Kate McCann releasing a book...

[special_kala]

I think they initially said the door was locked but then when there was no sign of forced entry they admitted it wasnt locked

 

[Samemka]

Just read on another forum that on page 129 of her book, Kate says

"I asked Gerry apprehensively if he'd had any really horrible thoughts or visions of Madeleine. He nodded. Haltingly, I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her perfect little genitals torn apart"

Can someone with the book confirm this?.....can't even comment yet because I can't believe she wrote that....

Vomitworthy.

Yea, it was apparently impossible to get out of the window whilst carrying a child, and even if the abductor had, they certainly would have left some sort of fibres from their clothing on the window shutters/frame. Unless they had an accomplice to help them out of the window so wouldn't touch anything. However the friend who saw a man carrying a child that night never said they saw more than one person, so it surely would have only been the one abductor taking her out of the window. Which doesn't make sense as there was nothing found apart from kates finger prints in window area. In which case the abductor could only have gone out through the front, which would have been the way they would have also gotten in. So that surely would tell us that the front door had in fact been left unlocked?! Now that's good parenting.

I'm pretty sure they have admitted leaving the door unlocked haven't they?! (can anyone confirm?)

If that is the case then surely it would have been an accident, I mean they wouldn't knowingly leave the door unlocked?! Did kate ever specify that upon realising that the door was unlocked that was her first indication that something was wrong, or was it only when she went into the bedroom to find that maddy wasn't there?? Because if you find your hotel room door unlocked wouldn't that be the very first point where you start to shit yourself that something has happened??

Very good point, going to look into this now....most likely me that's confused!

 

[Samemka]

I think they initially said the door was locked but then when there was no sign of forced entry they admitted it wasnt locked

Yeah that's what I thought too. Checking...

 

[LoraLoo]

If I had knowingly left the door unlocked, my first thought would be that she had opened the door and wandered off, not been abducted I'd be racing outside and checking where she had gone now writing down a time line of events

 

[Samemka]

https://www.mccannfiles.com/id31.html

Worth a read....

Here we read the first reactions from Kate and Gerry's closest family and friends, immediately after they have been contacted individually with the news that Madeleine has been 'abducted'.

Note how consistent the stories are that an 'abductor' gained access to a locked apartment by breaking open the shutter on the bedroom window and escaping by the front door.

The story changed later when it became clear the shutters on the window had not been forced, were not damaged in any way and could only be opened from inside the apartment.

From that point, the McCanns became convinced that an 'abductor' had entered through 'open' patio doors and escaped through the open shuttered window.

Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' spokesman, is eventually forced to admit that "There was no evidence of a break-in".

 

[special_kala]

exactly.

Its odd they jumped straight to "shes been taken".

I find her running back to the restaurant strange as well. If i went into Rivers room and she wasnt there i would be screaming her name so loud the whole street would here

 

[special_kala]

https://www.mccannfiles.com/id31.html

Worth a read....

Here we read the first reactions from Kate and Gerry's closest family and friends, immediately after they have been contacted individually with the news that Madeleine has been 'abducted'.

Note how consistent the stories are that an 'abductor' gained access to a locked apartment by breaking open the shutter on the bedroom window and escaping by the front door.

The story changed later when it became clear the shutters on the window had not been forced, were not damaged in any way and could only be opened from inside the apartment.

From that point, the McCanns became convinced that an 'abductor' had entered through 'open' patio doors and escaped through the open shuttered window.

Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' spokesman, is eventually forced to admit that "There was no evidence of a break-in".

but they could supposedly see the patio doors from the bar right?

 

[Samemka]

If I had knowingly left the door unlocked, my first thought would be that she had opened the door and wandered off, not been abducted I'd be racing outside and checking where she had gone now writing down a time line of events

Exactly what I've thought all along! That's why Kate had to say she knew someone had been in because the place was a mess - despite there being NO evidence of ANYTHING - to give her some sort of reason for instantly knowing what had happened...

 

[LoraLoo]

Considering there seemed to be every tom dick and harry 'checking on the kids' they probably thought locking the doors would be too much hassle

 

[Samemka]

exactly.

Its odd they jumped straight to "shes been taken".

