I find it difficult to accept the explanation that she had been told not to display emotion in case an abductor got a kick from it. Most parents would be unable to totally disguise how they felt - and not many would be able to sleep well.

****
I agree, the autism angle is interesting and I can’t dismiss the idea ever since I heard it.
K did not have the eyes of someone who cried a lot. Still doesn’t. Eyes get red-rimmed, glazed, change shape, are very distinctive when you cry a lot. Most adults know this.

I also don’t believe she was simply following a directive not to cry. I feel she was and is an amazingly selfish person, who dealt with her own issues in those early days–apart from dealing with the disappearance.

906
“Hideki, you have accused me again and again of being paid by the McCanns to support them”

Liar, I have not accused you of being paid for anything.

“you have said again and again that the only people who support the McCanns are paedophiles themselves.”

By now you’ve proven that you are a DAMN liar, for I most certainly never said that only paedophiles support the McCanns.

I said that support for the McCanns (particlularly the view that they should not be prosecuted) is advocacy against enforcement of child neglect laws, which benefits paedophiles.

“The fact that you now find it inconvenient for me to repeat your comments doesn’t alter the fact that you made those comments. ”

You are NOT repeating anything I said. You are LYING about what I said.

I said that support for the McCanns (particlularly the view that they should not be prosecuted) is advocacy against enforcement of child neglect laws, which benefits paedophiles.

“If you stopped accusing other posters of being whores and pimps, and started providing reasoned arguments instead of diatribes, we would all benefit…”

I did not accuse YOU of anything but being a LIAR and a “pretentious word-whore”. That was very accurate, as your new post of pathetic lies proves. Which part of the McCann family do you hail from, Chenier?

December 19th, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Moreover, I did not see you condemning Chenier when she lied about me calling her a “paid paedophile” — I never called anyone a paedophile. Chenier lied about what I wrote many times in that thread, and you said nothing.
————————————————–

Hideki, you have accused me again and again of being paid by the McCanns to support them, notwithstanding the assurances of Mods and Admin on this, and you have said again and again that the only people who support the McCanns are paedophiles themselves.

The fact that you now find it inconvenient for me to repeat your comments doesn’t alter the fact that you made those comments.

If you stopped accusing other posters of being whores and pimps, and started providing reasoned arguments instead of diatribes, we would all benefit…

Edit…

Upon reflection, perhaps Maria is not a whore. I retract my statement. Maybe she’s just a cleaning lady at the brothel. Her prose sounds too old and stiff for a bed bunny…

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

I’m sorry, I don’t understand your need to be abusive to other posters.

“I may not agree with a lot of what Maria posts but I don’t see that this give me any right to be so disrespectful.”

You have not stated exactly what you think is disrespectful about my opinion. Moreover, you deliberately copied this post onto the other thread, out of context. That is a form of “unnecessary” abuse, PeterO.

Moreover, I did not see you condemning Chenier when she lied about me calling her a “paid paedophile” — I never called anyone a paedophile. Chenier lied about what I wrote many times in that thread, and you said nothing. You seem to think that sort of “disrespect” is quite alright.

So why do you now give a shite if I think Maria is compromising her principles and associating with a bunch of McCann whores? You’re the pimp, IMO.
—————————–

Mods and Admin
“It’s not a case of not permissible, but it is unnecessary. We encourage debate, not abuse.”

Upon reflection, perhaps Maria is not a whore. I retract my statement. Maybe she’s just a cleaning lady at the brothel. Her prose sounds too old and stiff for a bed bunny…

Maria is a Team McCann whore.

891 Murder Says:

Edit…..

Maria is a Team McCann whore.

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

Mods and Admin

Is it really permissible to describe fellow posters in the manner above?

I may not agree with a lot of what Maria posts but I don’t see that this give me any right to be so disrespectful.

****************************

Mods and Admin
It’s not a case of not permissible, but it is unnecessary. We encourage debate, not abuse.

