Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: ferryman on May 18, 2013, 01:36:42 PM
Title: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 18, 2013, 01:36:42 PM
1. Why was she interviewed so late?
2. Why was she interviewed only the once?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 18, 2013, 02:36:25 PM
The sound of silence is somewhat deafening so far.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 18, 2013, 03:27:35 PM
Valid questions
to 1) no idea - her being in the closest proximity to 5a and being an independent witness should have made her the first one to be interviewed
to 2) I can only guess - I remember the short video of her being really upset by the media pack hounding her for answers - perchance the PJ thought - any stress for an ageing person should be kept to the bare minimum?
ETA: here's the vid from about 0117
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFHbkbBh5BM
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 18, 2013, 03:41:52 PM
Right at the end of the rogatory interview of Carol Tramner, Mrs Fenn's niece, we have this:
DC1485'Do you know if your aunt knew of anyone staying as a guest, or mentioned that someone was staying there'
CT'She probably knew, but she does not talk much about this.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'So this'humm.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She knows some people from the Resident's Association but I cannot guarantee that she knew who was staying there. She is pretty reserved or at least tries to be, but she does know the majority of the members of the Resident's Association and when there is a meeting'for this reason perhaps she knew that an apartment would be occupied. Remembering this after so much time has passed'
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She is very astute, you know.
DC1485'Very good. Is there anything else you would like to add'
CT'No.
DC1485'She was given the opportunity to clarify. Right, it is 11h10. This interview has ended/
Disinclined to talk (even to relatives) and mentally astute ...
And there has to have been some reason for that question being put to Carol Tramner ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 18, 2013, 03:49:33 PM
Right at the end of the rogatory interview of Carol Tramner, Mrs Fenn's niece, we have this:
DC1485'Do you know if your aunt knew of anyone staying as a guest, or mentioned that someone was staying there'
CT'She probably knew, but she does not talk much about this.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'So this'humm.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She knows some people from the Resident's Association but I cannot guarantee that she knew who was staying there. She is pretty reserved or at least tries to be, but she does know the majority of the members of the Resident's Association and when there is a meeting'for this reason perhaps she knew that an apartment would be occupied. Remembering this after so much time has passed'
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She is very astute, you know.
DC1485'Very good. Is there anything else you would like to add'
CT'No.
DC1485'She was given the opportunity to clarify. Right, it is 11h10. This interview has ended/
Disinclined to talk (even to relatives) and mentally astute ...
And there has to have been some reason for that question being put to Carol Tramner ...
Mrs. Fenn appears not to have been a 'blabbermouth'
If you suggest Ferryman, that the lady knew much more than she let on. - I'd agree with that.
Let's face it - at her stage of life she probably just wanted peace and quiet - one day she picks out veg at her local market and has a quiet glass of wine on her balcony - next day all hell breaks lose.
But that's just speculation - the lady is no longer with us - whether she passed on additional info. to say Carol on the QT before she passed away, is anyone's guess
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 18, 2013, 04:05:22 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 18, 2013, 05:20:33 PM
Right at the end of the rogatory interview of Carol Tramner, Mrs Fenn's niece, we have this:
DC1485'Do you know if your aunt knew of anyone staying as a guest, or mentioned that someone was staying there'
CT'She probably knew, but she does not talk much about this.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'So this'humm.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She knows some people from the Resident's Association but I cannot guarantee that she knew who was staying there. She is pretty reserved or at least tries to be, but she does know the majority of the members of the Resident's Association and when there is a meeting'for this reason perhaps she knew that an apartment would be occupied. Remembering this after so much time has passed'
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She is very astute, you know.
DC1485'Very good. Is there anything else you would like to add'
CT'No.
DC1485'She was given the opportunity to clarify. Right, it is 11h10. This interview has ended/
Disinclined to talk (even to relatives) and mentally astute ...
And there has to have been some reason for that question being put to Carol Tramner ...
CT was being asked, not about 5a, but a different apartment, having said that, her relaying of which flat she saw the blonde man come out of is as clear as very muddy mud.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 18, 2013, 06:21:32 PM
Right at the end of the rogatory interview of Carol Tramner, Mrs Fenn's niece, we have this:
DC1485'Do you know if your aunt knew of anyone staying as a guest, or mentioned that someone was staying there'
CT'She probably knew, but she does not talk much about this.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'So this'humm.
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She knows some people from the Resident's Association but I cannot guarantee that she knew who was staying there. She is pretty reserved or at least tries to be, but she does know the majority of the members of the Resident's Association and when there is a meeting'for this reason perhaps she knew that an apartment would be occupied. Remembering this after so much time has passed'
DC1485'Yes.
CT'She is very astute, you know.
DC1485'Very good. Is there anything else you would like to add'
CT'No.
DC1485'She was given the opportunity to clarify. Right, it is 11h10. This interview has ended/
Disinclined to talk (even to relatives) and mentally astute ...
And there has to have been some reason for that question being put to Carol Tramner ...
CT was being asked, not about 5a, but a different apartment, having said that, her relaying of which flat she saw the blonde man come out of is as clear as very muddy mud.
I'd agree that CT's testimony isn't limpid - but then she was only visiting her aunt and had no reason to be suspicious of anything.
But that still doesn't answer the OP's two questions concerning Mrs. Fenn.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 18, 2013, 06:26:03 PM
Well carana, they are pointless questions because no one knows the answers
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 18, 2013, 06:32:54 PM
Yes, questions without answer are no questions. But does somebody know how the couple above Mrs Fenn happened to be interviewed ? Was it spontaneously ? Where they invited to state when the police knocked all doors of all buildings around ?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 18, 2013, 06:34:56 PM
Yes, questions without answer are no questions. But does somebody know how the couple above Mrs Fenn happened to be interviewed ? Was it spontaneously ? Where they invited to state when the police knocked all doors of all buildings around ?
