UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
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: stephen25000 on February 21, 2014, 10:51:35 AM
-
They were drinking every evening ..............................
and it was never good enough to leave their children undefended in , as they claim, an unlocked residence.
-
They were drinking every evening ..............................
and it was never good enough to leave their children undefended in , as they claim, an unlocked residence.
Every night, they had a dinner, as you and I do Stephen.
From previous posts you have made, I know that YOU are vehemently against any alcohol.
Most of us are more laid back. Personally I care little whether I have an alcoholic drink, or not, but most people would like a glass of wine or two with dinner ... and there is nothing wrong with that. If that can be classified making them boozers, then I suspect over 90% of people, who could afford it, would be classified as boozers.
It is all a matter of balance and sensible amounts Stephen.
The residence you speak of is 5A. As you well know, they wre only 50 metres away visually and audiably ... the walking distance was a little over 70 metres, and a matter of seconds to get there.
Being rather crude, a person on the loo actually in 5A, in the middle of doing something could have taken longer to get there in an emergency. Because of your obsessive hatred of the Mccanns and even a drop of alcohol, you are thinking out of proportion, Stephen.
They believed 5A to be locked except for the illuminated patio entrance which the group overlooked from 50 metres away.
It is not clear whether the window to Madeleines bedroom was latched or not, but The Maccanns had never used it since they arrived and had every reason to believe it to be latched. Most flats on the ground floor would not be let with the flat window unlatched /unlocked. Additionally the shutters had never been opened in their time there. It seemed totally safe and probably was. The window and shutters were probably latched and actually were opened from inside. We just dont know.
A key would have been necessary to open the front doort. Even if it were not double locked, and was only latched it needed a key to open it.
Any reasonably normal person would have expected the window to be latched (and it probably was) and The Mccanns knew the front door needed a key to be opened. The only other entrance was via the patio windows which were illuminated , close and so unlikely an entrance that Amaral himself stated that no intruder would have gone in that way because it was too close at 50 metres and overlooked by the Tapas group. Too dangerous.
Why are you making all this fuss, when you KNOW they followed better procedures for checking than the procedures followed by hotels worldwide and Butlins etc for yonks ? More frequent visits and actually going into the flat to check the kids, when hotels and Butlins just LISTENED outside.
-
Every night, they had a dinner, as you and I do Stephen.
From previous posts you have made, I know that YOU are vehemently against any alcohol.
Most of us are more laid back. Personally I care little whether I have an alcoholic drink, or not, but most people would like a glass of wine or two with dinner ... and there is nothing wrong with that. If that can be classified making them boozers, then I suspect over 90% of people, who could afford it, would be classified as boozers.
It is all a matter of balance and sensible amounts Stephen.
The residence you speak of is 5A. As you well know, they wre only 50 metres away visually and audiably ... the walking distance was a little over 70 metres, and a matter of seconds to get there.
Being rather crude, a person on the loo actually in 5A, in the middle of doing something could have taken longer to get there in an emergency. Because of your obsessive hatred of the Mccanns and even a drop of alcohol, you are thinking out of proportion, Stephen.
They believed 5A to be locked except for the illuminated patio entrance which the group overlooked from 50 metres away.
It is not clear whether the window to Madeleines bedroom was latched or not, but The Maccanns had never used it since they arrived and had every reason to believe it to be latched. Most flats on the ground floor would not be let with the flat window unlatched /unlocked. Additionally the shutters had never been opened in their time there. It seemed totally safe and probably was. The window and shutters were probably latched and actually were opened from inside. We just dont know.
A key would have been necessary to open the front doort. Even if it were not double locked, and was only latched it needed a key to open it.
Any reasonably normal person would have expected the window to be latched (and it probably was) and The Mccanns knew the front door needed a key to be opened. The only other entrance was via the patio windows which were illuminated , close and so unlikely an entrance that Amaral himself stated that no intruder would have gone in that way because it was too close at 50 metres and overlooked by the Tapas group. Too dangerous.
Why are you making all this fuss, when you KNOW they followed better procedures for checking than the procedures followed by hotels worldwide and Butlins etc for yonks ? More frequent visits and actually going into the flat to check the kids, when hotels and Butlins just LISTENED outside.
Better procedures ???
Whilst they were drinking ???
In an unlocked apartment.
In unverified checks.
Nuf said.
-
Why are you making all this fuss, when you KNOW they followed better procedures for checking than the procedures followed by hotels worldwide and Butlins etc for yonks ? More frequent visits and actually going into the flat to check the kids, when hotels and Butlins just LISTENED outside.
The Mccanns also just LISTENED
-
The Mccanns also just LISTENED
Gerry looked. Matt looked (only seeing two kids admittedly but Madeleine he presumed was around the corner and no disturbance heard), Kate went to the bedroom door and listened as any parent in the Uk would often do when checking their kids.
