Why Should We Believe the Parent’s When....?

[Brietta]

What difference would the time difference make in terms of light entering the room?  GM and KM went out at 8.30. Page 90 KM's book she states the bedroom door was left open to allow a glimmer of light in from the lamp they left on in the lounge.  The curtains and shutter in the children's room were closed.

"To be fair, it wasn't all that dark at 9:05." http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10801.msg536947#msg536947
Darkness hadn't fallen at 8.30 when they left.  But it was going to get dark and they prepared for that, as one does.

[faithlilly]

Amaral falsified evidence in a torture trial ...

I would neither trust a convicted thief or a convicted liar ... but maybe other grannies have different standards.

My granny certainly did...she didn’t see the standard of honesty one is prepared to tolerate as a pick and mix. The truth  was the truth.

[Brietta]

My granny certainly did...she didn’t see the standard of honesty one is prepared to tolerate as a pick and mix. The truth  was the truth.

               And a convicted perjurer is the thief of truth.

[Holly Goodhead]

That bedroom got lighter and darker depending on who was speaking. To be fair, it wasn't all that dark at 9:05. On the other hand the proud father moment took a while to be spoken of.

The problem with the checking is that no independent witnesses saw any of them apart from Jez Wilkins and he refused to be precise about the time he saw Gerry. Between 8:45 and 9:15 he said.

https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/portugal/faro?month=5

But according to how the apartment was left ie lamp on in lounge and curtains/shutters closed in children's room I don't see how the outside light influenced anything internally?   

The Paynes were on the first floor and had their own hi-tech baby monitor therefore they were not carrying out what to my mind was a bizarre checking arrangement.  I don't know the layout of the apartments occupied by the Oldfields and Tanner/O'Brien but if they were similar to McCanns they may well have been walking around the front and listening at the shutters some of the time. 

According to KM when GM stopped to speak with Jeremy Wilkins, who was pushing his child around in a buggy, GM discussed their "childcare arrangements".  JM was someone GM had known over a matter of days through tennis.  So now someone he knew virtually nothing about in terms of character knows his children are home alone!  Who else did GM tell about their "childcare arrangements"? 

[Brietta]

https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/portugal/faro?month=5

But according to how the apartment was left ie lamp on in lounge and curtains/shutters closed in children's room I don't see how the outside light influenced anything internally?   

The Paynes were on the first floor and had their own hi-tech baby monitor therefore they were not carrying out what to my mind was a bizarre checking arrangement.  I don't know the layout of the apartments occupied by the Oldfields and Tanner/O'Brien but if they were similar to McCanns they may well have been walking around the front and listening at the shutters some of the time. 

According to KM when GM stopped to speak with Jeremy Wilkins, who was pushing his child around in a buggy, GM discussed their "childcare arrangements".  JM was someone GM had known over a matter of days through tennis.  So now someone he knew virtually nothing about in terms of character knows his children are home alone!  Who else did GM tell about their "childcare arrangements"?

Congratulations on picking up the general trend ... excellent progress and quick learning for a novice.

[Robittybob1]

He would hardly pee in the front passageway.  He used the toilet when he was in the apartment.

One would hope so.

[G-Unit]

https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/portugal/faro?month=5

But according to how the apartment was left ie lamp on in lounge and curtains/shutters closed in children's room I don't see how the outside light influenced anything internally?   

The Paynes were on the first floor and had their own hi-tech baby monitor therefore they were not carrying out what to my mind was a bizarre checking arrangement.  I don't know the layout of the apartments occupied by the Oldfields and Tanner/O'Brien but if they were similar to McCanns they may well have been walking around the front and listening at the shutters some of the time. 

According to KM when GM stopped to speak with Jeremy Wilkins, who was pushing his child around in a buggy, GM discussed their "childcare arrangements".  JM was someone GM had known over a matter of days through tennis.  So now someone he knew virtually nothing about in terms of character knows his children are home alone!  Who else did GM tell about their "childcare arrangements"?

The shutters weren't completely closed, so outside daylight may have made a difference earlier on.
 
the external blinds closed but with some slats open
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Despite everyone agreeing that the Payne's did no checking, Gerry said;

On Wednesday night, 2 May 2007, as well as he and his wife, he thinks that DP also went to his apartment to confirm that his children were well, not having reported to him any abnormal situation with the children.

Jez Wilkins knew the night before (Wednesday) what the group were doing;

Jeremy and Bridget became aware that although the McCanns had taken up the use of the creche facility during the day, they had not done so for the evening hours and had left the children in the apartment but were checking on them regularly and that other members of the group appeared to be doing the same.
They expressed surprise over this.....
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

[slartibartfast]

               And a convicted perjurer is the thief of truth.

What has Amaral got to do with this thread?

[Erngath]

What has Amaral got to do with this thread?

I think the credibility of someone who may have told a lie is being questioned and his trustworthiness is being discussed!

Amaral who played such a vital role in  this case and who has been proven to be a liar is surely within the concept of the thread  of lying and trustworthiness.

[faithlilly]

               And a convicted perjurer is the thief of truth.

As is a liar of any description.

[faithlilly]

I think the credibility of someone who may have told a lie is being questioned and his trustworthiness is being discussed!

Amaral who played such a vital role in  this case and who has been proven to be a liar is surely within the concept of the thread  of lying and trustworthiness.

Do you think Amaral lying justifies Gerry doing it ?

[Erngath]

Do you think Amaral lying justifies Gerry doing it ?

Gerry doing what?
Has it been proven he lied?

If the subject of lying and subsequent unworthiness is being discussed, then surely it's on topic to mention that Amaral who has a conviction for lying must also have his unworthiness mentioned.

[faithlilly]

Gerry doing what?
Has it been proven he lied?

If the subject of lying and subsequent unworthiness is being discussed, then surely it's on topic to mention that Amaral who has a conviction for lying must also have his unworthiness mentioned.

Absolutely....but I do think it has been conclusively proved that Gerry lied. The real question is, why would the father of a missing child lie simply to save face ? Was his reputation really important enough to him that he would jeopardise his credibility ?

To be clear.....the table was booked for the whole week. There was never any question that the group wouldn’t get a table....and there is the lie right there.

[Erngath]

Absolutely....but I do think it has been conclusively proved that Gerry lied. The real question is, why would the father of a missing child lie simply to save face ? Was his reputation really important enough to him that he would jeopardise his credibility ?

To be clear.....the table was booked for the whole week. There was never any question that the group wouldn’t get a table....and there is the lie right there.

You may "think" that it has been "conclusively" proven that Gerry lied.

But until your thought is proven to be true, then unlike Amaral whose lie has been proven, you really cannot continue with the whys and wherefores based on something you cannot prove.

[Holly Goodhead]

Congratulations on picking up the general trend ... excellent progress and quick learning for a novice.

Thanks.  Yes, I know very little about this case but I know a lot about some others and as I see it there are common themes among them.  Eg sifting the relevant from the irrelevant; looking for the devil in the detail; accepting that unless something is timed digitally eg mobile phone records it's only going to be approx; looking for facts that can withstand scrutiny; not taking what witnesses say at face value - reasons for distorting may be many.