Good question. Offhand, I don't recall an official statement.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 18, 2013, 06:41:30 PM
Yes, questions without answer are no questions. But does somebody know how the couple above Mrs Fenn happened to be interviewed ? Was it spontaneously ? Where they invited to state when the police knocked all doors of all buildings around ?
Ive only ever seen a media report about them and it was the mccanna friends apparently who knocked on the door
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id52.html
Scroll down to where the title is we were woken at half past eleven at night
BTW they lived above Mrs Fenn, which puts Carole Tramners statement that she had the top flat a bit out of it
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 18, 2013, 06:47:43 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
The thought that occurred to me is that the question might have been an attempt to tease out a reference to Mrs Fenn's friend Ms Glynn, as far as I'm aware, not referred to anywhere other than in Mrs Fenn's statement.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 18, 2013, 07:22:50 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
The thought that occurred to me is that the question might have been an attempt to tease out a reference to Mrs Fenn's friend Ms Glynn, as far as I'm aware, not referred to anywhere other than in Mrs Fenn's statement.
I realise that. But I'm still back to the basic questions. Why on earth did the PJ not check all of this out right at the beginning?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 18, 2013, 10:51:16 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
The thought that occurred to me is that the question might have been an attempt to tease out a reference to Mrs Fenn's friend Ms Glynn, as far as I'm aware, not referred to anywhere other than in Mrs Fenn's statement.
I realise that. But I'm still back to the basic questions. Why on earth did the PJ not check all of this out right at the beginning?
The answer just might be circular.
What if "Ms Gynn" never existed? ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 19, 2013, 06:52:45 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
The thought that occurred to me is that the question might have been an attempt to tease out a reference to Mrs Fenn's friend Ms Glynn, as far as I'm aware, not referred to anywhere other than in Mrs Fenn's statement.
I realise that. But I'm still back to the basic questions. Why on earth did the PJ not check all of this out right at the beginning?
The answer just might be circular.
What if "Ms Gynn" never existed? ...
What makes you think that, Ferryman? That night she contacted a friend called EDNA GLYN, who also lives in Praia da Luz, after 23.00, telling her about the situation, who was not surprised at the childs crying.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 19, 2013, 06:59:37 PM
Well apart from Mr Amaral fabricating or corrupting Mrs Fenns statement we now have Mrs Fenn or Mr Amaral inventing Mrs Glynn
Excellent sleuthing 8)--))
Just waiting for Ferrymans theory that Mrs Fenn didnt exist
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 19, 2013, 07:04:22 PM
She lives very near by.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 19, 2013, 07:05:55 PM
That night she contacted a friend called EDNA GLYN, who also lives in Praia da Luz, after 23.00, telling her about the situation, who was not surprised at the child’s crying.
Had this been said, I would think it's highly relevant.
Did Mrs. Fenn and Mrs. Glyn have previous conversations - say about child care arrangements at 5a?
This does not strike me as a random comment. Luz was then the sleepiest place ever - no stag parties littering up the streets - no Thai massage parlours - no perceived danger - tranquil/bucolic even.
So why was Mrs. Glyn not surprised - assuming she was British like Mrs. Fenn - it wouldnt have been said in the spirit of 'yeah them Ruskies - I'm not surprised' - if you catch my drift.
If that was said it had some provenance. Any views on what that is?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 19, 2013, 07:08:05 PM
Anne, I don't think it's fair to give out someone's phone number, particularly if it's an elderly lady (which may well be the case).
Why didn't the PJ interview her, though? Seems strange not to have corroborated the date and time.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 19, 2013, 07:15:57 PM
I don't think it's fair to suggest the lady doesn't exist or should have been checked by the police as if some sort of plot existed between her and Mrs Fenn. Mrs Glyn might have been contacted to confirm the day and hour without this being in the file. Mrs Fenn, as a witness, didn't have to prove anything and Mrs Glyn tried her best to help her friend who, as many people would, felt terrible listening to that crying child.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 19, 2013, 07:27:15 PM
Who were the members of the "Residents' Association"? Independent owners within Block 5? Other owners within PdL?
Long-term tenants?
The thought that occurred to me is that the question might have been an attempt to tease out a reference to Mrs Fenn's friend Ms Glynn, as far as I'm aware, not referred to anywhere other than in Mrs Fenn's statement.
I realise that. But I'm still back to the basic questions. Why on earth did the PJ not check all of this out right at the beginning?
The answer just might be circular.
What if "Ms Gynn" never existed? ...
What makes you think that, Ferryman? That night she contacted a friend called EDNA GLYN, who also lives in Praia da Luz, after 23.00, telling her about the situation, who was not surprised at the childs crying.
1. There's no other trace of Ms Glyn
2. Mrs Fenn is on record as saying she didn't know the holiday apartment was occupied. What else about her statement is untrue?
3 Mrs Fenn's statement was initially leaked as being about a crime of which she herself was victim. Subsequent leaks suggested something to do with hearing a child crying.
4. Neither assertion should have been leaked. Why should we believe either?
5. The crime of which Mrs Fenn was a victim gets a "sneaked" mention, right at the end of her, apparent, interview.
6. Mrs Fenn was interviewed only the once.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 19, 2013, 07:40:17 PM
2. Mrs Fenn is on record as saying she didn't know the holiday apartment was occupied.
A lie being perpetuated, day after day after it has been demolished, how sad is that, you cant get sadder basically
SAD
8-)(--) 8-)(--)
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Angelo222 on May 20, 2013, 09:29:41 AM
Posting personal details on the forum can result in a ban ... Take note !!
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 10:24:36 AM
Posting personal details on the forum can result in a ban ... Take note !!
