FIND MADDIE AUSSIE

well considering this woman was said to be really agitated and then seen to row with a guy who bumped her chair at another bar i would imagine shes a total stranger to the place herself if its drug connected.After all crack cocaine aint that hard to get hold of so to be pacing the floors and ready to batter someone for bumping your chair she must be pretty desperate for it.You can get it anywhere so no need for her to be pacing the floors in desperation for it. And especially when your wearing glam clothes and things..money aint no obstacle for her.

Unless of course shes a dealer and her wages are depending on the delivery of the stuff!!
Hmmm what to think?

calcite51 wrote:We still don't know the exact phrase used by the woman in question. Just the fact that former police officers are interested in pursuing this lead is encouraging to me - of course, I could be wrong and this lead may lead them to nowhere but all credible leads should and must be investigated.

Exactly Calcite.
Nobody knows what was said as Clarence said, it wouldn't be divulged.
At least things are being checked now Gonc's gone under cover.

clairesy wrote:well considering this woman was said to be really agitated and then seen to row with a guy who bumped her chair at another bar i would imagine shes a total stranger to the place herself if its drug connected.After all crack cocaine aint that hard to get hold of so to be pacing the floors and ready to batter someone for bumping your chair she must be pretty desperate for it.You can get it anywhere so no need for her to be pacing the floors in desperation for it. And especially when your wearing glam clothes and things..money aint no obstacle for her.

Unless of course shes a dealer and her wages are depending on the delivery of the stuff!!
Hmmm what to think?

____________

I think you are right Clairesy ..
A wealthy woman does not need to meet strangers outside a bar, in the early hours, just for drugs .. she will send someone to do it for her, and it would not need to be late at night either. It's a non-starter for me .. I think there is plenty in this story.

An interesting conversation ocurred between a man and a woman at that bar. That conversation is of interest to the McCanns PI's. The woman is not a suspect and we still dont know what was said. I for one would not trust the newspapers version.

I only trust the PI's in what they are doing and along with Kate and Gerry, hoping and praying that something positive will turn up.

Best not to get too exited until the investigators or CM make an announcment that they have found something that we can all be excited about.

Hello Everyone! I'm new to this forum but been following this case from the beginning. Hoping for the best of course from this new lead.

Just playing devil's advocate...could the witness who delayed coming forward be himself a businessman/ Part-time drug dealer? Perhaps he approached the woman thinking she was looking to buy, and then he was thrown because it took him a few to realize she was not asking for cocaine, but asking for an actual little girl, new daughter and not drugs.

Just one possible scenario. I think we may have only received a little of the info on that encounter and none of the background that makes them feel so strongly about this lead. I doubt the investigators feel so strongly about this lead based solely on the encounter - must be a a culmination of evidence and other leads. OR So I hope?

Hi ChloeV, nice to see a new face. I agree, I think there is much more going on beneath the surface than we know. The investigators are not fools, despite what the idiots on the 3a's think. they know just how much is safe to reveal and how much to keep quiet about.

Hi ChloeV, welcome to our band of sleuths and friends. I am still new too and have been made to feel very welcome and at home here.
If it´s true that this fellow is a Bank employee, quite senior, then I doubt he would be dealing. Maybe looking to buy.
But you make a good point that the team wouldn´t have made so much of this lead based solely on the brief encounter. I very much hope this is the case.
I cannot help feeling it´s actually unhelpful and perhaps a little naive in these days of "heightened" newspaper reporting (and I think what I mean by that phrase is that journalists are also skilled detectives themselves nowadays and are given carte blanche to try to bribe anyone they can track down who may hold information) to withold a vital conversation that has led them to make such an appeal. Far better to leave the encounter and what was said or not said out of it altogether - what good has it done? Far better IMO just to hold up an efit and mention a time and a place and an accent if it´s important.

If you say you cannot, for "operational reasons", disclose the nature of this vital chat then a leaked source WILL be found and persuaded to reveal all, and Chinese whispers will then rush around the globe about what this woman may or may not have said. Is all this useful I ask? No, it just sells papers. And drives Forums and people like us crazy with speculation.

Can anyone think of a positive effect of NOT revealing the contents of the conversation but simply alluding to one having taken place? The accent yes, but we still didn´t need to know about a Bar and a happy stag night and a bank manager did we?