Why are you obfuscating Red?
Let's have the truth, Red. Gerry and Matt looked . All three, Kate included, went into the apartment and nothing out of order, just a minor niggle about the amount the door was open. Until kate noticed the door being wrong and went to check, then it slammed. She looked too, when you think about it.
The TRUTH please Red.
Am trying to get out. A long drive (for me) ahead.
Excuse me
-
No Sadie you are the one obfuscating and trying to assert things which the Mccanns themselves have denied
Oldfield checked once inside all week and didnt properly check did he?
Gerry never checked visually apart from once in the whole week only because the door seemed more open
Kate said she just listened and would not have looked had the door not seemed more open
(Referring to the Thursday so we dont know what she did all week)
Yes Sadie, all three looked/checked but just on ONE night, hardly a constant pattern as you insist which isnt the TRUTH! So why you keep peddling it?
This has been explained and proved to you over and over but wont sink in for some reason, your problem, not mine, cheers
-
Sillywhiskers
Your post is the height of silliness.
1) You believe "they cried every night"... no evidence .... in fact to the contrary .... seems they slept well, with just one night a little disturbed per Kates statement. There is no way that Mrs Fenns crying report can be definitely attributed to the Mccann children. In fact it is likely to be another family cos, had one of the Mccann children started off crying loudly, then all three of them would have been at it, yelling their heads off.
2) "They were in for a big night" <<<< so having their dinner 50 metres away is "the big night" is it? At least you are correct that they were "in" rather than "out". They did not go out to some fancy restaurant over 200 metres away as some of the early myths spread said. That was pure propaganda.
They stayed in their "back gaden" only about 50 metres away from their apartment and the group could see the patio windows from where they sat. The patio area was immediately across the road from a street lamp and light streamed through a large arched side window straight on to the patio itself, so reasonably well lit.
Having reasonable quantities of wine with a meal does not make you "a boozer". From the statements of the waiters, only four bottles were opened and they were unfinished in one and a half hours. Likely that wine was left in most of the glasses too. So unfinished bottles and unfinished glasses. Not excessive at all.
Between 9 adults eating a meal, 4 bottles is well within the norm .... and unfinished too. They were not boozers at all.
"Boozers, day and night" ? Day and night? get your facts in order and pls dont say things that you have dreamt up ... [unless you specify that you dont know, but just think, maybe] ..... cos it aint fair.
You are spreading disinformation ... a kind of propaganda.
You are also sounding very narrow minded and bigotted ...
I love a drink. My friends love a drink. We get together at least once a week to love our drinks together.
This crew went out every night for HOURS.
How long did it take you to eat your dinner last night? Five or ten minutes?
Kate and Gerry took 5 hours.
If you think they were just eating for 5 hours night after night then YOU are the one who is spreading disinformation.
-
I love a drink. My friends love a drink. We get together at least once a week to love our drinks together.
This crew went out every night for HOURS.
How long did it take you to eat your dinner last night? Five or ten minutes?
Kate and Gerry took 5 hours.
If you think they were just eating for 5 hours night after night then YOU are the one who is spreading disinformation.
5 hours. what are you talking about.
-
5 hours. what are you talking about.
I think 8pm until 1 am was mentioned one one occasion - that adds up to 5 hours.
-
5 hours. what are you talking about.
Do you know anything about this case at all? Have you even read the PJ files?
The Tapas crew met every night, around 7.30 - 8.30, when they would proceed to carouse until at least midnight.
It is in the PJ files. These were creatures of habit, except for the last night when everything inexplicably changed.
Dont take my word for it - Tanner went on her "check" at 9.15 just before the "starters" arrived.
This means that they only just ordered them, probably at 9.
Which means in turn the "mains" wont show up till 10ish. Another hour to serve and eat the mains takes you through to 11pm.
We also know they were in the habit of retiring to the bar after eating, for "nightcaps". Another hour spent away from the kids.
This takes us through to midnight, no matter where you went to school it's at LEAST 4 hours depending on the start time.
-
I think 8pm until 1 am was mentioned one one occasion - that adds up to 5 hours.
the tapas group seemed to be in there from 8.30 to 11.30/12.00 most nights according to one waiter and one night until 1 am
Thats 3 -4 hours in general nightly
Pleae dont mention the figure five as get annoyed as philomena mccann says the pj took five hours to arrive, a blatant lie, did she exagerate or was she told that?
-
Was she the one who talked about the door 'hanging off its hinges' ?
-
Was she the one who talked about the door 'hanging off its hinges' ?
