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: faithlilly on December 21, 2016, 11:00:52 AM
-
According to Diane Webster both Gerry and Oldfield were not at the tale when she, her daughter and son-in-law arrived at the tapas bar.
' Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law.
- Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no.
- Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no.
- That night she judges to have arrived at the restaurant close to 21:00, in the company of the PAYNE couple.
- That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group.
- In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. '
Was Gerry's check at nearer nine rather than 9.15? Does this explain his normal behaviour when talking to Wilkins? Did he then make a further check at 9.30 at which point he found Madeleine missing? Was the voice calling Madeleine's name softly heard by the Carpenter's Gerry's after finding her missing from her bed?
-
According to Diane Webster both Gerry and Oldfield were not at the tale when she, her daughter and son-in-law arrived at the tapas bar.
' Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law.
- Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no.
- Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no.
- That night she judges to have arrived at the restaurant close to 21:00, in the company of the PAYNE couple.
- That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group.
- In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. '
Was Gerry's check at nearer nine rather than 9.15? Does this explain his normal behaviour when talking to Wilkins? Did he then make a further check at 9.30 at which point he found Madeleine missing? Was the voice calling Madeleine's name softly heard by the Carpenter's Gerry's after finding her missing from her bed?
It makes one wonder what the people who run this forum actually believe constitutes libel. Here we have a post which has been authorised by a mod in which it is being suggested that it was Gerry, not Kate who found Madeleine missing during a check he has never spoken about and which suggests a reason for him behaving "normally" during his chat with Jez (as opposed to behaving how, exactly)?
Bizarre!
-
If Jez finished talking with Gerry at 9pm what did he (Jez) do in the intervening 30 minutes before returning to his apartment?
-
If Jez finished talking with Gerry at 9pm what did he (Jez) do in the intervening 30 minutes before returning to his apartment?
Wilkins said himself that he guesstimated their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15.
-
Wilkins said himself that he guesstimated their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15.
he also said he went straight back to his apartment after the chat and arrived about 9.30pm if I recall correctly. So.....?
-
he also said he went straight back to his apartment after the chat and arrived about 9.30pm if I recall correctly. So.....?
Maybe I'm missing where Wilkins says he arrived at his apartment at 9.30pm. Could you provide the quote please?
-
Wilkins said himself that he guesstimated their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15.
I find that very difficult to accept, the time period is far too wide given what occurred that night.
-
Maybe I'm missing where Wilkins says he arrived at his apartment at 9.30pm. Could you provide the quote please?
OK, he didn't say it, but his wife did.
"Our baby would not sleep and at about 8.30pm, Jes took him out for a walk in the buggy to settle him. Gerry was on his way back from checking on his children and the two men stopped to have a chat. They talked about daughters, fathers, families. Gerry was relaxed and friendly. They discussed the babysitting dilemmas at the resort and Gerry said that he and Kate would have stayed in too, if they had not been on holiday in a group. Jes returned to our apartment just before 9.30pm".
-
Did anyone report Gerry leaving the table at around 9.30pm?
-
Did anyone report Gerry leaving the table at around 9.30pm?
I don't believe everytime anyone stood up or moved around is recorded in the file. He can't have gone to the toilet for he already had been there in his apartment. Unless he needed to go again.
-
I find that very difficult to accept, the time period is far too wide given what occurred that night.
dissociative amnesia innit.
-
If Jez finished talking with Gerry at 9pm what did he (Jez) do in the intervening 30 minutes before returning to his apartment?
That is the real question that needs to be asked in conjunction with how did both Matt and Russell not know when Gerry of Jane return to the table around 21.20 or earlier.
-
That is the real question that needs to be asked in conjunction with how did both Matt and Russell not know when Gerry of Jane return to the table around 21.20 or earlier.
I don't really think it is.
-
Wilkins said himself that he guesstimated their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15.
What do you think Jez' statement means? When he said "their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15" is this the duration or the range of start times or the possible start time and possible finish time?
I don't really think it is.
It is if it is to treated as evidence.
-
What do you think Jez' statement means? When he said "their chat being between 8.45 and 9.15" is this the duration or the range of start times or the possible start time and possible finish time?
It is if it is to treated as evidence.
Jes was with his baby in a pram. We know this for a fact. So that's what he was doing, only he wasn't doing it for 30 minutes after his chat with Gerry because he went back to the apartment afterwards. So the 30 minutes afer the chat doesn't exist. This thread is just mischief making, for want of anything else to discuss.
