2 & 2 TV video allegedly to be released on 12th October

Well i have watched the video time and time again, but can not see anything in it i didn't notice or think after watching the McCann's Mockmockery.

Not sure about this 2 and 2 tv thingy. The video was nothing new even though they claimed that was just a taster and more to follow.

Will await for this so called T day or whatever it is.

Sceptical to say the least anyway.

Just as an aside on the "open door angles" matter - it really hasn't worked for them. They've included it and elaborated on it to craftily suggest that there was an intruder - and they make a meal of saying "the door wasn't as we left it" (which doesn't even make sense in Kate's 10pm check as she knew two other people had certainly been in).

And yet... having decided to include it to suggest something suspicious was going on, Kate sees door not where it should be and so decides to do nothing - and Gerry sees it not where it should be and wonders if it means Madeleine got up - so does he look into the room to see if she's in bed? No - he goes into his own bedroom to check there instead.

Their own alleged reactions to this oddity basically out it for the rubbish it is.

Decides to use the bathroom, then exits! Yeah right.
IMO

gbwales wrote:Just as an aside on the "open door angles" matter - it really hasn't worked for them. They've included it and elaborated on it to craftily suggest that there was an intruder - and they make a meal of saying "the door wasn't as we left it" (which doesn't even make sense in Kate's 10pm check as she knew two other people had certainly been in).

And yet... having decided to include it to suggest something suspicious was going on, Kate sees door not where it should be and so decides to do nothing - and Gerry sees it not where it should be and wonders if it means Madeleine got up - so does he look into the room to see if she's in bed? No - he goes into his own bedroom to check there instead.

Their own alleged reactions to this oddity basically out it for the rubbish it is.

The moving door makes an appearance as early as the second handwritten timeline - but is not mentioned in the first.

9.15pm Gerry McCann looks at room. A? Door open to bedroom.

On the squiggly mark, I've said before that it is my opinion that it is a capital 'A', that may well have been the start of the word 'Abductor'. The 'A' follows on towards the top of the stem of another letter, but is abruptly cut off. I've blown it up and it's quite clearly an 'A'.

Andrew wrote:Does anyone actually think that M.O did this alleged half 9 check at Apt 5a..?

I don't.

No, I don't, because none of the Tapas bar staff mention Matthew Oldfield leaving the table in their statements. One of them could be interpreted to be MO, but it could just as easily be Gerry. All of the statements that describe Russell leaving the table state that he left on his own, and that contradicts the account that MO went with him.

Yes, the door angles, door slamming, curtains whooshing, jemmied shutters etc etc are all and is complete utter nonsense.

Which all the above indicates to me that everything happened fairly last minute hence what an absolute cock up of it all it is.

If M met her demise earlier on in the holiday, then surely better, more thoughtful and precise 'stories / explanations' would be said and not the garbage that has been spouted which has contradictions in left right and centre.

All just my own thoughts and opinions...

Andrew wrote:Yes, the door angles, door slamming, curtains whooshing, jemmied shutters etc etc are all and is complete utter nonsense.

Which all the above indicates to me that everything happened fairly last minute hence what an absolute cock up of it all it is.

If M met her demise earlier on in the holiday, then surely better, more thoughtful and precise 'stories / explanations' would be said and not the garbage that has been spouted which has contradictions in left right and centre.

All just my own thoughts and opinions...

Let's hope the next instalment of the video is a bit more compelling as the first is old hat.

2&2TV don't seem to have tweeted for a couple of days, and they're still only on 186 followers. And that taster video wasn't anything we didn't already know, and is certainly not going to force the McCanns to answer any questions.

Latest:

@2and2TV
Video 2 tomorrow, 17.00 GMT.

Hoping for something better than the first one.

Andrew wrote:Yes, the door angles, door slamming, curtains whooshing, jemmied shutters etc etc are all and is complete utter nonsense.

Which all the above indicates to me that everything happened fairly last minute hence what an absolute cock up of it all it is.

If M met her demise earlier on in the holiday, then surely better, more thoughtful and precise 'stories / explanations' would be said and not the garbage that has been spouted which has contradictions in left right and centre.

All just my own thoughts and opinions...

Agreed. I think it all happened on the Thursday. I think the 5pm to 10pm Thursday 3 May is where this mystery might be solved. The whole David Payne fiasco and how long he was with Kate for is just one example of a reason to be suspicious of what was unfolding in that time.

I have looked here there and every where but can not find video number 2 we were promised at 17.00 hrs this evening.

Poppy wrote:I have looked here there and every where but can not find video number 2 we were promised at 17.00 hrs this evening.

They said tomorrow

Thanks wlbts my mind got my wires crossed.

@2and2TV
It’s our view, Jane’s testimony would be ‘passed by’ in court.



Nothing we don't all know already, finding this quite tiresome.  If they really do have something in video 4, I wish they'd just get to the point.  This is wasting our time - and giving the McCanns and their legal team at least 2 weeks advance warning of something potentially dangerous to them (which I doubt).

