Sadie's theory, the watcher and a getaway car.

[sadie]

Bumped for you, Stephen

[Redblossom]

stephen

The PJ found no evidence of an abduction, and it was the UK police who suggested they investigate the Mccanns as well, again standard practice in the UK.

No, but only  cos they ignored Golden witness Jane, and they ignored Mrs Caroline Carpenter.   For what reason?  I wonder why?

stephen

However, abroad, unlike in some sections of this country, children dine with the parents, and are NOT left by themselves unprotected..

In hot countries, Stephen, as I suspect you know, everyone has a siesta in the middle of the day to avoid the heat.  In cooler countries that is not the case.  A child that has had a siesta will be able to stay up later than one who has not.
simples...........

[/quote]

Sadie, can you explain how the police ignored Mrs Carpenter, and when? Do you even know when this info was relayed to the PJ? Because in a related previous post IIRC you said had thry not ignored her Madeleone could haveen home within hours!  And what you think they should have done about her saying she vaguely remembered someone calling Madeleine, and who you think that was and why?

[stephen25000]

What the hell is the matter with you, Stephen?  What's all this talk about uncorroberated statements?  People make statements all over the world without peeps who were not there, nor knowing anything, challenging them all the time. 

Can we be clear
Are you saying that Jane is a liar?
Are you saying that all the Brits are liars?

Remember she is not the accused,  Seems you are treating her as that.
Why are you suspicious of her all the time?


A child was seen being carried by a man we call bundleman and she reported to the PJ what she saw.  Simples



Remember "The Cutting Edge Video" Youtube?  Just spare a moment and have a look at that.

Please note as I am a bit deaf, I might not have the exact words.  Feel free to correct me.

I suggest you start at 10.59

@11.57 she says about herself, in a chiding manner

"Why the hell didn't you think?
Not even thought anyone go into an appartment and take a child out.

Probably the one person who could have actually stopped anything
What if, what if, what if ...."

At 12.30-12.40, she is weeping.


Are you unable to see how wrong you are?

How do you know Tanner is telling the truth ?

Answer, of course, you don't.

[sadie]

Please dont change the subject Redblossom.  I bumped for Stephen.  I did it when he arrived

I will copy it again
For Stephen:
 » Insert Quote

What the hell is the matter with you, Stephen?  What's all this talk about uncorroberated statements?  People make statements all over the world without peeps who were not there, nor knowing anything, challenging them all the time. 

Can we be clear
Are you saying that Jane is a liar?
Are you saying that all the Brits are liars?

Remember she is not the accused,  Seems you are treating her as that.
Why are you suspicious of her all the time?


A child was seen being carried by a man we call bundleman and she reported to the PJ what she saw.  Simples



Remember "The Cutting Edge Video" Youtube?  Just spare a moment and have a look at that.

Please note as I am a bit deaf, I might not have the exact words.  Feel free to correct me.

I suggest you start at 10.59

@11.57 she says about herself, in a chiding manner

"Why the hell didn't you think?
Not even thought anyone go into an appartment and take a child out.

Probably the one person who could have actually stopped anything
What if, what if, what if ...."

At 12.30-12.40, she is weeping.


Are you unable to see how wrong you are?

[sadie]

Stephen, you have not answered my questions.

Why are you constantly disbelieving a witness statement.  Trying to make it fit your ideas?



PLease can I have the answers to the qustions asked in the longer post.

[stephen25000]

Please dont change the subject Redblossom.  I bumped for Stephen.  I did it when he arrived

I will copy it again
For Stephen:
 » Insert Quote

What the hell is the matter with you, Stephen?  What's all this talk about uncorroberated statements?  People make statements all over the world without peeps who were not there, nor knowing anything, challenging them all the time. 

Can we be clear
Are you saying that Jane is a liar?
Are you saying that all the Brits are liars?

Remember she is not the accused,  Seems you are treating her as that.
Why are you suspicious of her all the time?