Cant remember now lol but someone was
But the five hours for the PJ to arrive was a bloody LIE as well as the hours it took the local two bobbies to turn up
*****
PM: Absolutely. It was hours before the local police turned up and we're talking two bobbies that totally downplayed the incident and said that Maddie had maybe just wandered off, and that... but what 3-year-old would wander off for hours on their own? It took the CID 5 hours before they responded to come and even then it was, kind of, shrug of the shoulders. There's been no feedback from the Portuguese police to Gerry. The stress levels have been through the roof because of this, it's just been shocking.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id250.html
-
Do you know anything about this case at all? Have you even read the PJ files?
The Tapas crew met every night, around 7.30 - 8.30, when they would proceed to carouse until at least midnight.
It is in the PJ files. These were creatures of habit, except for the last night when everything inexplicably changed.
Dont take my word for it - Tanner went on her "check" at 9.15 just before the "starters" arrived.
This means that they only just ordered them, probably at 9.
Which means in turn the "mains" wont show up till 10ish. Another hour to serve and eat the mains takes you through to 11pm.
We also know they were in the habit of retiring to the bar after eating, for "nightcaps". Another hour spent away from the kids.
This takes us through to midnight, no matter where you went to school it's at LEAST 4 hours depending on the start time.
As far as I am aware Sillywhiskers, they aimed to meet at 8.30pm, never 7.30 pm. But some were later than that. Please correct me if I am wrong.
On the 3rd of May, that fateful night, they had all finished their main course well before 10pm, 9.45 seems to ring a bell. That is except for Russell whose little one had been poorly IIRC and he came back to finish his meal later. He was still eating his mains, or just finishing, when the alarm started.
Then there was pudding ... and/ or maybe cheese and biscuits. Most peeps dont bother with Cheese and biccies after a big meal, but some might, I suppose.
It is you that needs to read the files. I have done that altho I no longer do since my eyesight was ruined by posters on here insisting that I verified everthing with references. I now only write what my memory tells me and ask for peeps to correct me if I am wrong.
I sincerely suggest that YOU read the files. Could open your eyes if you are not too entrenched in myths and make believe.
-
the tapas group seemed to be in there from 8.30 to 11.30/12.00 most nights according to one waiter and one night until 1 am
Thats 3 -4 hours in general nightly
I agree Red, but 3 to 3 1/2 is the figure that makes. Hardly 5 hours on a regular basis, was it? One night as Red says they were there later; I thought that it was 12.30 when they left, but I am not going to make a scene about half an hour on one other night.
NEVER 5 hours as you say, Sillywhiskers, because the night began at 8.30pm, as far as I am aware ... usually 3 to 3 1/2 hours .... eating in a place where according to Amaral no intruder would have passed en route to going into 5A, because the patio was too overlooked and too close to the Tapas group.
My own observations confirm that. I have eaten in that Tapas outdoor restaurant.
-
As far as I am aware Sillywhiskers, they aimed to meet at 8.30pm, never 7.30 pm. But some were later than that. Please correct me if I am wrong.
On the 3rd of May, that fateful night, they had all finished their main course well before 10pm, 9.45 seems to ring a bell. That is except for Russell whose little one had been poorly IIRC and he came back to finish his meal later. He was still eating his mains, or just finishing, when the alarm started.
Then there was pudding ... and/ or maybe cheese and biscuits. Most peeps dont bother with Cheese and biccies after a big meal, but some might, I suppose.
It is you that needs to read the files. I have done that altho I no longer do since my eyesight was ruined by posters on here insisting that I verified everthing with references. I now only write what my memory tells me and ask for peeps to correct me if I am wrong.
I sincerely suggest that YOU read the files. Could open your eyes if you are not too entrenched in myths and make believe.
Always happy to correct someone who is wrong. From the McCanns own typewritten timeline, given to the PJ on 10 May 2007.
2100: MO return to the table. Starters were ordered.
2105: GM returns to his flat (5A) and enters via the patio gate entrance. This and a child gate at the top of the stairs were closed at the time. He enters the flat via the patio door which is closed but unlocked.
The door is slightly ajar (about 45 degrees) which is unusual. All the 3 children were present and asleep. GM believes the shutter was down. The room in which the children are asleep is completely dark. On leaving the room, GM shuts the door to approximately 5 degrees. He then goes to the toilet to urinate.
2120: JT then returns to the restaurant, by which time GM has also returned. The entire party then begins eating their starters which have arrived.
2125: After starters, MO and RJO go back to the apartments via the car park entrance to check all flats. They go first to 5D where RJO's daughter Evie is heard crying. RJO enters flat, whilst MO checks inside 5B, and then returns to 5D.
2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that Evie unwell.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives
Unless he was a speed eater, Oldfield at least is still eating at 10.
