Did this finding get followed up by the PJ?

[Robittybob1]

I need to go back through the thread and see if we have covered all the loose ends.  I have a feeling we have not looked into the other Ocean Club driver deeply enough.  Don't ask me his name.
Driver
1. Mario Fernando Madeira Marreiros  https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572#ixzz2UdIbUEt1

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BERNARDINO-SILVA.htm

This was the place I saw the second sighting in the stairwell but I can't have posted it.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4989.msg177158#msg177158
"The laundrymen sightings on 2nd and 3rd May at Block G."

"There were TWO seperate sightings in this stairwell by two different drivers, both collecting laundry.

The first incident was 7:30pm-8pm Wed 2nd May.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572
The witness was Mario Marreiros.

The second incident was at about 6:00pm Thu 3rd May
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-madeleine-suspect-seen-in-stairwell-509604
The witness was Bernardino Silva. (It's also mentioned indirectly by Teofilo Castela). "

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TEOFILO-CASTELA.htm
". Questioned as to whether in past times he noted or was aware through communication with colleagues of the resort that a strange person/persons
Were seen around the resort, or asked strange questions about the tourists and children who accompanied them or about the proper installations of the resort, the deponent states that only an employee named Bernardino Silva, told him on Friday, the 04 of May, that the day prior, the date the child went missing, that he saw a strange individual around the resort;
. The deponent does not remember any details of what that employee told him but knows that the same employee was already questioned by the Judicial Police regarding these facts; "

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3287.0  Former staff at Ocean Club now being investigated over burglary claims.

[Robittybob1]

That is a good point he worries about the cold for himself but didn't wrap the child.

That could mean they were not going that far.  Hadn't come that far and destination not that far. 
I must admit I'm a bit concerned about the testimony of the laundry men.
Points I've noted causing concern.
1.  Testimony of seeing a strange person in the stairwell 6 years after the event, yet in their statements both say they didn't see anything suspicious leading up to the event. They aren't the only ones to suddenly get a memory, there have been a number of others, can't recall actual names though at the moment IMO

2.  They seem to be picking laundry up from Block 5 long after the laundry closes at 6:00 PM as per the other laundry and cleaner statements.  - yes very unusual I would think although I suppose it depends on when they would normally pick up the laundry from Block 5

3. They had access to a vehicle. - Yes and one with a hidden back part
4. The PJ had already questioned one of them why he was working late.   ( I wonder if the PJ really did check their alibis?) - I don't think they considered the laundry man a suspect and would have dozens of people to check, so probably not

5.  The Laundry man said his son lived there in the garage.  Yet one son would have only been 15 at the time, if we are talking about the same son 6 years later being 21. - It was his stepson wasn't it and I can imagine a 15 year old loving being in a seperate space away from the parents

6. 15 year olds don't play with kid's toys. - but if the parent was a hoarder or keeping the toys for future grandchildren it is possibly innocent

7. Talks of going for a drive after  9:30 to pick up his son from a village about 7 km away. (was this confirmed?)
 - It is odd though if his stepson was only 15 years old why was he working so far from home, and so late at night

My answers in red Rob (whew much easier than Robittybob1).

I hope that they make sense but you have made me think about these things here too, so thanks.

Sorry I missed this post.

It was common for the laundry drivers to work in the evening .
"He said: “I was at my last collection point near the girl’s flat. I was always rushing. I’d park the van any-where.

"It was 7.30pm to 8pm. When cleaners cleared sheets they dropped them down the hole in the stairs to be collected by me at the bottom." https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-witness-saw-weird-1918572#ixzz2UdIbUEt1

[slartibartfast]

OK do you think the PJ were aware of this time "away" by Gerry.  So why did they put maximum pressure on Kate and not Gerry?  That's what I want to know?
What do you think he was doing while he was away?

I'd have to ask you whether you'd believe Kate or Gerry no matter what they say in their statements? Why say: "Kate didn't know Gerry 'allegedly' saw MBM in her bed he never mentioned it at the table or in his statements" for I doubt if you would believe them even if they did.

It’s a standard application of logical reasoning, go through the suspects one by one, when considering them you have to discount all their statements and put caveats by the statements of their friends and acquaintances. If what you have left still stands up you have a possible culprit.

[Robittybob1]

It’s a standard application of logical reasoning, go through the suspects one by one, when considering them you have to discount all their statements and put caveats by the statements of their friends and acquaintances. If what you have left still stands up you have a possible culprit.

"culprit
noun
a person who is responsible for a crime or other misdeed."
So you think it is possible to solve the McCann case just using logic!

[jassi]

"culprit
noun
a person who is responsible for a crime or other misdeed."
So you think it is possible to solve the McCann case just using logic!