-
I find that very difficult to accept, the time period is far too wide given what occurred that night.
You may find it difficult John but that's what he said.
-
OK, he didn't say it, but his wife did.
"Our baby would not sleep and at about 8.30pm, Jes took him out for a walk in the buggy to settle him. Gerry was on his way back from checking on his children and the two men stopped to have a chat. They talked about daughters, fathers, families. Gerry was relaxed and friendly. They discussed the babysitting dilemmas at the resort and Gerry said that he and Kate would have stayed in too, if they had not been on holiday in a group. Jes returned to our apartment just before 9.30pm".
Was this in her statement ?
-
Jes was with his baby in a pram. We know this for a fact. So that's what he was doing, only he wasn't doing it for 30 minutes after his chat with Gerry because he went back to the apartment afterwards. So the 30 minutes afer the chat doesn't exist. This thread is just mischief making, for want of anything else to discuss.
But O'Donnell only claimed that Wilkins returned at 9.30 in a fluff piece she wrote for the Times ( I think ) months later. In the statements of both her and her partner they say Wilkins returned after his talk with Gerry. They are no more specufic than that.
-
But O'Donnell only claimed that Wilkins returned at 9.30 in a fluff piece she wrote for the Times ( I think ) months later. In the statements of both her and her partner they say Wilkins returned after his talk with Gerry. They are no more specufic than that.
What is a "fluff" piece? I take it from the use of this dismissive word that we are not to take Bridget O'Donnell's article in the Times seriously and that she merely wrote that her husband came back at 9.30pm anticipating that in years to come it would prove a contentious talking point of a forum somewhere, not that it was the truth or anything as prosaic as that!
-
What is a "fluff" piece? I take it from the use of this dismissive word that we are not to take Bridget O'Donnell's article in the Times seriously and that she merely wrote that her husband came back at 9.30pm anticipating that in years to come it would prove a contentious talking point of a forum somewhere, not that it was the truth or anything as prosaic as that!
Look at her and Wilkin's official statements Alfie. Do either of them say Wilkins returned at 9.30pm?
-
What is a "fluff" piece? I take it from the use of this dismissive word that we are not to take Bridget O'Donnell's article in the Times seriously and that she merely wrote that her husband came back at 9.30pm anticipating that in years to come it would prove a contentious talking point of a forum somewhere, not that it was the truth or anything as prosaic as that!
What would be said if Kate and Gerry started writing fluff pieces that contradicted their statements. I'm sure that wouldn't just be brushed off a creative writing.
So neither should Bridget as her name is on the original statement, whatever she says after that is going to be assessed based on what was said before.
-
Look at her and Wilkin's official statements Alfie. Do either of them say Wilkins returned at 9.30pm?
What time do they say he returned then?
But let's go along with your theory for a bit shall we? The McCanns leave the apartment at 8.30, and yet at 8.45 pm Gerry has already gone back to the apartment, oblivious (according to your theory) that anything is amiss in the apartment, chatting merrily to Jes Wilkins. So, what's he doing in that vicinity 15 minutes after leaving the apartment, in your view?
-
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm
Q. Relative to the time I met Gerry McCann on the Thursday night of May 3, 2007;
As stated in my original deposition, I believe that I left the apartment around 20h30. I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21h05. Even if this were correct, I have no idea from where such information originated. It is not possible to give you a more exact time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
We returned to our apartment. We decided to spend the evening in, watching television. Our son was awake and unable to sleep. I decided to take him for a walk in his pram. I left about 8:15 to 8:30 pm. I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant. As I got the baby to sleep, I was on my way back to the apartment. I came out at the top road.
I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs. I was pretty certain that he had left the apartment. We spoke for a few minutes. He said you're on walking duty. I said I was staying in ...........He said that as he was staying two weeks XXXXX he was staying one night' (unreadable)
I don't remember anyone else walking around with a child. The conversation lasted for about three (3) to five (5) minutes.
He was acting completely normal from what I know of him so far. I then walked back to the apartment. I had dinner, watched a DVD and went to bed at about 11 pm.
-
Was this in her statement ?
In the statement on the 7th which is taken under Jez' name only.