-
Always happy to correct someone who is wrong. From the McCanns own typewritten timeline, given to the PJ on 10 May 2007.
2100: MO return to the table. Starters were ordered.
2105: GM returns to his flat (5A) and enters via the patio gate entrance. This and a child gate at the top of the stairs were closed at the time. He enters the flat via the patio door which is closed but unlocked.
The door is slightly ajar (about 45 degrees) which is unusual. All the 3 children were present and asleep. GM believes the shutter was down. The room in which the children are asleep is completely dark. On leaving the room, GM shuts the door to approximately 5 degrees. He then goes to the toilet to urinate.
2120: JT then returns to the restaurant, by which time GM has also returned. The entire party then begins eating their starters which have arrived.
2125: After starters, MO and RJO go back to the apartments via the car park entrance to check all flats. They go first to 5D where RJO's daughter Evie is heard crying. RJO enters flat, whilst MO checks inside 5B, and then returns to 5D.
2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that Evie unwell.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives
Unless he was a speed eater, Oldfield at least is still eating at 10.
Who is RMO ?
Matt Oldfield had finished his main meal by about 9.45 it seems. You are wrong he was NOT still eating at 10 pm. Russell was late because he had stayed at his apartment looking after his daughter, Evie. Jane had eaten her meal and gone to relieve him at about 9.45. That was the time he returned for his main course. The waiter called for his steak to be recooked ... a new one, I guess. He had only been eating for about 5 minutes before the alarm.
Why do you keep getting things wrong Sillywhiskers?
The timeline you give is truncated. It does not confirm, or otherwise, the start of the evening.
I can assure you that it started at about 8.30 pm when Kate and Gerry arrived. The Oldfields and the "O'Briens" arrived soon after, but as the Paynes were late and preventing the start of the meal, Matt went to fetch them. He checked both his apartment ... and the Mccanns <<< by listening. This was at about 9pm. And you start your copy and paste when he returned to the table at about 9.05pm ... not at the start of the evening.
Sillywhiskers, almost all your so called facts are wrong. It is NOT fair to misquote and twist facts. Lets have the correct information please, otherwise you will be starting more myths and piling the propaganda on the Mccanns.
FAIR PLAY please.
-
Who is RMO ?
Matt Oldfield had finished his main meal by about 9.45 it seems. You are wrong he was NOT still eating at 10 pm. Russell was late because he had stayed at his apartment looking after his daughter, Evie. Jane had eaten her meal and gone to relieve him at about 9.45. That was the time he returned for his main course. The waiter called for his steak to be recooked ... a new one, I guess. He had only been eating for about 5 minutes before the alarm.
Why do you keep getting things wrong Sillywhiskers?
The timeline you give is truncated. It does not confirm, or otherwise, the start of the evening.
I can assure you that it started at about 8.30 pm when Kate and Gerry arrived. The Oldfields and the "O'Briens" arrived soon after, but as the Paynes were late and preventing the start of the meal, Matt went to fetch them. He checked both his apartment ... and the Mccanns <<< by listening. This was at about 9pm. And you start your copy and paste when he returned to the table at about 9.05pm ... not at the start of the evening.
Sillywhiskers, almost all your so called facts are wrong. It is NOT fair to misquote and twist facts. Lets have the correct information please, otherwise you will be starting more myths and piling the propaganda on the Mccanns.
FAIR PLAY please.
Its Silky not silly.
Another one who cant read, or who thinks it amusing to cyber bully....
FAIR PLAY - RMO is Rachel Manpilly Oldfield.
-
Its Silky not silly.
Another one who cant read, or who thinks it amusing to cyber bully....
FAIR PLAY - RMO is Rachel Manpilly Oldfield.
Oh thankyou Sil^ywhiskers. I wasn't aware that she hadn't finished. Must have orderd something special or have been a very slow eater or gone to the loo, or something. Cos most of them finished their mains by about 9.45 IIRC.
Psst. Sillywhiskers has a much nicer ring to it than Silkywhiskers. Try not to take it so seriously ... just a leg pull as has happened many times before on this forum before. Only fair to say that you do get a lot wrong tho.
-
Oh thankyou Sil^ywhiskers. I wasn't aware that she hadn't finished. Must have orderd something special or have been a very slow eater or gone to the loo, or something. Cos most of them finished their mains by about 9.45 IIRC.
Psst. Sillywhiskers has a much nicer ring to it than Silkywhiskers. Try not to take it so seriously ... just a leg pull as has happened many times before on this forum before. Only fair to say that you do get a lot wrong tho.
Show me what i got "wrong".
-
SWhiskers
Show me what i got "wrong".