In order to do that, one would need to have ALL the relevant information.
None of us keyboard enthusiasts have that

[Miss Taken Identity]

In order to do that, one would need to have ALL the relevant information.
None of us keyboard enthusiasts have that

Yes, but it doesn't stop some supporters from 'making it up'. tweaking it, and re interpretation of some things said.

[Miss Taken Identity]

As I recall, "Dangerous" has read all the evidence, though he's had so many of his posts deleted that I wouldn't know where to look for a cite.

Transferred to http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10075.0

[Alice Purjorick]

Yes, but it doesn't stop some supporters from 'making it up'. tweaking it, and re interpretation of some things said.

Yet when asked none of them admit, so far, to having read the official files.
One would have thought at least one supporter would have.
But then I guess it's easier and cheaper to cut and paste from "Ye Olde Currant Bun".
Even "Old Dangerous" , I have read all the evidence, is backward in coming forward on that one.

[Robittybob1]

Yet when asked none of them admit, so far, to having read the official files.
One would have thought at least one supporter would have.
But then I guess it's easier and cheaper to cut and paste from "Ye Olde Currant Bun".
Even "Old Dangerous" , I have read all the evidence, is backward in coming forward on that one.

Have you read the entire official file Alice?

[Robittybob1]

Was he asked,would he care.

That was in response to "Not everyone would know about this garage with toys in it overlooking the McCann's property so it was just a handful.  Would Murat himself have been aware of the garage?" 

Maybe Steve told Robert Murat about it later that day or on Saturday morning.

[Robittybob1]

Jane Tanner's description of the man carrying the child 4th May statement.
"Personal description:

( * ) Dark skinned individual, male sex, aged between 35-40, slim physical appearance, about 1.70m tall. Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back (she could only see him from behind). He was wearing linen type cloth trousers, beige to golden in colour, a "duffy" sic type jacket (but not that thick). His shoes were dark in colour, classic type. He had a hurried walk. He was carrying a child, who was lying on both his arms, in front of his chest. By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed"."

  from:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569668/McCann-friend-saw-Madeleines-abductor.html

Contrast this with Mario the laundry man 6 years later


Hardly slim built!

[Robittybob1]

Was there a short cut to block 4 from the Tapas pool area?  Neil Berry says something I can't comprehend otherwise: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NEIL_BERRY.htm

"I am not certain where I was at 18.00. It is possible that I was already in my apartment or returning from the bar. In order to arrive at my apartment I would walk along the side of the pool, crossing the stairs of block 4. If I were with someone, this person would be Raj, but as I have already said I do not remember whether I returned with him or before him. I do not remember having seen a lift in any of the apartment blocks. I was not in block 5, but had to pass by it in order to arrive at my apartment. It is possible that I was on the other side of the street opposite block five." 
Where was Berry heading  what apartment was he in?  " I think that our apartment was 4G"  Was he in block 4?
4G would be the first level up wouldn't it?

I see he is being questioned about being seen by a laundry man in the stairwell.  But he denies ever being in block 5. 
"With regard to where I was at 18.00, whom I was with and the fact that I was seen by a witness at this time next to stairs and lift of block 5 of the Ocean Club:"  It must have at some stage put to him as a fact that he had been in block 5 seen by the laundry man.  When I had read that previously I was thinking he had admitted it was a fact, but really it was an allegation only.

Do the laundry men admit to seeing someone in the stairwell, yes but only years later.  That suggests the PJ knew about this much earlier but were keeping it quiet.  Have I got that right?

This still remains one of the most problematic posts for me.

[Robittybob1]

Shining in Luz has done the best analysis on Neil Berry I've seen so far:
https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/neil-berry-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/.

[barrier]

Shining in Luz has done the best analysis on Neil Berry I've seen so far:
https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/neil-berry-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/.

Exactly,a lot of people are dragged into just because they were in Luz at the time, nothing suspicious except to those who want it to be.

[Robittybob1]

G-unit has Berry in another apartment altogether: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8179.msg411989#msg411989

"Apartment 606 was occupied all week by Neil Berry. It's on the same level as the balcony referred to and the Berrys and Balus were sitting on the apartment's large balcony overlooking the car park behind block 6 all evening on 3rd. Berry was due to leave on 5th, so I assume the police took over the apartment after he vacated it. "

If he was in Block 6 why did he take the "short cut"?  The best path yo block 6 would be out through the secondary reception gate wouldn't it?

Shining in Luz devotes a whole post in an effort to unravel the mystery, https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/2015/02/02/textusa-v-neil-berry-and-raj-balu/

Fairly unsuccessfully.  But any attempt is better than nothing.