He states:
"The conversation with Gerry lasted for about three minutes during which Gerry was chatty and in his normal self. Jeremy then made his way back to his apartment.
They went to bed about 2300hrs but were waken about 0100hrs by a knock at the door. On answering the door they spoke with the resort manager and a person they knew was a member of the group but they only knew him as Matthew. It was then they found out that Madeleine was missing."
There is an apparent lack of detail in there and when you consider there had been a specific request to intercept Jez you would have thought a bit more attention to detail was in order.
There is the Fax sent to the London Police by Goncalo Amaral on the 7th. Were the London Police acting on this request or had Jez came in voluntarily?
"By FAX
Department of Criminal Investigation at PORTIMAO.
CONFIDENTIAL/URGENT.
To : Detective Chief Superintendent Robert Hall
Fax: 00441XXXXXXXXX
From: Goncalo Amaral - C.I.C. no D.I.C. de PortimAo
C/C : Fax:
Data: 07-05-2007 . No pages : 03
Ref : N / ref : Inq. 201107.0 GALGS
Subject : Request for Collaboration
In furtherance of your operation TASK and International Police Cooperation please see the following points:
1. Could you consider making enquiries to question JEREMY MICHAEL WILKINS (UK Passport No 205XXXXXX, DOB 24.02.1974) ?
Wilkins was staying at the Ocean Club resort at the time of Madeleine's disappearance and may have vital information. Wilkins lives at the following address, 23 MXXXXX RXXX, London, NWlX XXX. Wilkins is contactable on the following telephone numbers 00447XXXXXXXXX and 00442XXXXXXXXX.
We would like the following points covered if possible;
- Did Wilkins travel with anyone else?
- If he has children and what age are they?
- If he knows the group of people which MADELEINE MCCANN was part of and the apartment block where the guests were staying ?
- If he knows MADELEINE'S parents and in particular her father GERALD MCCANN ?
- When did he met GERALD MCCANN and in what circumstances ?
- Did he play tennis with GERALD McCANN ?
- Did he meet with him apart from playing tennis ?
- Did he come to know the routine of GERALD McCANN and his family (his wife and children ?
- If he did, when GERALD was having dinner with his wife and friends where were the children and how were they looked after ?
When was the last time he was with GERALD McCANN, when not playing tennis, before the disappearance of MADELEINE ?
- On the day of the disappearance, was JEREMY out with his children in the evening ?
- Did he meet GERALD and at what time ?
- Where was GERALD coming from at this time ?
- Exactly where was this meeting with GERALD ? (please obtain confirmation of the exact location on the attached map)
- What was the distance of this meeting from GERALD'S apartment ?
- Can Jeremy provide a sketch map of the location ?
- What did they talk about at this time and for how long ?
- When he was talking with GERALD, did any of Gerald's group pass by ?
- If so, who ?
- When he was talking with GERALD did he see whether anyone passed by carrying a child in the road near the apartment block ?
2. In the spirit of Police to Police Cooperation we request the presence of a British Criminal Analyst who may be able to assist the enquiry.
Also the collaboration of the UK's "Child Exploitation Online Protection" may be useful if they wish to send one of their officers to provide assistance to the investigation,
3. We would like further information (by telephonic analysis if thought necessary) relevant to the investigation about the following subjects :
- GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY contactable on telephone numbers 00447XXXXXXXXX,00441XXXXXXXXX and 00447XXXXXXXXX.
- MATTHEW DAVID OLDFIELD and RACHAEL MAMPILLY, contactable on telephone numbers 00442XXXXXXXXX, 00447XXXXXXXXX and 00447XXXXXXXXX.
- RUSSEL JAMES O'BRIEN and JANE MICHELLE TANNER, contactable on telephone numbers 00447XXXXXXXXX and 00447XXXXXXXXX.
- DAVID ANTHONY PAYNE, contactable on telephone number 00441XXXXXXXXX, FIONA ELAINE PAYNE, contactable on telephone number 00441XXXXXXXXX and DIANNE WEBSTER, contactable on telephone number
00441XXXXXXXXX.
Namely if there is any indication of motive for anyone in the UK to kidnap the daughter of GERALD McCann ?
Regards
Coordinator of Criminal Investigation :
Goncalo Amaral."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
-
I can not see any indication the fax was in the hands of the Police at the time doing the interview.