It is all in the previous posts. To name just a few:
1) You have Oldfield still eating at 10pm when likely they all had finished by 9.45
2) You have the evening starting at 7.30 when it started at 8.30 ish
3) You have them all eating until about 11 pm when that is over an hour later than the correct time
4) You have the evenings taking 5 hours when they only took 3 - 3 1/2 hours generally. One night they were late and took about 4 to 4 1/2 hours. Never 5 hours that I can find.
Why such massive exaggerations? You are altering the FACTS and producing myths and propaganda
-
SWhiskers
It is all in the previous posts. To name just a few:
1) You have Oldfield still eating at 10pm when likely they all had finished by 9.45 "Likely"?????? You are stating this as fact remember!!!!
2) You have the evening starting at 7.30 when it started at 8.30 ish I was speaking of the general routine not that night in particular and the importance of this is....?
3) You have them all eating until about 11 pm when that is over an hour later than the correct time Where did I say they were eating at 11????!!!!
4) You have the evenings taking 5 hours when they only took 3 - 3 1/2 hours generally. One night they were late and took about 4 to 4 1/2 hours. Never 5 hours that I can find. Do the sums.
Kate was on her check at 10. She was NOT turning in for the evening. She was on a "routine check", presumably to return to the restaurant afterwards to continue consuming WHATEVER. Next you will say I'm wrong because the dinner service pattern was plain instead of spotted. It doesn't matter, it doesn't affect the important detail of that night which is, if Madeleine had been in that bed, Kate would have returned to the restaurant and carried on the same as every other night.
Why such massive exaggerations? You are altering the FACTS and producing myths and propaganda
-
Gerry looked. Matt looked (only seeing two kids admittedly but Madeleine he presumed was around the corner and no disturbance heard), Kate went to the bedroom door and listened as any parent in the Uk would often do when checking their kids.
Why are you obfuscating Red?
Let's have the truth, Red. Gerry and Matt looked . All three, Kate included, went into the apartment and nothing out of order, just a minor niggle about the amount the door was open. Until kate noticed the door being wrong and went to check, then it slammed. She looked too, when you think about it.
The TRUTH please Red.
Am trying to get out. A long drive (for me) ahead.
Excuse me
The truth is that on the night Madeleine disappeared you could count on the thumbs of one hand the number of "checkers" who stated that they went in and actually saw Madeleine inside the apartment, during their so-called "superior service."
How would they know by simply going into the apartment but not actually looking at Madeleine that "nothing was out of order" when the open apartment allowed access in and out?
Promoting this as some sort of superior listening service is where the myth and propaganda exists imo.
-
Do you know anything about this case at all? Have you even read the PJ files?
The Tapas crew met every night, around 7.30 - 8.30, when they would proceed to carouse until at least midnight.
It is in the PJ files. These were creatures of habit, except for the last night when everything inexplicably changed.
Dont take my word for it - Tanner went on her "check" at 9.15 just before the "starters" arrived.
This means that they only just ordered them, probably at 9.
Which means in turn the "mains" wont show up till 10ish. Another hour to serve and eat the mains takes you through to 11pm.
We also know they were in the habit of retiring to the bar after eating, for "nightcaps". Another hour spent away from the kids.
This takes us through to midnight, no matter where you went to school it's at LEAST 4 hours depending on the start time.
The point is surely, they left their children alone EVERY NIGHT to eat and drink and chat.
It was their time in the evening.
During the day it was the creche workers time to look after the kids, and the afternoon, then the kids got about an hour before bed with parents, then it was the parents time.
ALSO we havent got a clue, how often they checked their children prior to the 3rd May. I dont believe they checked much, possibly once or twice. What would be the point of eating out and spending the time toing and froing checking the kids. They could have easily have rotated their apartments each night, and ate in, and drank on their balconies and letting the kids sleep over for a few hours.
What i will NEVER forgive them for is leaving them again after the child mentioned it on the morning.
How could any good catholic parent do that to their children.
ALSO ONE MUST NEVER FORGET.....IF the child was not missing at 10pm after the check, Mrs McCann was GOING BACK TO THE TAPAS bar not going home, so was still out for the night.
-
I'm not sure, Icabodcrane, it would have been easier, when they concocted the third time-line, for Matthew to be uncertain about the state of the curtains.
The lack of forensic evidence that someone passed through the window made their dramatic "jemmy" description (the crucial ingredient in the story telling) collapse and they needed a second best : the whooshing curtains revealing a horrible dark opening on evil.
As was quoted the other day...
Merely corroborative detail, intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative.
-
That is in fact true. Both the tapas-9 friend and the family member who contacted the BBC and Sky News did not contact the police beforehand, that responsibility was left to AN Other.
The comment should not be taken to mean that the Press were contacted before the police.
Quite. The group split up to do what they could.
Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police.