I find her running back to the restaurant strange as well. If i went into Rivers room and she wasnt there i would be screaming her name so loud the whole street would here

Yup! Me too! And the twins STILL remained asleep even when people came into the room, are we supposed to believe everyone kept their voices down & stayed calm so as not to wake them? This is what suggests to me they'd been sedated.

 

[Nut_Shake]

I'm so frustrated I want to effing scream! Why so much protection for the mccanns? They aren't the friggin royal family!

Loraloo I say that all the time! The first thing I would have done is screamed her name in the room, out of the room, ran everywhere looking for her in a complete panic! I wouldn't have thought for a second that someone came into my room to take her!

 

[special_kala]

exactly.

Its odd they jumped straight to "shes been taken".

I find her running back to the restaurant strange as well. If i went into Rivers room and she wasnt there i would be screaming her name so loud the whole street would here

Yup! Me too! And the twins STILL remained asleep even when people came into the room, are we supposed to believe everyone kept their voices down & stayed calm so as not to wake them? This is what suggests to me they'd been sedated.

good point.

 

[odd_socks]

Considering there seemed to be every tom dick and harry 'checking on the kids' they probably thought locking the doors would be too much hassle

yeah my thoughts too, asif it was too much trouble to check on them themselves

 

[Samemka]

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2265-mccanns-new-book-163-questions

Well worth a read - questions raised from Kate's new moneyspinner. I can't bring myself to read it because it will infuriate me but the questions raised from it NEED answering.

Considering the proceeds from this book go to the 'Find Madeleine' fund it's the Police's DUTY to investigate all these discrepancies, because if they are covering something up, using money donated is bloody fraud!

12. Why did the McCanns and their friends focus their attention on contacting the media in Britain rather than on searching for Madeleine in the early hours of 4 May 2007?

I wonder....

18. The McCanns have said that the children were in their pyjamas by 6.30pm the night Madeleine disappeared, were bathed at 7.00pm and asleep by 7.30pm. But just a few weeks later, in Dr Gerald McCann’s blog, he wrote: “The twins must like their new cots as they were asleep by 7.30pm which was most unusual”. What is the truth about when the twins normally went to bed?

21. Dr Kate McCann claimed that Dr Oldfield said, at 9.30pm: “I’ll check on Maddie for you”. Why didn’t he say: “I’ll check on the children?” Why, when all three children were sleeping in the same room, as the McCanns have stated, did he only refer to checking on Madeleine?



Oh there's too much to quote....how many lies can people tell & get away with it?!

 

[Jem_x3]

Just read on another forum that on page 129 of her book, Kate says

"I asked Gerry apprehensively if he'd had any really horrible thoughts or visions of Madeleine. He nodded. Haltingly, I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her perfect little genitals torn apart"

Can someone with the book confirm this?.....can't even comment yet because I can't believe she wrote that....

I was going to mention this but didn't as I thought it would upset some people. It felt very wrong and a bit disturbing to read that. The last bit actually reads:

"I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her body, her perfect little genitals torn apart"

But yeah

 

[going_crazy]

Just read on another forum that on page 129 of her book, Kate says

"I asked Gerry apprehensively if he'd had any really horrible thoughts or visions of Madeleine. He nodded. Haltingly, I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her perfect little genitals torn apart"

Can someone with the book confirm this?.....can't even comment yet because I can't believe she wrote that....

I was going to mention this but didn't as I thought it would upset some people. It felt very wrong and a bit disturbing to read that. The last bit actually reads:

"I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her body, her perfect little genitals torn apart"

But yeah

That is just shocking. Sick.

 

[CRWx]

What. The. Fuck.

that comment is sick

i'm actually sat here in disbelief

 

[AppleBlossom]

WTF is with that comment? That is sick even by their standards. How could you think, let alone write something like that?!

 

[CRWx]

why would you EVER think that. Sorry but i don't think anything could justify that..

 

[TattiesMum]

One of the really troubling things about it is that earlier in the week, on the Late show in Eire, Kate McCann said this:

"We just hope that something will come from the book. It's something that may just force someone to come forward. It's also an account for Madeleine and for the twins [six-year-old Sean and Amelie]."

And she doesn't think that accounts of her sex life and graphic speculations about child rape are inappropriate things for her children to read ... whatever age they read them at?

It kind of puts the Gasper statements back in the spotlight