect the McCanns did it! I doubt they got very far with that lawsuit.

Oh really - yawn. Must to bed.

I find any theories that dont stick rigidly to ‘it was an abductor’ get rejected and scorned and shouts of ‘foul’ by some people - totally missing the point that wild speculation sometimes hits the nail on the head!

Much better to challenge through logical argument or simply ignore, but no point in moaning and whining.

That is one point, but it is another point when the footage is broadcast. Specifically, the footage with Gerry talking about sedation was broadcast AFTER Team McCann announced their (dubious) negative test results on the twins. Therefore, this remark’s broadcast tends to show that they themselves do not take their test seriously, and that they must prepare for the likelihood that the PJ have obtained positive test results. It is also an admission that the twins did give the appearance (even to doctors) of being sedated. Edit…

++++++++++++++++

Indeed… That they allow it to be broadcast at all I agree is significant in itself. What I find fascinating about the time that the footage was shot is that even back in early August, before they were arguido/a, they were already beginning to make ‘excuses’ about some of the things that they were concerned the PJ might find during their investigations.

I can’t remember now, don’t know if you can? Were there already fairly commonplace rumours about the children having being sedated, allegedly, at the end of July/early August? i.e. Were they making this ‘excuse’ to camera because the rumour was already in the public domain, or were they making an ‘excuse’ about something that wasn’t yet known about? I think it’s the former, but as I say, I’m not certain.

It does also make you wonder what other ‘gems’ Jon Corner has hidden away in his footage?

Cheryl , there are two Cheryls posting, you are showing up as Anonymous. The reference in the above bit is not about you, but t’other

___________
That is me - I have my machine at home programmed to recognize me but using another one here at work and it didn’t - put me in as Anonymous.

—————————

Mods and Admin

To avoid futher confusion , if you are you , can you email me to confirm.

(As an aside I have a client called Cheryl too)

December 6th, 2007 at 7:43 am
1276
Cheryl Says:
” I may be mistaken but didn’t he say that [Gerry admitting that the twins had appeared as if sedated by someone]after it was said they drugged the children? ”

Yes, you are wrong, Cheryl. He said it in the car while he was driving, in the Jon Corner “family video” segment. That pretty much negates the ridiculous excuse you tried to make up for Gerry.

_________________
REPLY: Excuse me, did I not say “I may be mistaken…” and put a question mark after my sentence; as I was looking for clarification? Thank you for the clarification despite your nasty tone. I was not attempting to make a ridiculous excuse for Gerry anymore than I make excuses for rude people.

————————

Mods and Admin

Cheryl , there are two Cheryls posting, you are showing up as Anonymous. The reference in the above bit is not about you, but t’other

December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 am
1277 Cheryl

What I dont understand is if you dont like theorising - what the hell are you doing here?

____________________

Ian, there are some theories on here that are not far-fetched but some are way off the walls! I don’t understand how people can get their ‘jollies’ in making statements that are quite close to or are slanderous about another and deliberately smear another’s reputation without facts to base it on. So one might say I sit and watch and read and study what is written and, yes, give my opinions at times. Ian, if you’ll note I make statements at times to try to point out what is and what is not known as true FACT.

That is one point, but it is another point when the footage is broadcast. Specifically, the footage with Gerry talking about sedation was broadcast AFTER Team McCann announced their (dubious) negative test results on the twins. Therefore, this remark’s broadcast tends to show that they themselves do not take their test seriously, and that they must prepare for the likelihood that the PJ have obtained positive test results. It is also an admission that the twins did give the appearance (even to doctors) of being sedated.

1302
Cheryl Says:
“Anyone with an ounce of common sense and know anything about proper police procedures would recognize the total mess the first inept team caused. ”

A completely unsubstantiated statement. You cannot even give examples of what you are talking about.

“Why do you think they were removed and the new team brought with the top professional investigators to take over the case?”

My opinion is that THE MAIN REASON is because a paedophile network is involved (according to the Team McCann abduction version AND according to the reported PJ “intruder” version). The new team is headed by a guy whose SPECIALTY has been tracking paedophiles.