I can understand your point of view Rosemary and while I tend to agree with the majority of your comment. However, I think back to cases like Watergate (US) - it was skilled journalists who were obviously skilled detectives to find out the information they did. But in Madeleine's case, I wish the journlists would all have agreed to leave it alone.....

But Calcite they need the Press too. And you can´t have it both ways can you?

That was my point really i.e. they gave out this tantalising snippet about a conversation they could not reveal, when they should/could have simply kept that bit quiet IMO.

It simply led to wild speculation and bribery and leaks..
Counterproductive IMO.

Hi, thanks for the welcome!

(I may change my profile name to Valson -which is what I used on the Oprah community board - or coco btw - might be simpler. I found out about this forum while on the Oprah community forum where a number of you posted)

I wish the journos would only print what they faithfully believe true; I am skeptical that they have printed what is the complete conversation and what they believe to be truth. I dunno. They might have printed just what one person in an office was goaded to tell them so as to try and force the investigators to reveal the real or complete account of the conversation. Investigators have not confirmed this printed account as "the" conversation from what I understand.

I agree chloev, while the media is helpful in getting a story publicised, they usually add a twist of their own to sell papers and make it worth their while.

The most positive media response is of course getting the e fit out. The rest is salty.

I would stick to what the PI's said and they haven't said half as much as the papers have. Unfortunatly the stories told by the newspapers open doors to theories and speculation that go too far, which could all turn out a waste of time and energy.

and false hope.

If all that Kate and Gerry say is they will keep hope alive and pray that Madeleine is still alive as long as there is nothing to prove otherwise then I'll go along with that until They say that they are convinced about further evidence.

For what its worth, I think there is nothing wrong with the detectives referring to the conversation and where it occurred etc. If they didnt, why would we listen, why would anyone help. The problem they have is that the man waited 2 years to come forward. They needed to build up his credibility to the public.

On the content of the conversation, that should have been kept secret, which it was until 'Portuguese sources' said ...........

And that makes me think it might be close to the truth. And why, because the conversation keep changing, daughter, girl, my girl etc in different papers. This looks to me like a translation problem. If we heard the original English version we would have no problem understanding it. Hearing only a snippet being translated into Portugues and then back into English. Well, we have been through that many times, and we know the misunderstanding it causes.

The PI´s know exactly what they are doing. I agree with Mod, and I quote: "If all that Kate and Gerry says is they will keep hope alive and pray that Madeleine is still alive as long as there is nothing to prove otherwise then I´ll go along with that", until evidence otherwise given by the PI´s, who are now in charge of the case.

Pedro Silva wrote:The PI´s know exactly what they are doing. I agree with Mod, and I quote: "If all that Kate and Gerry says is they will keep hope alive and pray that Madeleine is still alive as long as there is nothing to prove otherwise then I´ll go along with that", until evidence otherwise given by the PI´s, who are now in charge of the case.

Very true Pedro, my sentiments exactly .

ChloeV wrote:Hello Everyone! I'm new to this forum but been following this case from the beginning. Hoping for the best of course from this new lead.

Just playing devil's advocate...could the witness who delayed coming forward be himself a businessman/ Part-time drug dealer? Perhaps he approached the woman thinking she was looking to buy, and then he was thrown because it took him a few to realize she was not asking for cocaine, but asking for an actual little girl, new daughter and not drugs.

Just one possible scenario. I think we may have only received a little of the info on that encounter and none of the background that makes them feel so strongly about this lead. I doubt the investigators feel so strongly about this lead based solely on the encounter - must be a a culmination of evidence and other leads. OR So I hope?

Hi Chloe, please change your name to Valson if you want no problem, but please not coco, anything but that name! There just happens to be something not very nice going on with that name at the moment concerning an anti and it will only cause confusion. (Let's face it, it doesn't take much to confuse some of those half wits on the 3 A's