The question regarding motive is missed altogether "Namely if there is any indication of motive for anyone in the UK to kidnap the daughter of GERALD McCann ?"
-
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm
Q. Relative to the time I met Gerry McCann on the Thursday night of May 3, 2007;
As stated in my original deposition, I believe that I left the apartment around 20h30. I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21h05. Even if this were correct, I have no idea from where such information originated. It is not possible to give you a more exact time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
We returned to our apartment. We decided to spend the evening in, watching television. Our son was awake and unable to sleep. I decided to take him for a walk in his pram. I left about 8:15 to 8:30 pm. I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant. As I got the baby to sleep, I was on my way back to the apartment. I came out at the top road.
I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs. I was pretty certain that he had left the apartment. We spoke for a few minutes. He said you're on walking duty. I said I was staying in ...........He said that as he was staying two weeks XXXXX he was staying one night' (unreadable)
I don't remember anyone else walking around with a child. The conversation lasted for about three (3) to five (5) minutes.
He was acting completely normal from what I know of him so far. I then walked back to the apartment. I had dinner, watched a DVD and went to bed at about 11 pm.
What does stand out is that Wilkins has absolutely no intention of giving a more exact time.
-
What does stand out is that Wilkins has absolutely no intention of giving a more exact time.
You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague.
-
You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague.
How can we ever determine if something is deliberate or not? There is a saying "if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck. It is a duck."
Wikipedia has it down as the "The Duck Test".
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
The test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject's habitual characteristics. It is sometimes used to counter abstruse, or even valid, arguments that something is not what it appears to be."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
-
How can we ever determine if something is deliberate or not? There is a saying "if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck. It is a duck."
Wikipedia has it down as the "The Duck Test".
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
The test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject's habitual characteristics. It is sometimes used to counter abstruse, or even valid, arguments that something is not what it appears to be."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
Robbity, you're quackers!
-
Robbity, you're quackers!
I might sound quacked but I don't look or swim or walk like a duck.
-
I might sound quacked but I don't look or swim or walk like a duck.
I'll have to take your word for that.
-
You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague.
What a strange thing to say
How do you arrive at that?
-
What a strange thing to say
How do you arrive at that?
You do that by applying the Duck Test. Read his rogatory statement and then come and say you are convinced he is being open. I dare you to try. Here we are testing the observation "he deliberately set out to be vague". Not Alfie's interpretation "You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague."
Which one did you want tested?
-
What a strange thing to say
How do you arrive at that?
"What does stand out is that Wilkins has absolutely no intention of giving a more exact time".
-
You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague.
His first contact with the authorities was on 4th May, when he reported 'rasta man', who entered the Tapas restaurant where Mr Wilkins was between 8.30 and 9 pm.
His second contact was 7th May, and he is now in the toilet near the bar; not only is he no longer in the restaurant, he can't see into it either. Amaral asked what time he saw Gerry, but the question isn't answered.
In November Op task are back for 'background information'. I don't know if the PJ requested this visit, but they were given the statement. He is now in the bar, which is where the toilet was, it seems (not 'near'?). On 4th May this happened between 8.30 and 9 pm, but he no longer remembers that.
Both the PJ and the McCanns asked what time he met Gerry in their rog. questions, but he would only say 8.45-9.15.
Quite possibly Mr Wilkins had no idea where he was or at what time so he's vague because of that. He does, however, say he went to his apartment after his chat with Gerry. He ate dinner, watched a DVD and was in bed at 11pm. His wife says that all began at around 9.30pm. If she's right he was speaking to Gerry shortly before that so it begs the question why he insists on a half hour possibility.
4th May
He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant, he noted that a person of around 1.70m, with long blond hair, apparently of the "Rasta," style and dressed in green military-style clothes, entered the restaurant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
7th May
I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
November
He walked around the main area of the resort and eventually ended up in the Tapas bar where he used the toilet facility. He was unable to state what time this was.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm
Rog
As stated in my original deposition, I believe that I left the apartment around 20h30. I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21h05. Even if this were correct, I have no idea from where such information originated. It is not possible to give you a more exact time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm
-
Then when you read the rest of the rogatory statement I was left with the impression he was being vague. There were at least 5 points of total vagueness. I commented on the specifics a couple of days ago.