Other less important reasons include the distraction of (unproven) charges against Amaral for falsifying documents in a case involving police brutality. The direct pretext was his final comments complaining about how the British police were allowing the McCanns to interfere with the investigation.

December 6th, 2007 at 7:48 am
1249
Cheryl Says:
December 6th, 2007 at 1:54 am

_____________
If you’ll read carefully what I was saying I was talking about the first team of investigators. I’ve always said in other remarks on here how professional the second team and lead investigator is. Anyone with an ounce of common sense and know anything about proper police procedures would recognize the total mess the first inept team caused. Why do you think they were removed and the new team brought with the top professional investigators to take over the case?

contention /not contetion

hearsay/ not heresay

I agree w/cheryl/1277
Theorising based on certain known facts is logical…When it is based on he ,she , they said without any real evidence that is heresay…Which has been a bone of contetion as to why some are here.

“He said it to cover the drowsiness of the twins - in case it was discovered that they were in fact sedated by someone.”

True enough, but WHEN did he say that? That video was shot in, say May, July or August. Afterwards, the McCanns supposedly “proved” the twins had not been sedated. And yet they included that remark in the recent broadcast.

Edit….

+++++++++++++

Nobody has ever contradicted me on my assertion that ALL of the footage of Kate and Gerry on Panorama in fact came from Jon Corner’s “home video” (I’m being sarcastic there!).

I believe that Jon Corner shot all his footage in early August?

REPLY: Peter, you left three other pertinent paragraphs out in your edit:

++++++++++++

Er, no I didn’t omit anything…. I was responding to a previous poster who must not have included them? If it’s my mistake, then I can only apologise, it was a genuine omission.

In any case….. Given the wording of the paragraphs you posted, it would make me doubt the veracity of the entire article. Several of the matters discussed are the subject of pending trials. Discussing them in the manner contained in that article extract is odd at best, worse, possibly illegal?

Further… article of this nature when used in support of the McCann’s are no more than a PR exercise to rubbish the investigation. There may well be merit in the suggestion that the investigation has not been without its problems. However, as with much about this case I don’t think we in the public domain actually know to what degree the PJ may have bungled or if it’s the potential perpetrators who may have helped create this perception.

It would, in my opinion, be far better that those wishing to support the McCann’s, up to and including the McCann’s themselves, did their best to answer outstanding questions and/or address criticisms rather than constantly seeking to rubbish the investigation.

“He said it to cover the drowsiness of the twins - in case it was discovered that they were in fact sedated by someone.”

True enough, but WHEN did he say that? That video was shot in, say May, July or August. Afterwards, the McCanns supposedly “proved” the twins had not been sedated. And yet they included that remark in the recent broadcast.

This indicates that the McCanns KNOW VERY WELL that the twins’ hair DOES INDEED REVEAL sedatives or other drugs. They know the PJ knows. Their own tests must have shown them this. And yet they announced that their tests were negative — by NOT including those particular drugs in the list of those “tested for”. JMO, allegedly all.

“there was some speculation that the MC’s had the twin’s hair analysed around early Oct (not sure of date) some 5 months after the “event” which proved no “medication / sedation” present.”

Any such analysis is completely meaningless without knowing the details of what the sample was tested for. Gerry knows all about testing of athletes, etc. Each Olympics there is a “secret” list of drugs that will be tested for. Other drugs are not tested, and if an athlete was using the untested drugs, they get “lucky”. It’s too time-consuming and expensive to test for ALL KNOWN banned substances.

So the biased tests on the twins’ hair probably consisted of tests for a certain set of sedatives, and nothing else. This would be ridiculous, because if the McCanns did the sedation, then they know which drug(s) NOT to include in the test.

Completely meaningless, except as PR proving that the twins were not sedated. And yet AFTER THIS, we have the Panorama broadcast of Gerry saying that it did look like the twins were sedated. Why did they include that segment in the broadcast — with no mention of the dubious tests that supposedly show they were not sedated?

Ian

There are one or two confusing agents ( as the Chinese would say ) about.