What about suggesting people could be invented since they're mentioned by some witness in the files without having made a statement proving the witness wasn't lying ?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 10:40:08 AM
@ Anne
Apologies. It would have been better if I'd PM'd you. 8()-000(
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 10:44:21 AM
Apologies. It would have been better if I'd PM'd you. 8()-000(
No problem, Carana. It just crossed suddenly my mind to check whether Mrs Glyn was easy to contact or not. And she was ! But of course I changed a digit and then erased in case by chance the modified number would belong to someone !
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Angelo222 on May 20, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 11:00:25 AM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Two Edna G. living in Praia da Luz ?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 11:01:38 AM
I have taken the plunge and subscribed to The Times.
The profile runs to 3 pages.
I will add the other pages in edits. Here's the first:
Robert Murat, a suspect in the disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann, adored his own daughter and desperately missed her after his marriage broke down. The former car salesman “lost” her when his wife, Dawn, returned to her native Norfolk with their daughter four months after the family had emigrated to Portugal because she was homesick and he stayed behind. Mr Murat, 33, whose father is Portuguese, carried on as a self-employed property consultant on the Algarve, but visited the child regularly. Gareth Bailey, a close friend and former colleague of the suspect at Inchcape Autoparc used car dealership in Norwich, where Mr Murat had worked for four years, said the family embarked on a new life in Portugal in 2005. Married in 1994 in Deerham, Norfolk, the couple had been trying for a baby for years until she fell pregnant in 2002 and had looked forward to moving abroad. ”But Dawn was unhappy in Portugal and became homesick,” Mr Bailey said. “She is a Norfolk girl and her family are in Norfolk. ”She only stayed with Rob for three or four months before she decided to come home with [their daughter]. He had already got a life out there, so he decided to stay. At first, he kept his relationship with Dawn and kept flying back to the UK to spend time with her and her daughter. ”He was going backwards and forwards between Portugal and here all the time, often only staying a couple of days before going back there. In the end, their relationship just fizzled out.” Friends today described Mr Murat’s daughter, four, who is also blonde, as “his life”. Mr Bailey, who last saw his friend two months ago, added: “He is a laidback guy who loves the wonderful weather and the relaxed lifestyle out there.
”But he was upset about being away from his daughter. She is his first child and she means a lot to him. When she was born, it was the best thing ever for him. I know he stays in contact with [her] and telephones her all the time from Portugal. She is his world and he loves her to bits.” Mr Murat was born on November 20, 1973, at Queen Charlotte’s Hospital, Hammersmith, west London - the elder son of John Henry Queriol Murat, a company director, who is Portuguese, and Jennifer (nee Eveleigh), from Sidmouth, Devon. Mr Murat’s parents were then living in Richmond-upon-Thames, but moved to Portugal, where he was educated. As a young man, he returned to Britain, where he took a variety of jobs and enjoyed playing darts and clay pigeon shooting. Mr Murat, who lost an eye in a motorbike accident as a teenager when he crashed into the wall of a railway station, worked for the turkey tycoon, Bernard Matthews, at the company factory in Lenwade, Norfolk, between 1994 and 2000. He and his wife, who has a son, David, now 20, by a previous marriage, bought a modest, semi-detached, three-bedroom house, now worth £190,000, in The Street, Hockering - a quiet Norfolk village near Deerham (population 230). Mr Murat went on to become a successful car salesman with Inchcape for four years before moving on to work at Desira car dealership in Norwich, selling Nissans, Alfa Romeos, Fiats and Citroens. But he also earned £150 a time as a translator for Norfolk police, using his language skills to help their inquiries among the large Portuguese community in the county. Mr Bailey remains certain of his friend’s innocence. He said: “I would trust him with my own daughter. It was a complete shock to hear what has happened in Portugal. If I was to give him a character reference, I would describe him as brilliant and a real people person. ”He is ever such a likeable guy and probably one of the most helpful people you could come across. He was very conscientious when I worked with him and spent masses of time with customers - almost to the point where he would become annoying. It’s just the way he is.
”He is one of those overly helpful people who likes to get involved. Sometimes at work, I had to tell him to go away in a friendly way.” Mr Murat had a reputation, not only in the car trade but in Hockering, as something of a Good Samaritan. His next door neighbour, Colin Shackcloth, 85, said: “He is a lovely man, but, two years ago, I realised he was gone. I went round with a little present at Christmas, a box of chocolates and Dawn said: ’Robert has gone back and he is stopping there.” Mr Shackcloth, a retired display manager, added: “He always struck me as a down-to-earth kind of fellow. If you wanted anything, he would help. If you needed it, he would be round to replace a bulb for you. What he is supposed to have done just doesn’t fit. ”They were both very nice to us. We never had an angry word since they moved in about 11 years ago. I can’t say a bad word about him.” Police stood guard at the house, from which Mrs Murat was driven away at speed by police late on Monday night carrying her daughter in a blanket.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 11:03:02 AM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Personally, I don't think anyone, except the police should contact her. If the statements hadn't been made public, no one would even have heard of her.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 11:09:16 AM
I do agree. Moreover because nothing proves the PJ didn't contact her. On the contrary, considering the easiness to contact her, the PJ likely checked Mrs Fenn wasn't confusing Tuesday (when she said she was home) and Wednesday (when she said she was out).
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 11:12:23 AM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Personally, I don't think anyone, except the police should contact her. If the statements hadn't been made public, no one would even have heard of her.
Even as one who love to know the truth, and cheerfully hold my hand up and admit I'd got it wrong if I have, I'm with Carana with this.
I don't think we should be pestering people personally.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 11:17:43 AM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Personally, I don't think anyone, except the police should contact her. If the statements hadn't been made public, no one would even have heard of her.
Even as one who love to know the truth, and cheerfully hold my hand up and admit I'd got it wrong if I have, I'm with Carana with this.
I don't think we should be pestering people personally.