-
His first contact with the authorities was on 4th May, when he reported 'rasta man', who entered the Tapas restaurant where Mr Wilkins was between 8.30 and 9 pm.
His second contact was 7th May, and he is now in the toilet near the bar; not only is he no longer in the restaurant, he can't see into it either. Amaral asked what time he saw Gerry, but the question isn't answered.
In November Op task are back for 'background information'. I don't know if the PJ requested this visit, but they were given the statement. He is now in the bar, which is where the toilet was, it seems (not 'near'?). On 4th May this happened between 8.30 and 9 pm, but he no longer remembers that.
Both the PJ and the McCanns asked what time he met Gerry in their rog. questions, but he would only say 8.45-9.15.
Quite possibly Mr Wilkins had no idea where he was or at what time so he's vague because of that. He does, however, say he went to his apartment after his chat with Gerry. He ate dinner, watched a DVD and was in bed at 11pm. His wife says that all began at around 9.30pm. If she's right he was speaking to Gerry shortly before that so it begs the question why he insists on a half hour possibility.
4th May
He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant, he noted that a person of around 1.70m, with long blond hair, apparently of the "Rasta," style and dressed in green military-style clothes, entered the restaurant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
7th May
I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
November
He walked around the main area of the resort and eventually ended up in the Tapas bar where he used the toilet facility. He was unable to state what time this was.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm
Rog
As stated in my original deposition, I believe that I left the apartment around 20h30. I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21h05. Even if this were correct, I have no idea from where such information originated. It is not possible to give you a more exact time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm
So what?
-
So what?
What was the other saying: "there is none so blind as those that don't want to see".
-
"What does stand out is that Wilkins has absolutely no intention of giving a more exact time".
It does stand out that Mr Wilkins was not prepared to be Shanghai'd into giving a more accurate time scale.
I don't see anything sinister in either him being steadfast or anyone else saying he was so.
-
It does stand out that Mr Wilkins was not prepared to be Shanghai'd into giving a more accurate time scale.
I don't see anything sinister in either him being steadfast or anyone else saying he was so.
Fair enough you can take that view, but I was thinking what tests could SY apply to really find out whether it is true or not, and there is one I would like applied.
Same questions as Goncalo asked we could ask them again "- Did Wilkins travel with anyone else?
- If he has children and what age are they?" Travel documents, passports, etc maybe they are still around.
And actually sight the kids this time. Do DNA tests on them if need be.
-
Fair enough you can take that view, but I was thinking what tests could SY apply to really find out whether it is true or not, and there is one I would like applied.
Same questions as Goncalo asked we could ask them again "- Did Wilkins travel with anyone else?
- If he has children and what age are they?" Travel documents, passports, etc maybe they are still around.
I do take that view.
You might like a test applied but how do you know the PJ, The Met and LP have not applied it jointly or severally ?
More to the point whatever the test is The Met and PJ are hardly likely to apply it at your behest.
-
You do that by applying the Duck Test. Read his rogatory statement and then come and say you are convinced he is being open. I dare you to try. Here we are testing the observation "he deliberately set out to be vague". Not Alfie's interpretation "You make it sound like he deliberately set out to be vague."
Which one did you want tested?
What was his excuse for not taking part in the Portuguese reconstruction?
-
I do take that view.
You might like a test applied but how do you know the PJ, The Met and LP have not applied it jointly or severally ?
More to the point whatever the test is The Met and PJ are hardly likely to apply it at your behest.
There are not that many active discussion boards so maybe they do look in here from time to time. If we can develop a robust argument there could be the idea seeded that they should just apply those tests. How long would it take to ring him up and say can we talk to your kids please?
-
There are not that many active discussion boards so maybe they do look in here from time to time. If we can develop a robust argument there could be the idea seeded that they should just apply those tests. How long would it take to ring him up and say can we talk to your kids please?
What's this "we" business paleface. In the words of Sam Goldwyn "include me out".
-
What was his excuse for not taking part in the Portuguese reconstruction?
http://textusa.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/bladderman.html does a major study on the whole issue. Even if that site has no favour here (I'm unsure) it certainly shows that Jez' statements have been questioned before.
Here is an comment left on that blog with the reference to the emails. (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm)
"Jes, as he likes to spell it, fell remarkably in line with the McCann's and Tapas group's defensive stance on a proposed PJ reconstruction in 2008.
