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.

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…

“[...] 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 …

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 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 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..

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 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 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.

—–

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).

—–

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.

—-

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 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 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 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.

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?

Interesting because G Mccann said the twins cots were either side of Maddies Bed

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 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?