Rachel contacted a friend whose husband worked for the BBC; David sent an email to Sky in the early hours of the morning (which apparently no one on Sky read when it came in).
They were all trying to help in different ways.
The long-held rumour that Kate had rung Sky prior to ringing the police doesn't seem to have any credence whatsoever.
-
Quite. The group split up to do what they could.
Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police.
Rachel contacted a friend whose husband worked for the BBC; David sent an email to Sky in the early hours of the morning (which apparently no one on Sky read when it came in).
They were all trying to help in different ways.
The long-held rumour that Kate had rung Sky prior to ringing the police doesn't seem to have any credence whatsoever.
Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police.
Because they didn't know how to operate a phone themselves & they had far too much searching to do.
-
Quite. The group split up to do what they could.
Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police.
Rachel contacted a friend whose husband worked for the BBC; David sent an email to Sky in the early hours of the morning (which apparently no one on Sky read when it came in).
They were all trying to help in different ways.
The long-held rumour that Kate had rung Sky prior to ringing the police doesn't seem to have any credence whatsoever.
Immediately after the alert that Madeleine was gone, her parents wouldn't have been in any fit state to contact anyone. The term 'headless chickens' comes to mind. The wailing episodes in reception and in the bedroom of apartment 5a would bear this out.
In fact, I don't know how they can remember much of those initial events as the mind tends to blank out such trauma?
-
Contrary to what was reported previously, the judge has not yet set a date for the next hearing. The reason for this appears to be that both sides have asked for clarification of several matters from the judge.
Not really. Those who were in Portugal, did act after the police was called.. they did not have to call them personally because the police was already called.
Those who were in the UK, why would they call the UK police, the crime never happened in the UK?
-
Immediately after the alert that Madeleine was gone, her parents wouldn't have been in any fit state to contact anyone. The term 'headless chickens' comes to mind.
In fact, I don't know how they can remember much of those initial events as the mind tends to blank out such trauma?
Russ's initiative was to try to get the timeline down, as in when could this have possibly taken place. I personally think that that was quite sensible before people's minds blanked out in the trauma of the situation.
-
Russ's initiative was to try to get the timeline down, as in when could this have possibly taken place. I personally think that that was quite sensible before people's minds blanked out in the trauma of the situation.
Absolutely, good thinking.
-
Immediately after the alert that Madeleine was gone, her parents wouldn't have been in any fit state to contact anyone. The term 'headless chickens' comes to mind. The wailing episodes in reception and in the bedroom of apartment 5a would bear this out.
In fact, I don't know how they can remember much of those initial events as the mind tends to blank out such trauma?
Come on, John, weren't they in fit state to know immediately and without a doubt that it was an abduction ?
-
Russ's initiative was to try to get the timeline down, as in when could this have possibly taken place. I personally think that that was quite sensible before people's minds blanked out in the trauma of the situation.
Agreed. It was a sensible thing to do. I came to the conclusion a long time ago that this witness is completely honest. And BTW one of the PJ officers in 5A in the early hours of the 4th specifically said he wanted that written timeline.
-
Russ's initiative was to try to get the timeline down, as in when could this have possibly taken place. I personally think that that was quite sensible before people's minds blanked out in the trauma of the situation.
Even a week after ?
-
Agreed. It was a sensible thing to do. I came to the conclusion a long time ago that this witness is completely honest. And BTW one of the PJ officers in 5A in the early hours of the 4th specifically said he wanted that written timeline.
No PO asked for a timeline to be done.
Who isn't completely honest, Pegasus ?
-
Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police.
It's not clear who suggested to Mr Oldfield to ask the reception to call the police. Mr McCann made no direct attempt and rejected an offer.
-
Come on, John, weren't they in fit state to know immediately and without a doubt that it was an abduction ?
What has that got to do with who phoned The Police? That is what sent them into a state and made them unable to function normally.
-
It's not clear who suggested to Mr Oldfield to ask the reception to call the police. Mr McCann made no direct attempt and rejected an offer.
Only because he thought someone had already done it. Stop twisting things.
-
Russ's initiative was to try to get the timeline down, as in when could this have possibly taken place. I personally think that that was quite sensible before people's minds blanked out in the trauma of the situation.
yes its a shame that his preparations and foresight did not include removing himself and others from the "crime scene".
Doctors know about crime scenes...it's part of their training to leave any unattended death scene undisturbed until LE arrive.
-
yes its a shame that his preparations and foresight did not include removing himself and others from the "crime scene".
Doctors know about crime scenes...it's part of their training to leave any unattended death scene undisturbed until LE arrive.
They were searching the apartment for Maddie
-
They were searching the apartment for Maddie
Kate had already searched...
How long does it take to thoroughly search a 2 brm holiday apartment? How many people does it need?