His reply emails, signed 'Jes', via proxy 'Stu' from the UK police to the PJ are in synergy with the Tapas Group response - Including the questions he raises to its objectives, its worth and the dates of his replies.
In conclusion he appears to completely tow the party line in relation to hesitations in partaking, despite pretending to appear willing. Contact was made.
A good read:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
IMO it makes no sense, no sense that as an external, uninvolved party he would not simply respond, 'Yes. What are the hours?'
He is the drafted 10th member to add external credence to timelines & checks - a late signing.
-
What was his excuse for not taking part in the Portuguese reconstruction?
1. "As discussed with your colleagues last week I still feel reluctant to agree to this for a number of reasons including family and work commitments, the likelyhood of media intrusion and a lack of information about anything tangible or constructive that is likely to be achived by doing this.
I am happy to discuss further if necessary.
Jes"
2. "Ricardo
This is the reply from Jes.
It implies that if each of the other witnesses' are going to take part then Jes will consider his position as to whether he will attend or not.
Give me a call
Stu
From : Jes Wilkins ( Jes@xxxxxx.uk.com )
Sent : 30th April 2008 12.09 pm
To : Prior Stuart
Subject : Witnesses' Questions
Thanks for this and for your message.
I'm not sure what they mean by witnesses' being compelled to attend as my understanding is that I am under no obligation ?
My position remains the same really. As you mentioned in your message last night if everyone else is on board and I am the only outstanding person saying no I would be more likely to reconsider.
Feel free to call me if you wish to discuss it further.
Best
Jes"
3. History of the reenactment:
"From : Prior Stuart
Sent : 29th April, 2008 19.10
To : Jes Wilkins
Subject : Witnesses' Questions
Dear Jes,
This is the response that I have received from Paulo Rebelo, the Officer leading the Portuguese Investigation, following the issues that you and your friends raised in relation to the proposed re-enactment and his earlier replies.
I will call you shortly to discuss this further,
Thanks
Stu
Page 4253 (Page 2 of 3)
From : Paulo Fernando Gaspar Rebelo
Date : 29th April 2008 12.39 pm
To : Prior Stuart
Subject : Witnesses' Questions
Dear Stuart,
In Portugal, the Criminal Investigation is conducted by the Policia Judiciaria, under the supervision of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The competence to evaluate the interest and need for the performance of any Criminal Inquiry lies with these two entities, not with the witnesses.
In fact, according to Portuguese Law (article 132, Section 1, subsection a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure), whenever a Witness Summons is served, the witness is compelled to attend the Authorities so that any action mentioned in the Summons may take place.
Following the messages sent by the wittnesses', I hereby inform you that both the PJ and the Public Prosecutor responsible for the Investigation consider all the questions and doubts previously raised by the witnesses' to have been properly answered.
Therefore, in this context and in a clear way, could the witnesses' inform you, by noon tomorrow, if they will attend (or not attend) the re-enactment.
Thanks once again for your valuable cooperation,
Best regards
Paulo Rebelo"
-
It does stand out that Mr Wilkins was not prepared to be Shanghai'd into giving a more accurate time scale.
I don't see anything sinister in either him being steadfast or anyone else saying he was so.
Of course you don't.
-
http://textusa.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/bladderman.html does a major study on the whole issue. Even if that site has no favour here (I'm unsure) it certainly shows that Jez' statements have been questioned before.
Here is an comment left on that blog with the reference to the emails. (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm)
"Jes, as he likes to spell it, fell remarkably in line with the McCann's and Tapas group's defensive stance on a proposed PJ reconstruction in 2008.
His reply emails, signed 'Jes', via proxy 'Stu' from the UK police to the PJ are in synergy with the Tapas Group response - Including the questions he raises to its objectives, its worth and the dates of his replies.
In conclusion he appears to completely tow the party line in relation to hesitations in partaking, despite pretending to appear willing. Contact was made.
A good read:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
IMO it makes no sense, no sense that as an external, uninvolved party he would not simply respond, 'Yes. What are the hours?'
He is the drafted 10th member to add external credence to timelines & checks - a late signing.
There is little doubt where Bridget O'Donnell's sympathies lay;
'The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.'
Of course the Bitish police were there at the request of the PJ, with questions the PJ wanted answered. Did they not tell the Wilkins that? Either way, the PJ's competence has been questioned.