191 followers at the moment - what is the point of waiting, they're not going to build up much more than that on these showings.

At the moment, this looks to me like a few people with delusions of grandeur.

wlbts wrote:@2and2TV
It’s our view, Jane’s testimony would be ‘passed by’ in court.



Nothing we don't all know already, finding this quite tiresome.  If they really do have something in video 4, I wish they'd just get to the point.  This is wasting our time - and giving the McCanns and their legal team at least 2 weeks advance warning of something potentially dangerous to them (which I doubt).

191 followers at the moment - what is the point of waiting, they're not going to build up much more than that on these showings.

At the moment, this looks to me like a few people with delusions of grandeur.

Yeah nothing new there however both parts 1&2 are from the McCanns own mockumentary iirc. Are 2&2 going to pull a rabbit out of the McCanns own hat and this is the reason they state that the McCanns will have to reply once part 4 is released. Or is it an anti climax in the making.

Actually, this has put a perspective on this that I haven't before seen set out so coherently. It's logical to follow. We all knew the timings were wrong but this is the first time I've seen the testimonies linked to the Mockumentary to prove conclusively that one or more of the statements are wrong.

The blooming football. Knew that would be significant. Did Jane drop that deliberately? I've often wondered, considering Gerry's reaction and her subsequent undermining by the cluster of forceful men.

Question is, has she 'dropped' it in to drop them in it?

More encouraging than Part 1, anyway.

Dee Coy wrote:Actually, this has put a perspective on this that I haven't before seen set out so coherently. It's logical to follow. We all knew the timings were wrong but this is the first time I've seen the testimonies linked to the Mockumentary to prove conclusively that one or more of the statements are wrong.

The blooming football. Knew that would be significant. Did Jane drop that deliberately? I've often wondered, considering Gerry's reaction and her subsequent undermining by the cluster of forceful men.

Question is, has she 'dropped' it in to drop them in it?

More encouraging than Part 1, anyway.

Maybe that was her way of getting back at Gerry for moving where he and Wilkins were and making Jane out as wrong.

That's what I think. I'm not sure why it is so important to Jane that they are where she says they are and not Gerry's version, because in either case neither of them see her (Jez because he didn't see her because his and Gerry's chat took place much earlier, imo) and Gerry because in both scenarios he has his back to her.

But important to her it is. So much so she shakes her head continuously while being surrounded by three forceful men telling her they believe Gerry's version (in so many words) followed by her subdued and resigned "Ok, that's fine". She then weeps copiously, but we are not shown this yet.

At this point the footage is edited very cleverly. We are shown her recounting the tale of how she saw Tannerman, and the video continues with the shots of her weeping, ostensibly in despair that she didn't think to do more at the time. In fact, the lighting and positions of the people clearly show to me that the tears flowed directly after the pooh-poohing, not after she describes the sighting.

Whether she intended to drop him in it with the football comment or not, I think she was punished for it. But watching the irritated way Gerry steps in to 'halt her blather' I bet she'd already been told they were going with Gerry's positioning and not hers, so maybe did plan her little bombshell.

But why is this so important to her?

Watch the editing. Starts from about 60 seconds in:



Again, just my opinion.

ChillyHeat wrote:"Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue It" - Genesis 1:28

Nowadays most rabbis agree that the commandment to populate the world is so important that many modern technological developments for assisting infertile couples may be permitted by Jewish law. They say that in case natural reproduction does not succeed, it gives a tacit approval for assisted reproduction.

The implied flexibility of the Torah regarding assisted reproduction should not surprise us. After all, three out of four biblical matriarchs suffered from infertility. The Torah documents in Genesis the suffering of Sarah, Rebecca and Rachel due to infertility. The narrative provides much of the human drama in the relationships between the matriarchs and their husbands, and the matriarchs and God. The three matriarchs dealt in different ways with their tragic circumstances.



Just saying.....
Considering Catholicism is against IVF.

Ah never mind...Just my theory

And your point is?

In my opinion there is certainly no love lost between Jane Tanner and Gerry McCann. Which gives me hope that she has broken or will break

Do you think its possible someone or organisation has viewed video number 4 already ?

ChillyHeat wrote:Do you think its possible someone or organisation has viewed video number 4 already ?

Hi Chillyheat, it does make you wonder, what with recent events. If I was a betting man (ie. Andrew) I would say there is a connection, but I couldn't speculate on exactly what the nature of it is.

Seicento wrote:

ChillyHeat wrote:Do you think its possible someone or organisation has viewed video number 4 already ?

Hi Chillyheat, it does make you wonder, what with recent events. If I was a betting man (ie. Andrew) I would say there is a connection, but I couldn't speculate on exactly what the nature of it is.

Hello Clay How are you ?

At about 6mins 50secs in the video they are asking if any mainstream media journalists are interested in collaborating on part 4 release....
Wonder if anyone took up the offer...

Grange were also notified about this back in August iirc...I presume that would be Operation Grange.
Wonder if this is why this week has been a bit zany ?

ETA...July 31st...re-read thread (Im too sexy for my shirt)