About your theory, I appreciate you are playing devil's advocate but I honestly cannot see him being a drug dealer, if he was, then why would he come forward now? Also his circumstances do not depict him being a part timer in Barcelona, as he was there on his brother's stag do, if he was a part timer, why would he start dealing in a strange place, with people he doesn't know and where would he get his supply from to deal? He would hardly have brought it over from the UK with him and risk getting caught. You mention Morocco? Or was it somewhere else? If drugs were (and they could very well be) being brought over from Morocco, why choose Barcelona? That is a really long way off, far better to do it in Tarifa, Morocco is just 20 odd minutes across the water there. If it was a big drop, I would rule out her meeting anyone in this bar in Barcelona, a big drop would have been done somewhere up the coast on the QT, there are many places in and up the coast of Tarifa for this to happen, where they would not be detected. Also if it were in the big bucks region of illegal drug smuggling, then all this would have been taken care of previously, nothing would have been left to chance.
Did you know that there is also a very big people trafficking problem with immigrants from Africa crossing the water between Morocco and Tarifa in Southern Spain? (Europe's most southerly point, where the Atlantic meets the Mediterranean sea)There are gangs that charge people mega bucks for this and these poor people are usually taken to Morocco and bundled in boats and told to row to Spain, some do not make it, they find them dead drifting in boats and others do make it, there is a place there along the coast that these illegals come ashore and you see all their discarded items there, like disposable rubber shoes and other items needed to get across the water. Some desperate people even try swimming it.

I am with the others on here and as I keep saying, I am not going to berate the investigators, because I trust them and believe they would have taken this step after discussing all the pros and cons and I would guess, that they knew and expected all this to happen, if I could guess immediately that a journalist would get the gist of that convo by the next morning, then the detectives would have thought of this for sure.
I believe everything we are told, we are being told because they want us to know. If those detectives took this step 'knowing' what was in that conversation, then this is good enough for me.

clairesy wrote:well considering this woman was said to be really agitated and then seen to row with a guy who bumped her chair at another bar i would imagine shes a total stranger to the place herself if its drug connected.After all crack cocaine aint that hard to get hold of so to be pacing the floors and ready to batter someone for bumping your chair she must be pretty desperate for it.You can get it anywhere so no need for her to be pacing the floors in desperation for it. And especially when your wearing glam clothes and things..money aint no obstacle for her.

Unless of course shes a dealer and her wages are depending on the delivery of the stuff!!
Hmmm what to think?

Clairesy, you just made me choke on my Pom-bear frits I can just imagine some poor guy bumping into this agitated woman's chair and her wanting to batter him

But you are so right, if it was drug connected, unfortunately this drug is so readily available and if this woman is a very wealthy woman, I too have said she would have sent someone else to score for her and would never have risked it herself. The chances are, if she was into this scene then her being a 'well connected' wealthy woman, she would have her own regular supplier and would not have to go trying to meet strangers in a bar to get her drugs of choice. The more I think of this, the more unfeasible this drug thing becomes. If she was a dealer picking up her supply, again she would have a recognised person to deliver and even if this changed, why would she want to be in receipt of a large amount of drugs being handed over in a club, no doubt covered by security cameras? Especially, as this would no doubt be a regular thing and if it was then she would have known the person.

Also we have to trust the PI's, as they know what was actually said and we do not, it may be something completely different, in which case we are all racking our brains and barking up the wrong tree.

Welcome a board ChloeV. The more the better.

Rosiepops one more thought. Where did this idea that the woman is wealthy come from? Just because she was wearing a pair of designer jeans?

What do others think? Does this signify wealthy?

She could simply be a flashy dresser. I know a lady who buys designer jeans and she is taking in ironing for a living......

I thought of that too, loads of people wear designer gear, it doesn't make them wealthy. However, this was the impression that the witness got and which he relayed to the PI's. How would he know they were designer jeans anyway, unless he noticed a label? He could have I suppose and we have not been told this. Some of these jeans costa alota (sorry I couldn't resist that) so if she had a designer label on and they were real and the jeans are known to have cost upwards of £500, then it is a feasible thing to assume that she was well off.
But if someone is wealthy, they do give off an air of being wealthy, but usually I have observed this to be understated rather than overstated!

It is all speculation anyway, the only people that really know are the witness, the woman and the detectives.

Having been away on holiday when this news broke, I'm playing catch up and am having difficulty following all the difference snippets of info and understanding what is credible and what isn't. Does anyone have a link to the press conference by chance ? I've searched on line but can't find one.

here ya go tinks

heres another from gmtv

clairesy wrote:heres another from gmtv

Aw bless you Clairesy, thank you. Unfortunately I cannot view any of the videos on the forum, I just get a blank square with a little mozaic in the top left corner :-(