Thank you, Ferryman.
Quite apart from the invasion of privacy on the part of a bunch of forum noseyparkers, the police would be far better equipped to help her through a cognitive interview of what must - by now - be a faint recollection.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 11:23:39 AM
This is the article by Matthew Parris. (Actually, it's slightly abridged in that the original repeated just about every libel going about Murat. But you'd have to be a journalist as skilled as Parris to get away with that sort of thing, as he did).
Our columnist on the disgraceful hounding of Robert
Do you have a mother? Have you ever shared a house with her? Might you have dealt with anyone a couple of years past his teens who (for all you know) could have boasted to someone else about seducing an underage girl? Might you be separated from a spouse and conduct another affair? Might you love your daughter? Might you have a cellar in your house? Might you assist local efforts to trace a missing child?
Well watch out, because if any toddler should go missing anywhere near you, and you were to be (not unreasonably) questioned by police, the British press could have had you hanged, drawn and quartered by Monday.
A life has been destroyed after the abduction of Madeleine McCann. Perhaps two, for we do not yet know Madeleine’s fate, and perhaps we never will. But for Robert Murat, the one-time suspect whom much of the British newspaper industry and parts of the Portuguese media casually decided to convict, a life lies in ruins. There is no redemption for Mr Murat now, not if the Angel Gabriel should appear on television to exonerate him. The name alone brings a shudder.
But nobody closely involved with this case believes any longer that Mr Murat is anything but an innocent man. For the rest of the world, however, glancing in passing at headlines and skimming news reports over its coffee, the name Murat is now synonymous with “creepy oddball and obvious suspect”.
His reputation will not now be rescued even by the arrest and conviction of anyone else. Imagine today giving your name at a hotel reception as Robert Murat — or Colin Stagg, or Sally Clark. Linkages between a crime and a name are set up in the public imagination and persist even after the story has changed direction. “Robert Murat — wasn’t he the one suspected of taking Maddie? Or cleared of it? Whatever. Mixed up in it anyway.”
For the record, Robert Murat is an Anglo-Portuguese man in his early thirties who has separated from his English wife, has a girlfriend estranged from her own husband, and is sharing a house with his mother, not far from where Madeleine McCann disappeared. After her disappearance he volunteered to help. He hired a car for a few days. His house has a cellar. He has a friendly business connection with a 22-year-old
Russian IT operative, Sergey Malinka, who was (it was reported) claimed by a workmate once to have boasted about underage sex. Mr Murat and Mr Malinka have spoken to each other on mobile phones. And Mr Murat has a four-year-old daughter who (somebody says) looks like Madeleine. Oh — and he’s blind in one eye.
Allegations have swirled around about computers on which pornographic websites have been accessed; but as a large proportion of computers worldwide would answer to that description and the claims have been neither confirmed nor elucidated, I shall not pursue these.
Now watch the British media at work. Exercising a courtesy not extended to Mr Murat, I shall name neither papers nor reporters. Let the headlines (in italics) and reports that follow provide a handy journalists’ guide to assassination-by-innuendo.
“ MADDIE SUSPECT BEHAVED JUST LIKE HUNTLEY: Kidnapping has weird echoes of Soham case. The prime suspect in the kidnap of Madeleine McCann interfered in the investigation as soon as the search for her began, it emerged yesterday. Briton Robert Murat, 33, even tried to comfort Madeleine’s distraught parents, Kate and Gerry, in the hours after she was snatched . . . One holidaymaker said: ‘There was a feeling that his behaviour was similar to that displayed by Huntley.’ Murat was said to have volunteered to act as a translator . . .”
“ Maddie: Russian ‘pervert’ quizzed by cops. A Russian computer ace linked to suspect Robert Murat was being quizzed last night . . . Sergey Malinka, 22 . . . who helped Murat, 33, set up a website – was picked up in a police swoop . . .
“ HUNT FOR MADDIE: POLICE IN NEW VILLA SWOOP COMPUTER RAID. . . Malinka, 22, said he . . . worked on a computer owned by the one-eyed Briton . . . Meanwhile it emerged there is an underfloor chamber at [Murat’s] home, 100 yards from where Maddie, four, was snatched as she slept in a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz a fortnight ago . . .”
“ Revealed: The cellar in suspect’s villa. . .‘There is a hole in the floor that we used as access when we were putting all the pipes in, so it’s big enough for a man to get down inside.’” “ His girl is the spitting image of Madeleine. Robert Murat has been pining for his four-year-old daughter Sofia, a ‘spitting image’ of missing Madeleine, friends revealed yesterday . . .”
“ Sex secret of Madeleine suspect: Briton ‘shared’ the wife of pool cleaner at villa. While friends and relatives portrayed suspect Robert Murat as a devoted family man, a darker picture emerged of an irritating oddball who loves to be the centre of attention. A one-eyed estate agent, former car salesman and turkey farm worker . . . it also emerged that Murat was caught up in a bizarre love triangle . . .”
“ One minute the Murats were happy with their new life in Portugal, the next their marriage was in tatters . . . his wife never said why it ended FAMILY FRIEND: Friends of Robert Murat’s ex-wife told last night how she suddenly walked out on him — but she would not say why.”
“ A PHONEY ALIBI? 11.40pm call on the night she went missing. Murat told police he was at home in bed” . . . Detectives are said to be concerned that though Murat and Malinka claim to be only business acquaintances they were captured on CCTV speaking animatedly . . . Murat also rented a hire car for three days after the abduction, possibly after he realised he was under police surveillance.”
“ The police haven’t told the family what is on Murat’s computer. They want to shield them. . .” . . . And so it went on for about a week: a week in which Mr Murat saw his good name torn apart. The damage done, a cautionary note then crept in . . .
“Despite the discoveries, nothing was found to connect Briton Murat to Madeleine . . .”