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
-
ah, but that would be making the assumption that Oldfield was involved in the 'concoction'
What if he was innocently speaking the truth about what occured that night, ? ... there might be a need, then, mightn't there, to 'incorporate' his recollections into the 'Jane saw the abductor making off with Madeleine at 9.15 ' story
So instead of sticking with the first statement, where the open curtains/ window/ shutters were the first thing Kate noticed ( before she even realised Madeleien was missing ) Kate changes her mind, and says she already knew Madeleine was not in her bed before she noticed the open window ... only brought to her attention when the ( closed ) curtains 'whooshed' up following a timely gust of wind
For it to have been possible for Jane Tanner to have 'seen' the abductor at 9.15pm ( as we have reletlessly been told by the McCanns she SHE DID ) then the room would have been exactly as he ( the abductor ) had left it at 9.15pm
That's how Matthew Oldfield would have found it at 9.30pm ... and how Kate McCann would have found it at 10pm
There would have been been no change in the situation in the room between those two checks ( presuming, as the McCanns insisted, that Madeleine had been abducted just after Gerry's 9.10pm check ... as witnessed by Jane Tanner )
And yet there was
Matthew Oldfied said the curtains were closed when he checked at 9.30pm ... and Kate said the curtains were open when she checked at 10pm ( an anomaly that could only be explained by any abductor having struck between 9.30pm and 10pm .... nixing Tannerman )
The anomaly was 'fixed' when the story changed
Oldfield did not change his story ... Kate changed hers
Not really. The group changed the narrative, since the time-line (the third one) was written down before Mr McCann's second statement. They all signed, i.e responsibility is diluted.
-
Kate had already searched...
How long does it take to thoroughly search a 2 brm holiday apartment? How many people does it need?
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
who said she didnt call maddies name
-
Kate had already searched...
How long does it take to thoroughly search a 2 brm holiday apartment? How many people does it need?
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
how long did it take...how many people searched
-
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
She knew Madeleine couldn't hear her any more.
You're in a public place, suddenly your child isn't where you thought he was, do you start running around madly but silently, or do you scream your child's name ?
-
Kate had already searched...
How long does it take to thoroughly search a 2 brm holiday apartment? How many people does it need?
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
The GNR also searched the apartment when they arrived prior to calling the PJ.
-
The GNR also searched the apartment when they arrived prior to calling the PJ.
Would they not have been failing in their duty if they hadn't searched the apartment?
-
Would they not have been failing in their duty if they hadn't searched the apartment?
Clearly, in my view. But I was responding to Silkywhiskers comment:
Quote from: Silkywhiskers on Today at 06:56:07 PM
Kate had already searched...
How long does it take to thoroughly search a 2 brm holiday apartment? How many people does it need?
Why didnt Kate call Madeleine's name?
-
[Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police. ]
Fiona asked Matt to go and call according to her and Matt at around 10.10pm. Gerry was busy elsewhere.
-
[Gerry and Matt had been trying to get the OC to ring the police. ]
Fiona asked Matt to go and call according to her and Matt at around 10.10pm. Gerry was busy elsewhere.
So I believe ?{)(**
-
So I believe ?{)(**
Moi itou ?{)(**
-
No PO asked for a timeline to be done.
Who isn't completely honest, Pegasus ?
In 5A that night a PJ officer says no he does not want them to contact press but instead yes he wants the timeline which is being written down, it is in the files, link available.
‘That’s what we want’
-
In 5A that night a PJ officer says no he does not want them to contact press but instead yes he wants the timeline which is being written down, it is in the files, link available.
Yes, once it existed, the PO wanted it, but he didn't ask them to do a time-line, nor two, nor three..
-
Yes, once it existed, the PO wanted it, but he didn't ask them to do a time-line, nor two, nor three..
I think it was reasonable to assume that the PJ would ask for the times people were at the apartment, so it was reasonable for ROB to write the times down. This witness is IMO veracious and was constructively trying to help.
-
I think it was reasonable to assume that the PJ would ask for the times people were at the apartment, so it was reasonable for ROB to write the times down. This witness is IMO veracious and was constructively trying to help.
?{)(** Pegasus, all witnesses are veracious for you !
But, you see, PO usually interview witnesses separately... For obvious reasons.
And, ask ex-inspector Moita Flores, he'll tell you that the TP9 should have been interviewed in such a way that none of them could know what the others told. It is the normal, only way. But, there it is, they were still hoping to find an alive little girl.
-
Indeed.
Why waste manpower searching borders and ferries when the suspects are behaving as guilty as sin, right before your eyes?
Whoever says "they were upset" - well no they weren't.
Police see dead children, maybe not once a week but certainly a couple of times per year, traffic fatalities, accidental drowning etc.
They also see grieving parents. It's part of their job.