December 18th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
626
chenier Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
There’s enough material in there for several Phds…

************
Well spotted. But the MF produces even better research material…….
______________________________–
So Meej (please correct me if I’m being too familiar - I have trouble with etiquette) is your primary research interest here McCannology or autism?
**************
Are the two mutually exclusive?
**************
Meejician, I have wondered from the onset of the Madeleine saga whether Kate could be autistic, but don’t know enough about the subject to understand if this thought is wildly out of order. It just seemed to me an explanation for her apparently being unable to empathise with the plight of her daughter in a way which would normally be understood by the majority.

I find it difficult to accept the explanation that she had been told not to display emotion in case an abductor got a kick from it. Most parents would be unable to totally disguise how they felt - and not many would be able to sleep well.

891
Murder Says:

“…I will henceforth feel bound to ‘factor in’ to your [Maria's] arguments some possible contamination of your analyses by what I will crudely characterise as a ‘hidden agenda’.”

Henceforth? You’ve got to be kidding? I assumed Maria was Team McCann after reading one post a long time ago. After that, I skipped most of them, except when the response to them by Bennett, yourself or others was interesting.

Maria is a Team McCann whore.

You have absolutely no idea what I think of the Bishop of Rome, either his supposed (by whom?) authority in this world or any particular holder of the office.

If you believe that every Catholic, or person educated as a Catholic, would think for one moment that a Catholic is less likely than anyone else to commit a crime, I am a little taken aback. The prisons are full of nominal Catholics and, no doubt, hold their fair share of practising or reformed ones. (Just ask TB!) The same is probably true of the Portuguese police force. I did read one report in which Amaral underlined his catholicism and the fact that he was a father. I did not allow either fact to distract me from considering the possibility that it might have been true that he had covered up the torture by his colleagues of another woman whose child had disappeared. I do not, and cannot, know whether or not he is guilty of that. I’m in exactly the same position with regard to all three arguidos in the Madeleine McCann case and anyone else suspected (unofficially) of offences related to this case. I cannot know and neither can you, unless you are Murat, K or G or, possibly, one of the tapas friends, in which case you might be sure of your own innocence. Of course, you may be a police officer and have access to evidence which I do not. I know only what the great British press chooses to tell us, hardly a sound basis for judgement!

It didn’t really take a genius to guess how I was educated, did it, though whether by Jesuits, nuns or others, is less easy to discern, my friend. TB could have told you that straight off. Wasn’t Brandon Flours, also? S/he will correct me if I’m wrong.

One thing my teachers taught me is that, outside the tenets of the “faith”, of course, which were to be accepted without too much, if any, intellectual examination, truth is all-important, ESPECIALLY when judging others. In fact, they were quite tiresome about it! Conscience was all. To have a clear one mattered more than anything else!

I can assure you that I have never forgotten that lesson and I hope I never will. It has always served me well.

I find your comparison with an MP’s position quite inapposite. I am not an MP. Unlike an MP, I represent nobody but myself. My idle musings, and they can be nothing more, can have no possible effect on the outcome of this case. I have no influence anywhere and absolutely no financial interest in the matter. I doubt if Aristotle would have failed to note that sort of distinction!

Feel free to enjoy the cathartic experience of going back to Aristotle whenever you like. Quite good at careful analysis, wasn’t he? Especially when it comes to causality if I recall correctly.

By the way, I didn’t see any posts about “reporting to Clarence” but I usually skip huge chunks of posts, in fact, nearly all nowadays, though not usually TB’s as they are usually interesting. I really wouldn’t have a clue how to report to CM, except, possibly, through the official Madeleine site? Wouldn’t know if he gets to see messages? Isn’t the site (badly) run by students of Philomena McCann? I wouldn’t want to report to him anyway. I don’t like him very much, insofar as I can judge from his pronouncements. That may be unfair and it certainly doesn’t mean I think him guilty of a cover-up. My impression, and it can be no more, is that he believes K and G to be innocent of sinister involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance or death.

It would be a cyber-impropriety to ask you any personal questions, so I won’t.

Not true. This is just another in the series of “Lies by Kris”. I made no such threat. I did provide information that suggests someone could easily successfully sue her, if they wanted to.