And, months later, nothing has been. There is speculation that the Portuguese police will formally exonerate Mr Murat soon. I don’t even know he is innocent. But I do know that, though “innocent until proved guilty” is a counsel of perfection, and though it is sometimes impossible to write useful reports without fingering guilty and innocent alike, there are still limits — cloudy though they must necessarily be. Reporting in this case has smashed right through them.
The whole disgusting business, the whole media-driven infatuation with this little girl and her parents, the whole sick, morbid, sentimental campaign of news generation and news manipulation, has been a disgrace to the British media.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 12:49:24 PM
the police would be far better equipped to help her through a cognitive interview of what must - by now - be a faint recollection.
What are you thinking of exactly, Carana, help her through memorizing the day or help her memorizing the fact ? In other words, do you suggest Mrs Fenn imagined the crying or made a confusion about the day ?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 01:34:56 PM
the police would be far better equipped to help her through a cognitive interview of what must - by now - be a faint recollection.
What are you thinking of exactly, Carana, help her through memorizing the day or help her memorizing the fact ? In other words, do you suggest Mrs Fenn imagined the crying or made a confusion about the day ?
I doubt that Mrs Fenn imagined it.
- No one knows if she had the TV on (or whether neighbours also had their TVs on) when she was talking to her friend.
- Did she ring her friend specifically because of her concern about a child crying, or was this simply a comment in the midst of a general chat? E.g., "Sorry, I can't hear you, some kid is crying"?
- What kind of phone did she have? A landline attached by a physical cable or a portable landline one where she could have moved around her apartment?
- Was there any indication in that chat as to whether it was the same child crying, or whether there could have been several? Where exactly was she when she heard it? Did she describe it to her friend? Does the friend agree on the date and time?
- Did she have a hearing aid? If so, how did that affect her ability to locate the source of sound?
- What were the acoustics like in this apartment? Could the sound have appeared to have come from a different place? Or several places?
- She didn't mention the gate opening... why not?
- She had been the victim of an attempted burglary the week before (which must have been scary), then a child disappears.
There are loads of questions which should have been verified and corroborated.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 01:41:42 PM
Could I suggest that admin contacts Mrd Glynn rather than several people pester her. Assuming the Mrs Glynn whom Anne found in the public phone book is the same Mrs Glynn whom Mrs Fenn referred to, what questions would you want to ask her?? >@@(*&)
Personally, I don't think anyone, except the police should contact her. If the statements hadn't been made public, no one would even have heard of her.
agreed, the notion that someone who turns up in the files and subsequently gets contacted out of the blue by some armchair sleuths (let's face it, that's what we are) - is ghoulish and wrong on just about every level.
If I was admin of this site - I'd take a very dim view of this
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 01:46:13 PM
as for confusing the day
nothing much ever happens in Luz (except the once)
regardless of age, it is quite feasible that a person living there permanently might get one day mixed up with another day
unlike say holidaymakers - 'Damn it's Thursday already - Saturday we'll be flying back to grey, sodden Britain'
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 01:48:09 PM
the police would be far better equipped to help her through a cognitive interview of what must - by now - be a faint recollection.
What are you thinking of exactly, Carana, help her through memorizing the day or help her memorizing the fact ? In other words, do you suggest Mrs Fenn imagined the crying or made a confusion about the day ?
I doubt that Mrs Fenn imagined it.
- No one knows if she had the TV on (or whether neighbours also had their TVs on) when she was talking to her friend.
- Did she ring her friend specifically because of her concern about a child crying, or was this simply a comment in the midst of a general chat? E.g., "Sorry, I can't hear you, some kid is crying"?
- What kind of phone did she have? A landline attached by a physical cable or a portable landline one where she could have moved around her apartment?
- Was there any indication in that chat as to whether it was the same child crying, or whether there could have been several? Where exactly was she when she heard it? Did she describe it to her friend? Does the friend agree on the date and time?
- Did she have a hearing aid? If so, how did that affect her ability to locate the source of sound?
- What were the acoustics like in this apartment? Could the sound have appeared to have come from a different place? Or several places?
- She didn't mention the gate opening... why not?
- She had been the victim of an attempted burglary the week before (which must have been scary), then a child disappears.
There are loads of questions which should have been verified and corroborated.
So you question the crying, not the day. Isn't it ?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 01:50:12 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 01:57:08 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
ETA 2: Weren't the headlines that she had heard Madeleine? That's not she said in her police statement and that is quite possibly what she was objecting to.
ETA 3: Does her police statement reflect reality anyway? This was late August...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 01:58:18 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
Can make neither head nor tail of your post.
Kate herself admitted the children had been crying during the night:
The possible missed chance came at breakfast on the day Madeleine vanished, when the little girl disconcerted her mother by asking: ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
So why would Mrs. Fenn imagine crying (although she might well have got the days muddled up)?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 02:02:07 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
The video clip has probably been edited to cut out the vital bits and marry up to a blog of Textusa.
Whoever wrote that newspaper article would have absolutely no reason to invent a detail such as that Mrs Fenn said she didn't know the family was in there.
Bloggers with an agenda, different matter ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 02:11:15 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
The video clip has probably been edited to cut out the vital bits and marry up to a blog of Textusa.
Whoever wrote that newspaper article would have absolutely no reason to invent a detail such as that Mrs Fenn said she didn't know the family was in there.
Bloggers with an agenda, different matter ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 02:14:06 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
The video clip has probably been edited to cut out the vital bits and marry up to a blog of Textusa.
Whoever wrote that newspaper article would have absolutely no reason to invent a detail such as that Mrs Fenn said she didn't know the family was in there.
Bloggers with an agenda, different matter ...
That's you-tube ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 05:58:23 PM
Http://videos.sapo.pt/p35nmzFZcMTW0GHD0mHV
Same??