They know when something smells. Part instinct, part experience. It is why the final PJ report says that the parents could not be cleared because they did not cooperate and allow themselves to be cleared.
It smells.
Of course BHH has names.
-
Indeed.
Why waste manpower searching borders and ferries when the suspects are behaving as guilty as sin, right before your eyes?
Whoever says "they were upset" - well no they weren't.
They were in a terrible state, genuinely, this is why it was hard, almost inhuman to suspect them.
-
They were in a terrible state, genuinely, this is why it was hard, almost inhuman to suspect them.
Yes I can imagine their anxiety was sky high.
I understand why the Portugese and others had a hard time wrapping their heads around it.
I don't however. That is where the evidence lies. Like Casey Anthony and Neil Entwhistle before them, it's incredibly hard to believe that such bland normal looking people could be scheming beasts, but we know it happens.
-
These http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap19 didn't require translating!
Yes Gerry 9.10-15. He was away longer than 5 minutes 8)-)))
And in the 2nd timeline:
9pm Matt checks
9.15 Gerry
Funny Matt said Gerry left as soon as he returned so how has that become 15 minutes later?
That's why the first check stands out and probably where the answer lies to Madeleine's disappearance.
-
Yes Gerry 9.10-15. He was away longer than 5 minutes 8)-)))
And in the 2nd timeline:
9pm Matt checks
9.15 Gerry
Funny Matt said Gerry left as soon as he returned so how has that become 15 minutes later?
That's why the first check stands out and probably where the answer lies to Madeleine's disappearance.
I dont think any of the tapas groups "times" can be taken as spot on/reliable...well apart from Gerry who seemed to look at his stopwatch and tell the actual minute he or Kate got up! Now why the heck would he do that? What a strange strange case.
-
No-one gave precise times - they were all approximate and usually preceded by the word ''around'' or ''about''
The only person who knew a particular time was Gerry with his 9.05. time.
To expect 9 people, (who had no idea that the timing of every single move they made that evening was going to be so important at a later stage) to have been able to quote precise times is totally unrealistic. IMO.
Why didn't he put 9.05 on the timeline? And he remembered the later and most important exact time - 10.03pm at the tapas bar LOL. He made a good note of that time 8)-)))
-
I dont follow all that but I do wonder why he gave times of his and her checks
9.05 and 10.03
he can remember the exact time but not what door he went into? OK
Ps why did he need an alibi for 9 05
10.03 I think someone in his best attempts to get that all important tapas bar alibi may have unwittingly gave away the actual time of the Smith sighting. Smithman would check his watch to remember that exact time. How ironic @)(++(*
p.s. 9.02-05 in case he was seen outside carrying something. He had to be at the tapas bar. 9.05 was the time he got back to the front door when he used the key to enter. That's why it was used but later denied. But it gets trickier because of the outdoor cadaver alerts. That is the tricky bit at present so working on theories to cover it. Some think Jez appearing interrupted the operation and left on balcony for a time brought later alerts.
-
Missing from both timelines are Jane Tanner's claimed second visit to her apartment to relieve O'Brien of his childcare duties. Missing from the first timeline is the claimed joint hand holding check made by O'Brien and Oldfield. Both timelines were written by O'Brien!
According to Dianne Webster neither Gerry or Mathew were at the table when she arrived at 8.55/9.00
-
I dont think any of the tapas groups "times" can be taken as spot on/reliable...well apart from Gerry who seemed to look at his stopwatch and tell the actual minute he or Kate got up! Now why the heck would he do that? What a strange strange case.
More twists and turns than the Warren Commission's magic bullet theory.
-
No-one gave precise times - they were all approximate and usually preceded by the word ''around'' or ''about''
The only person who knew a particular time was Gerry with his 9.05. time.
He did more :
Half and hour later, without anything to report, it being 22h03, he turned to alert Kate that it was time for her to go to see the children. She immediately made her way...
Mr McCann had a good reason to indicate precisely a time which is confirmed by nobody.
-
Like who?
And why would he? The PJ would know he is lying! for starters! As would the people he refers to (or that you refer to)
Jane Tanner for starters - who apparently gave the PJ the actual identity of the man who abducted Madeleine!!! But was then told she didn't need to sign a statement to confirm what was undoubtedy the most important piece of evidence received by the PJ thus far - and that she could go on home.
-
Jane Tanner for starters - who apparently gave the PJ the actual identity of the man who abducted Madeleine!!! But was then told she didn't need to sign a statement to confirm what was undoubtedy the most important piece of evidence received by the PJ thus far - and that she could go on home.
Where did you read that?
Who elses statements did Mr Amaral fabricate?
And you didnt address my query as to why he would fabricate anything when others in the PJ and LP and the witnesses would know he was lying.