More importantly, I suggested to Kris that unless she stops eating junk food and downing donuts by the dozen, she will never reduce to a size that makes it even thinkable for her to be a “fence-sitter”. I wonder if she can even fit through the door to get outside anywhere near a fence. Kris makes Philomena look like Twiggy.

BTW Kris, as a journalist, are you proud of your posts? Are you willing to present them to prospective employers, for example, as examples of your acumen and intellect? Just a rhetorical question.

All hypothetical speculation — guesswork based on Kris’s constant reference to donuts, burgers, french fries and potato chips. I’ve never met her.

REPLY by TB:” I cannot agree. There are just too many signs that the abduction hoax was developed in a panic sometime between the night of Wednesday 2 May and the afternoon of Thursday 3 May. If something had happened as early as you say, Salomon ES, they woud have thought up a much better abduction smokescreen than the one they came up with on 3rd May”

I agree with Salomon ES. The signs of panic that I see result from
things going wrong — some unforeseen things, but also some clearly forseeable.

For instance, probably it was much more difficult than anticipated to jemmy the shutter open. O’Donnell specifically mentions the wide open visibility of the McCann apartment on the corner. And this act was not something that could be done earlier. Obviously it is not an act that could be done alone. A lookout would be necessary. So whether Wilkins was a “lookout” or the opposite (someone spotted, OR MISSED, by a lookout), I think Gerry realized that forcing the shutter was too difficult and risky. I’d like to see an actual analysis of how much force it would take to jemmy open such a shutter, what the noise would be, etc.

Despite Gerry’s failure to jemmy the shutter, he did not notify the others of a change, and they all wound up reporting that the shutter was jemmied.

Of course, I suspect a poor plan was deliberately foisted on the McCanns. Possibly the planner knew there would be a problem with the shutter, but had told Gerry it would be easy.

The utter lack of photos is very strong evidence that Madeleine was gone long before the 3rd. And I think police suspicions have been confirmed by , for example, showing nannies pictures of Ella (or whoever) and having them identify her as “Madeleine”. The McCanns were certainly aware of how suspicious their mere 2 (dubious) photos would appear, and yet they produced no other holiday shots of Madeleine. Unless one wants to leap to the weird belief that someone is TRYING to instill doubt about the date by with-holding photos, this makes no sense at all — unless the girl simply was not present.

If she had died on May 3rd or the night before, and no intact safe plan was ready, what was to stop them from delaying it? I think that already a very large amount of thought went into the plan, and there is a reason it contains all kinds of pitfalls.

That is , the plan was never intended to leave Kate and Gerry unscathed, but only to (nearly) guarantee they would not be charged with intentional murder. They DID succeed with this, for it was reported that police wanted to charge them with this, but could not. Probably all of the talk about INCONCLUSIVE, USELESS, etc refers only to the police inability to prove what they think — that Madeleine was murdered deliberately.

The plan DOES leave Kate and Gerry COMPLETELY DEPENDENT on “Team McCann” to avoid jail, or get a minimum sentence, retain professional prospects (perhaps only one of them no longer a doctor), etc etc. Perhaps that was the trade-off for them — had they not received an enormous amount of help, one of them may already have been charged with murder.

And, the key question, how are the McCanns going to return this favor?

All hypothetical speculation.

What is your current take on the situation?
I have at the moment a household of 13, which will continue for 10 days at which point it will drop back to the standard 7.
Hardly get any time to come and check but what I get through quick scrolling is that ………
what is your take?

“Both theories are ruled out if Mrs Pamela Fenn is right in having heard Madeleine sobbing ‘Daddy’, ‘Daddy’ on the evening of Tuesday 1 May between 10.30pm and 11.45pm”

Did she specifically say that she recognized Madeleine’s voice? How did she know it was not one of the twins? (the McCanns later told her it was Madeleine and she accepted that?)

Going now. I s hall report back to the PJ and collect my cash.

And now, I shall report back to Clarence and collect my cash….