A child was seen being carried by a man we call bundleman and she reported to the PJ what she saw.  Simples



Remember "The Cutting Edge Video" Youtube?  Just spare a moment and have a look at that.

Please note as I am a bit deaf, I might not have the exact words.  Feel free to correct me.

I suggest you start at 10.59

@11.57 she says about herself, in a chiding manner

"Why the hell didn't you think?
Not even thought anyone go into an appartment and take a child out.

Probably the one person who could have actually stopped anything
What if, what if, what if ...."

At 12.30-12.40, she is weeping.


Are you unable to see how wrong you are?

Not in the slightest.

I don't believe the mccanns and associates version of events.

Provide the evidence to prove me wrong.

[sadie]

Please dont change the subject Redblossom.  I bumped for Stephen.  I did it when he arrived

I will copy it again
For Stephen:
 » Insert Quote

What the hell is the matter with you, Stephen?  What's all this talk about uncorroberated statements?  People make statements all over the world without peeps who were not there, nor knowing anything, challenging them all the time. 

Can we be clear
Are you saying that Jane is a liar?
Are you saying that all the Brits are liars?

Remember she is not the accused,  Seems you are treating her as that.
Why are you suspicious of her all the time?


A child was seen being carried by a man we call bundleman and she reported to the PJ what she saw.  Simples



Remember "The Cutting Edge Video" Youtube?  Just spare a moment and have a look at that.

Please note as I am a bit deaf, I might not have the exact words.  Feel free to correct me.

I suggest you start at 10.59

@11.57 she says about herself, in a chiding manner

"Why the hell didn't you think?
Not even thought anyone go into an appartment and take a child out.

Probably the one person who could have actually stopped anything
What if, what if, what if ...."

At 12.30-12.40, she is weeping.


Are you unable to see how wrong you are?

Not in the slightest.

I don't believe the mccanns and associates version of events.

Provide the evidence to prove me wrong.

You still are avoiding answering the questions

CLUE:  They are early on in the post

[Redblossom]

Sadie wrote:

Please dont change the subject Redblossom.  I bumped for Stephen.  I did it when he arrived

ummm, I was not changing the subject as you assume, or infer I was doing deliberately, I was responding to a post you made earlier, and asking questions on it. This IS your theory thread, so I was asking questions vis a vis that. Your convo  with Stephen is nothing to do with me. i didn't know one had to flow with the *latest* issue or spat, on any thread and not ask questions from previous *flows*

Admin,  can we have a rolly eyes smiley here please?
 

[sadie]

I didn't infer anything Redblossom.  You are wrong


But I had gone to the trouble of bumping the post ... and it was annoyong that the subject was suddenly changed


OK Stephen I am hoping that you have seen the video at the relevant parts and can now answer the questions ... Purleaze!

[Redblossom]

I didn't infer anything Redblossom.  You are wrong


But I had gone to the trouble of bumping the post ... and it was annoyong that the subject was suddenly changed


OK Stephen I am hoping that you have seen the video at the relevant parts and can now answer the questions ... Purleaze!

OK, once you have stopped being annoyed and at your leisure you can answer my post or not, your prerogative, you dont HAVE to, I dont DEMAND answers like some
 

[sadie]

Sadie, can you explain how the police ignored Mrs Carpenter, and when? Do you even know when this info was relayed to the PJ? Because in a related previous post IIRC you said had thry not ignored her Madeleone could haveen home within hours!  And what you think they should have done about her saying she vaguely remembered someone calling Madeleine, and who you think that was and why?

Well they didn't take much notice did they?

I see that you have quoted incompletely.  Herewith the full post


From the thread:
Could Madeleine have been abducted between 9.30 and 10.00?
« on: April 17, 2013, 12:14:48 AM »

There are least two reasons

1)  Jane Tanner witnessed bundleman carrying ?Madeleine

2) Mrs Caroline Carpenter heard a man whispering /murmuring "Madeleine, Madeleine".  She was in the vicinity of where bundleman walked to, and she was there at the correct sort of time

So two witnesses.  These should not have been ignored.