She also gives a better approximate time for the meeting than her husband manages, putting the meeting towards the middle of Jes's half hour gap;
In early September, Kate and Gerry became official suspects. Their warm tide of support turned decidedly cool. Had they cruelly conned us all? The public needed to know, and who had seen Gerry at around 9pm on the fateful night? Jes.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
-
It does stand out that Mr Wilkins was not prepared to be Shanghai'd into giving a more accurate time scale.
I don't see anything sinister in either him being steadfast or anyone else saying he was so.
I notice there are several factual discrepancies between the Statement on the 7th May 2007 and the rogatory one on 8th May 2008.
Basically he says he hadn't met Jane prior but it seems they originally met on the flight to Portugal.
He says he didn't meet Gerry and Kate till the Tuesday in one statement but Monday in the other.
He does not mention chatting to the Tapas group at the dinner on the Wednesday night in the Rogatory but there are mentions of it (expanded on in Bridget's fluff) in the joint statement so it becomes traceable.
He was "was asked to read my original statement to refresh my memory for which I was given authorization" so it appears he read the statement from 7th May but not the joint statement "J WILKINS & B O'DONNELL 05 NOV 07"
He states "I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15." yet in Praia da Luz he is at the Tapas area during most of this time "He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant, ....".
The time that John Hill and Matt wake him up changes "Relative to when I became aware of Madeleine's disappearance;
After having gone to sleep on the 3rd of May, we were woken around 01H30 by the manager of the resort, John Hill and by a friend of Gerry's. It was them who told me what had happened." In 05 Nov it was 1:00 AM.
OK he answers all the questions but the answers did not entirely match previous statements.
-
I wish I knew the answer to this one "I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again." So what time was that?
-
I wish I knew the answer to this one "I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again." So what time was that?
Just goes to show how quiet it was except for the toing and froing by some of the tapas group. Had there been an intruder after 9.30 surely someone would have seen him as he would have had to present himself twice to that possibility?
-
Just goes to show how quiet it was except for the toing and froing by some of the tapas group. Had there been an intruder after 9.30 surely someone would have seen him as he would have had to present himself twice to that possibility?
Do you mean he could be seen going in or seen coming out? After Matt had finished his check of 5A who would have seen him after 9:30 and before Jane goes to relieve Russell? There is a window of 15 minutes there.
-
Do you mean he could be seen going in or seen coming out? After Matt had finished his check of 5A who would have seen him after 9:30 and before Jane goes to relieve Russell? There is a window of 15 minutes there.
Or maybe less. Given the vagueness of everybody's timings, there is no certainty of the exact timing of Tanner's second trip up the road.
-
Or maybe less. Given the vagueness of everybody's timings, there is no certainty of the exact timing of Tanner's second trip up the road.
It was the time Jane took to eat her mains. So it wouldn't be too long, but long enough to do something back at the apartment.
-
It was the time Jane took to eat her mains. So it wouldn't be too long, but long enough to do something back at the apartment.
The timing is vague. She may have eaten fast, say 10 minutes, knowing that she needed to get to her apartment so that ROB could then get his food.
-
The timing is vague. She may have eaten fast, say 10 minutes, knowing that she needed to get to her apartment so that ROB could then get his food.
I think that is what she says, so she returns at 9:45 PM so there is a window between 9:30 - 9:45 IMO.
-
I think that is what she says, so she returns at 9:45 PM so there is a window between 9:30 - 9:45 IMO.
So you accept it is just your opinion and could be quite wrong.
And what about the 9.45 - 10.00 slot - who was around to monitor that?
-
So you accept it is just your opinion and could be quite wrong.
And what about the 9.45 - 10.00 slot - who was about to monitor that?
Jane had just gone there at 9:45 and Russell returns at 9:50. Ok there is another time gap between 9:50 and 10:00.
But knowing what Mrs Carpenter heard and the time associated with that I think the earlier time is good but the later time slot is just as good. It is hard to choose for I'm not sure how we could determine, but we have to allow Smithman to get Madeleine down the road by 10:00 so maybe the later time is better or is it? Can't determine at the moment sorry.
-
I notice there are several factual discrepancies between the Statement on the 7th May 2007 and the rogatory one on 8th May 2008.
Basically he says he hadn't met Jane prior but it seems they originally met on the flight to Portugal.