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 06:06:24 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
The video clip has probably been edited to cut out the vital bits and marry up to a blog of Textusa.
Whoever wrote that newspaper article would have absolutely no reason to invent a detail such as that Mrs Fenn said she didn't know the family was in there.
Bloggers with an agenda, different matter ...
That's you-tube ...
Yes, it's YouTube, but it was the clip from national TV, which then moved on...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 06:17:54 PM
On this crying from the apartment, here is what I base my scepticism on:
Last night the McCanns got a boost when the police case appeared to be undermined by a pensioner who is potentially a key witness.
Pamela Fenn, 81, lives above the apartment where Madeleine disappeared and is reported to have told police she heard Madeleine screaming below.
But yesterday she broke her silence to say it was "absolute rubbish" she had made any such claims to police. Mrs Fenn said: "I didn't even know that family was in there."
At the time Mrs Fenn lodged her complaint (about the crime of which she was a victim), the McCanns weren't in there.
There is the semantic alternative of I knew a family was in there, but not that family.
But why would Mrs Fenn say that?
Certainly, by the time of her interview, Mrs Fenn was in absolutely no doubt that family was in there.
Why say anything to the press at all?
We'd have to find that audio clip again, FM.
From memory, the "rubbish" was about media allegations.
ETA: I think Martha already posted the clip here.
The video clip has probably been edited to cut out the vital bits and marry up to a blog of Textusa.
Whoever wrote that newspaper article would have absolutely no reason to invent a detail such as that Mrs Fenn said she didn't know the family was in there.
Bloggers with an agenda, different matter ...
That's you-tube ...
Yes, it's YouTube, but it was the clip from national TV, which then moved on...
My point is, cannot You-tube clips be edited?
Because what we see doesn't contain the remark attributed to Mrs Fenn in the paper, need that mean she never said it?
Or could it just have been edited out?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 06:54:35 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:12:35 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
In this instance, it is far more likely to be bloggers than the newspapers misrepresenting facts.
Especially at that juncture, the papers had no particular agenda to do the McCanns any favours, as one or two of them found out later ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 07:16:49 PM
Redblossom, I don't understand either. Unless.. What Mrs McCann says about Mrs Fenn, the length of the crying (though she wasn't there) and the day of the crying is one thing and what Mrs Fenn says on the same topics another one.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 07:19:25 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 07:20:00 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
In this instance, it is far more likely to be bloggers than the newspapers misrepresenting facts.
Especially at that juncture, the papers had no particular agenda to do the McCanns any favours, as one or two of them found out later ...
And the evidence is?....
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:22:01 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
In this instance, it is far more likely to be bloggers than the newspapers misrepresenting facts.
Especially at that juncture, the papers had no particular agenda to do the McCanns any favours, as one or two of them found out later ...
And the evidence is?....
The fact that Mrs Fenn is on record as saying she didn't know a family was in the holiday apartment below.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 07:23:16 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
articles of faith:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
to the detractors: The dogs are right (usually followed by woof woof)
I was contacted by a Mirror Forum poster in June 2007 who claimed to be an ex-pat living in Luz who told me that the kids were crying every night that holiday
He/she asked me to put this on the forum - which I did with the caveat that that was just an unsubstantiated opinion piece of an unknown source
Guess what - all hell broke lose - and that was at a time when the Mirror forum had ca. 7000 regular posters
I don't do articles of faith - hence my relaxed attitude to the proceedings at large - it'll all come out in the wash
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 07:25:32 PM
Redblossom, I don't understand either. Unless.. What Mrs McCann says about Mrs Fenn, the length of the crying (though she wasn't there) and the day of the crying is one thing and what Mrs Fenn says on the same topics another one.
Probably. Can think of no other reason. Related to this though is Russell Obrien being three doors down at the time, Unless he was in a deep sleep, it being deadly quiet around there, you would think he would have heard something.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:28:43 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 07:31:42 PM
The question to which she was replying isn't in the video clip. She clearly denies having talked to the press.
Had allegations appeared in the press just prior to this?
Anne, what did the two or so sentences say by the TV reporter before her reply?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: DCI on May 20, 2013, 07:33:17 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
When was that programme, aired?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 07:33:37 PM
It is more likely that a newspaper article has misrepresented facts rather than someone editing a video for youtube when it can easily be compared to the original
After all these threads I still dont understand your main problem here, it must be a big one to entail you alledging even if in just your opinion that Mrs Fenns statement was deliberately corrupted, Mrs Glynn may not actully exist, and other suspicions
In this instance, it is far more likely to be bloggers than the newspapers misrepresenting facts.
Especially at that juncture, the papers had no particular agenda to do the McCanns any favours, as one or two of them found out later ...
And the evidence is?....
The fact that Mrs Fenn is on record as saying she didn't know a family was in the holiday apartment below.
And that is evidence of bloggers doctoring sic tv videos?
Ref she didnt know a family was in there: Nonsense as told to you the other day, why do you persist so much, when all the evidence points the other way. Its getting embrassing now, Mrs Fenn refers to the family below several times in her statement, you just cannot base your arguments on snippets out of tabloids whilst ignoring factual statements, thats desperate, but in your ming Mr Amaral was scurrying around changing them all, and Mrs Fenn invebted a non existent person etc, I give up here lol
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:35:00 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Please do not quote my posts out of context Keep the context - or don't quote at all
Thank you
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:45:08 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Please do not quote my posts out of context Keep the context - or don't quote at all
Thank you
Your point was that you don't "do" articles of faith.
How did I quote you out of context?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 07:46:29 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Who represented what she said dishonestly then?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:47:59 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Who represented what she said dishonestly then?
By what's written in the files
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: DCI on May 20, 2013, 07:49:17 PM
Mrs Fenn also said:
On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a photo fit"
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 07:49:35 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Please do not quote my posts out of context Keep the context - or don't quote at all
Thank you
Your point was that you don't "do" articles of faith.