Jane Tanner would have been treated as a GOLDEN WITNESS by almost any police Force in the World  But Amaral rubbished ALL the British witnesses.  Had he taken her sighting on board along with Mrs Carpenters audio witnessing, then there would have been a very different result.

 Madeleine would probably have been home within hours.

You are correct in the fact that Stephen Carpenters statement was not taken for months afterwards; almost a year.  I missed the date of the statement.

However Jane Tanner was such a golden witness that she should not have been ignored.  Had her witness statement been taken seriously, it is quite possible that Madeleine would have been home within hours.  Why was her statement ignored?  And why did Amaral chose to ignore the word of various Doctors and staff ?

And what on earth was Amaral thinking of, in NOT taking a statement from the Carpenters at the time?  They were dining in the same Tapas restaurant and left at a very pertinent time.  They then walked in a direction that was very similar to Bundlemans. 

In my book it was sheer negligence that Amaral failed to take a statement from the Carpenters at the time

THe Carpenters statement was not taken for almost a year.  Unbelievable!
Anyone remember, would that have been before Amaral "resigned" .. or after?


Talk about the trail going cold! 

[Redblossom]

Its ok sadie, mr amaral should have known within hours, like LOTS of hours, who was where at every time, who was dining where, who was sitting on their balcony, who passed the street and whispered, what the mccanns were doing and what they were not  inmediately, etc etc, he was not involved till the  the next day iirc pity he wasnt a saint, cos if he was YOU LOT as is your fave phrase, would still  blame him personally for everything, some of your extremeist ranks say he abducted madeleine, hello? Never mind, your thoughts mean nothing really in reality

[sadie]

Oh, touched a raw spot there did I, Redblossom? .... apologies


Sorry, but the basics should have been to interview everyone who was dining with the Mccanns asap.

Yep, everyone makes mistakes, I agree. 

Still in his book ... didn't he say that by the day after, he had decided there was NO abduction.  Pls corrct me if I am wrong.

Bit hasty, don't ya think?  Perhaps because of that he gave up on the spot?  Didn't bother to interview people?



That's me done for tonight.  Nigh Night Redblossom.  Will be off the forum for a while.  See ya


Psst:  Have given up on Stephen.  Seems he cant answer the questions.

[stephen25000]

Oh, touched a raw spot there did I, Redblossom? .... apologies


Sorry, but the basics should have been to interview everyone who was dining with the Mccanns asap.

Yep, everyone makes mistakes, I agree. 

Still in his book ... didn't he say that by the day after, he had decided there was NO abduction.  Pls corrct me if I am wrong.

Bit hasty, don't ya think?  Perhaps because of that he gave up on the spot?  Didn't bother to interview people?



That's me done for tonight.  Nigh Night Redblossom.  Will be off the forum for a while.  See ya


Psst:  Have given up on Stephen.  Seems he cant answer the questions.

Sorry to disappoint sadie.

However, with your flights of fancy to never never land with the 'golden witness tanner', I have yet to see a more 'ludicrous assertion' in this case.

Thanks to Clarence for that one.

[sadie]

This witness statement that i found again yesterday, is not conclusive in any way, but does seem to add some weight to my theory of a watcher/ controller on the balcony opposite 5A, that fateful night.  As suggested in the earlier posts on this thread.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm
 
 
The following day we saw Kate McCann when she came to collect the twins from the creche at lunchtime, she was distraught and broke down sobbing.

We didn't have any other involvement with their group for the remainder of our holiday and flew home on the Saturday. On the day of our departure we had to move out of our apartment and Mark Warner gave us another to use during the day until we left.

It was across the road from the McCann's apartment and the public balcony overlooked the side of their building and the road. You could actually see the front and back of the building from that view point. I noticed on the balcony that there was a pile of cigarette butts as if there had been someone stood there for some time smoking. I thought that was odd , and it could have been someone watching the McCann's apartment to monitor their comings and goings.

This was only a day and a half after Madeleine was taken and that balcony did not exactly have a beautiful sea view or anything !.