He says he didn't meet Gerry and Kate till the Tuesday in one statement but Monday in the other.
He does not mention chatting to the Tapas group at the dinner on the Wednesday night in the Rogatory but there are mentions of it (expanded on in Bridget's fluff) in the joint statement so it becomes traceable.
He was "was asked to read my original statement to refresh my memory for which I was given authorization" so it appears he read the statement from 7th May but not the joint statement "J WILKINS & B O'DONNELL 05 NOV 07"
He states "I calculate that I met Gerry on the road between 20h45 and 21h15." yet in Praia da Luz he is at the Tapas area during most of this time "He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant, ....".
The time that John Hill and Matt wake him up changes "Relative to when I became aware of Madeleine's disappearance;
After having gone to sleep on the 3rd of May, we were woken around 01H30 by the manager of the resort, John Hill and by a friend of Gerry's. It was them who told me what had happened." In 05 Nov it was 1:00 AM.
OK he answers all the questions but the answers did not entirely match previous statements.
De rigeur in this case methinks. With all discrepancies having an innocent explanation.
-
De rigeur in this case methinks. With all discrepancies having an innocent explanation.
"Methinks" being the operative word. How reliable is that?
-
I saw one site gave a name to the Curtis Jez met on his travels - Curtis Brain another Doctor who was staying in apartment block 6. Very interesting!
Very interesting to think Bundleman (is that another name for Tannerman?) could quite as easily be heading for Apartment 6 rather than Casa Liliana (Murat's place if I spelt it wrong). Take this guided but ghoulish tour at your own peril. https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/tag/casa-liliana/
"Third, after being made an arguido, three of the Tapas 9 stated he had been at apartment 5A on the night of 3 May, when his alibi was that he was with his mother in Casa Liliana.
Fourth, Tannerman was heading in a direction that is compatible with Casa Liliana as the destination."
But also block 6 I believe.
I also saw there were 14 calls to Gerry's phone all from the same number but no explanation as to who. You would think at the time it would have only been a matter of calling that number to find out who it was.
-
"Methinks" being the operative word. How reliable is that?
I would say, like much around here pretty bloody average to crap .... @)(++(*
But then I always lie.... ?{)(**
-
I would say, like much around here pretty bloody average to crap .... @)(++(*
But then I always lie.... ?{)(**
You didn't have to be so honest.
-
You didn't have to be so honest.
I hope you exclude the "I always lie" from that comment............. &%+((£
-
I hope you exclude the "I always lie" from that comment............. &%+((£
Would I lie to you?
-
In Gerry's first evidence he states he was in the Tapas area before 9:00
On the 4th May 2007 he stated "Following various informal conversations related to the area of research, we were contacted by a British citizen named Jeremy Michael Wilkins, holder of passport no. 205...., owner of mobile phone no. +44788...., living in ....London...He spends his holidays at, "WATERSIDE GARDENS," block G4, about 50 metres from the apartment where the small child was. He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant, he noted that a person of around 1.70m, with long blond hair, apparently of the "Rasta," style and dressed in green military-style clothes, entered the restaurant. This person did not stay very long. Their behaviour was somewhat strange and they seemed to be rather nervous. He was alone, he did not speak to anyone and left soon afterwards. The informant maintains that he has never seen this person in the village."
So he can't be at two places at once. Therefore there is no way he met up with Gerry earlier unless he met Gerry at the Tapas area.
Note here the partial phone number "phone no. +44788... were they the same starting numbers as the unknown phone calls to Gerry?
-
the list of numbers
00447786986188 - Gerald McCann
00447903108397 - Kate Healy
00447748844837 - David Payne
00447796272586 - Fiona Payne
00447790327853 - Diane Webster
00447713258795 - Russel O'Brien
00447808534191 - Jane Tanner
000447771591456 - Matthew Oldfield
00447771591461 - Rachel Mampilly
00447818520047 - unidentified telephone number which on the night of 2nd May 2007 sent 14 written SMS messages to Gerald McCann and another 4 messages on the day following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
"owner of mobile phone no. +44788...." is different unless it is a typo 44788 .... is potentially 447818.....
Typos do occur as above Matt's number has an extra 0 in it.
Did anyone get to know Jez' cellphone number?
The 0044 suffix shows they are UK phones AFAIK.
" United Kingdom 44 00" From http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/international-calling-codes.htm#U