How did I quote you out of context?
What's the point of you?
You took ONE line of my post - in isolation pal
So you can lambast Mrs. Fenn even further - easy she can't sue you anymore, hero
shameful
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:50:41 PM
On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a photo fit"
So I didn't quote you out of context.
I'm glad we've got that sorted.
And I accept your apology.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 07:51:20 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Who represented what she said dishonestly then?
By what's written in the files
So what exactly for the record is your allegation? And WHY on earth would you EVER take tabloid tattle as more important
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:52:25 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Please do not quote my posts out of context Keep the context - or don't quote at all
Thank you
Your point was that you don't "do" articles of faith.
How did I quote you out of context?
What's the point of you?
You took ONE line of my post - in isolation pal
So you can lambast Mrs. Fenn even further - easy she can't sue you anymore, hero
shameful
I'm happy to leave you to burble away to your own, convoluted, agenda ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 07:53:19 PM
On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a photo fit"
So? Whats that to do with the cryng episode
BTW the news report appears to havebeen made on sic on 22 august
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 07:56:47 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Please do not quote my posts out of context Keep the context - or don't quote at all
Thank you
Your point was that you don't "do" articles of faith.
How did I quote you out of context?
What's the point of you?
You took ONE line of my post - in isolation pal
So you can lambast Mrs. Fenn even further - easy she can't sue you anymore, hero
shameful
I'm happy to leave you to burble away to your own, convoluted, agenda ...
you slag deceased people off as you know full well they can neither defend themselves nor sue the shirt off your back for posting falsehoods
That ferryman makes you a coward I'm afraid
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 07:59:05 PM
nor sue the the shirt off your back for posting falsehoods
Actually, in Portugal, the dead can be defamed.
But I certainly have not defamed Mrs Fenn ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 08:04:10 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Who represented what she said dishonestly then?
By what's written in the files
So what exactly for the record is your allegation? And WHY on earth would you EVER take tabloid tattle as more important
Bump and request for evidence
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 08:14:58 PM
That clip seems to be all that was shown. Editing would seem to have been by the TV station as it's not clear what questions were actually asked. She clearly denies having spoken to journalists.
Well, perhaps ...
Registra:
to the supporters: Mrs. Fenn must be wrong
No, I am firmly of the view that Mrs Fenn is an honest witness.
I'm just not sure that what she has said has been honestly represented.
That's all ...
Who represented what she said dishonestly then?
By what's written in the files
So what exactly for the record is your allegation? And WHY on earth would you EVER take tabloid tattle as more important
Bump and request for evidence
Evidence provided ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 08:16:30 PM
On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a photo fit"
Was that ever released?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: DCI on May 20, 2013, 08:16:43 PM
Thanks Red.
BTW the news report appears to havebeen made on sic on 22 august
So that was the day after her statement, was made. How odd ?>)()<
Mrs Fenns statement, taken in Praia da Luz on the 20th of August 2007:
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 08:17:25 PM
So FM your evidence provided is a misquoted or deliberately falsified snippet out of a red rag? Well you carry on believing it then if it makes you happy, the real evidence demolishes your fantasies
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 08:20:26 PM
Anne, what did the two or so sentences say by the TV reporter before her reply?
The reporter says that the PJ wanted to know whether Mrs Fenn had seen TPs going towards the building to check on children and also what was about her short talk with Mrs McCann on that night.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 08:21:36 PM
On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a photo fit"
Was that ever released?
I dont think so but it sounded very much like Matt Oldfield so nothing suspicious about him exiting his apartment
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 20, 2013, 08:21:57 PM
So FM your evidence provided is a misquoted or deliberately falsified snippet out of a red rag? Well you carry on believing it then if it makes you happy, the real evidence demolishes your fantasies
If you prefer to listen to bloggers of heaven knows what credentials, by my guest.
Your prerogative ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Redblossom on May 20, 2013, 08:23:09 PM
So FM your evidence provided is a misquoted or deliberately falsified snippet out of a red rag? Well you carry on believing it then if it makes you happy, the real evidence demolishes your fantasies
If you prefer to listen to bloggers of heaven knows what credentials, by my guest.
Your prerogative ...
You are evading legit questions and comments and throwing it back on bloggers and assuming I read and or believe them, try harder FM, please do, your evidende to date that videos have been doctored and mrs fenns statement doctored, is a resounding......zilch, sometimes it better to give it up when there is NO foundation apart from ones own fantasies, im out of this totally pointless thread but you are free and indebted to prove to the board the FACTS and EVIDENCE for all doctoring, misrepresentation and fabrication going on in this little saga of yours 8((()*/
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 08:28:28 PM
I will grant that wikipedia is not always the most reliable source.
But a gauge of how reliable a wikipedia article is, is how well referenced it is.
This article is well referenced and it says:
Portugal [edit] In Portugal, defamation crimes are: "defamation" (article 180 of the Penal Code; up to six months in prison, or a fine of up to 240 days), "injuries" (art. 181; up to 3 months in prison, or a fine up to 120 days), and "offense to the memory of a deceased person" (art. 185; up to 6 months in prison or a fine of up 240 days). Penalties are aggravated in cases with publicity (art. 183; up to two years in prison or at least 120 days of fine) and when the victim is an authority (art.184; all other penalties aggravated by an extra half). There is yet the extra penalty of "public knowledge of the court decision" (costs paid by the defamer) (art. 189 of Penal Code) and also the crime of "incitation of a crime" (article 297; up to 3 years in prison, or fine).[71][72]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 08:29:41 PM
Anne, what did the two or so sentences say by the TV reporter before her reply?
The reporter says that the PJ wanted to know whether Mrs Fenn had seen TPs going towards the building to check on children and also what was about her short talk with Mrs McCann on that night.
Thanks, Anne.
Just reading up, was this recorded just after she'd made her statement in August?
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: registrar on May 20, 2013, 08:32:43 PM
I will grant that wikipedia is not always the most reliable source.
But a gauge of how reliable a wikipedia article is, is how well referenced it is.
This article is well referenced and it says:
Portugal [edit] In Portugal, defamation crimes are: "defamation" (article 180 of the Penal Code; up to six months in prison, or a fine of up to 240 days), "injuries" (art. 181; up to 3 months in prison, or a fine up to 120 days), and "offense to the memory of a deceased person" (art. 185; up to 6 months in prison or a fine of up 240 days). Penalties are aggravated in cases with publicity (art. 183; up to two years in prison or at least 120 days of fine) and when the victim is an authority (art.184; all other penalties aggravated by an extra half). There is yet the extra penalty of "public knowledge of the court decision" (costs paid by the defamer) (art. 189 of Penal Code) and also the crime of "incitation of a crime" (article 297; up to 3 years in prison, or fine).[71][72]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
wiki eh?
I see the strenght of your argument
Not
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
I will grant that wikipedia is not always the most reliable source.
But a gauge of how reliable a wikipedia article is, is how well referenced it is.
This article is well referenced and it says:
Portugal [edit] In Portugal, defamation crimes are: "defamation" (article 180 of the Penal Code; up to six months in prison, or a fine of up to 240 days), "injuries" (art. 181; up to 3 months in prison, or a fine up to 120 days), and "offense to the memory of a deceased person" (art. 185; up to 6 months in prison or a fine of up 240 days). Penalties are aggravated in cases with publicity (art. 183; up to two years in prison or at least 120 days of fine) and when the victim is an authority (art.184; all other penalties aggravated by an extra half). There is yet the extra penalty of "public knowledge of the court decision" (costs paid by the defamer) (art. 189 of Penal Code) and also the crime of "incitation of a crime" (article 297; up to 3 years in prison, or fine).[71][72]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
wiki eh?
I see the strenght of your argument
Not
Keep digging, registra ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: ferryman on May 20, 2013, 08:42:00 PM
So FM your evidence provided is a misquoted or deliberately falsified snippet out of a red rag? Well you carry on believing it then if it makes you happy, the real evidence demolishes your fantasies
If you prefer to listen to bloggers of heaven knows what credentials, by my guest.
Your prerogative ...
You are evading legit questions and comments and throwing it back on bloggers and assuming I read and or believe them, try harder FM, please do, your evidende to date that videos have been doctored and mrs fenns statement doctored, is a resounding......zilch, sometimes it better to give it up when there is NO foundation apart from onea own fantasies, im out of this totally pointless thread 8((()*/
When you start trying (as a verb) and quit trying (adjective) I may up my work rate slightly.
At the moment I am idling ...
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 08:45:12 PM
So FM your evidence provided is a misquoted or deliberately falsified snippet out of a red rag? Well you carry on believing it then if it makes you happy, the real evidence demolishes your fantasies
If you prefer to listen to bloggers of heaven knows what credentials, by my guest.
Your prerogative ...
You are evading legit questions and comments and throwing it back on bloggers and assuming I read and or believe them, try harder FM, please do, your evidende to date that videos have been doctored and mrs fenns statement doctored, is a resounding......zilch, sometimes it better to give it up when there is NO foundation apart from onea own fantasies, im out of this totally pointless thread 8((()*/
When you start trying (as a verb) and quit trying (adjective) I may up my work rate slightly.
At the moment I am idling ...
Your attempts at anything to date have been pretty pathetic, I doubt anyone is listening to you anymore on this little personal and pointless vendetta, again NO evidence provided for anything alledged, thats pretty much 0/10 from where I am and Im sure others are sitting. Have fun though trying to retain any little credibility you have left here, if there was any at all ?>)()<
Oh and BTW the only trying I will do is trying to ignore your convoluted machnations from now on
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: DCI on May 20, 2013, 08:48:08 PM
I will grant that wikipedia is not always the most reliable source.
But a gauge of how reliable a wikipedia article is, is how well referenced it is.
This article is well referenced and it says:
Portugal [edit] In Portugal, defamation crimes are: "defamation" (article 180 of the Penal Code; up to six months in prison, or a fine of up to 240 days), "injuries" (art. 181; up to 3 months in prison, or a fine up to 120 days), and "offense to the memory of a deceased person" (art. 185; up to 6 months in prison or a fine of up 240 days). Penalties are aggravated in cases with publicity (art. 183; up to two years in prison or at least 120 days of fine) and when the victim is an authority (art.184; all other penalties aggravated by an extra half). There is yet the extra penalty of "public knowledge of the court decision" (costs paid by the defamer) (art. 189 of Penal Code) and also the crime of "incitation of a crime" (article 297; up to 3 years in prison, or fine).[71][72]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
wiki eh?
I see the strenght of your argument
Not
I'm not certain that the PT criminal code that I've just consulted is the latest version (and it does keep changing), but Ferryman seems to be correct that defamation of the deceased is indeed an offence in Portugal.
Artigo 185o Ofensa à memória de pessoa falecida 1 - Quem, por qualquer forma, ofender gravemente a memória de pessoa falecida é punido com pena de prisão até 6 meses ou com pena de multa até 240 dias. 2 - É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto: a) Nos nos 2, 3 e 4 do artigo 180o; e b) No artigo 183o. 3 - A ofensa não é punível quando tiverem decorrido mais de 50 anos sobre o falecimento. (Redacção da Lei no 65/98, de 2 de Setembro)
ETA: And I don't see where Ferryman has defamed her.
Title: Re: Pamela Fenn, two questions:
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2013, 09:18:02 PM