The timeline revisited

[Mr Gray]

What’s perhaps more puzzling is why they felt such an urgent need to provide this information.

It’s also puzzling that the press were reporting on jemmied shutters the next morning, imo.

Neither is puzzzling

[G-Unit]

Didn't seem to have the same effect on Murat then did it.  I don't think I have seen more changes or contradictions in statements than his.  But for some strange reason that doesn't appear to excite the same interest.

Really? Do you have cites?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Neither is puzzzling

So why were there stories of jemmied shutters in the UK media but absolutely no signs of a break in according to investigators at the scene?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Didn't seem to have the same effect on Murat then did it.  I don't think I have seen more changes or contradictions in statements than his.  But for some strange reason that doesn't appear to excite the same interest.

I’d have been extremely interested had Eddie and Keela alerted in the grounds of his Mum’s house or the boot of his car!!

[Vertigo Swirl]

What’s perhaps more puzzling is why they felt such an urgent need to provide this information.

It’s also puzzling that the press were reporting on jemmied shutters the next morning, imo.

Erm…a child had just gone missing and you question the urgency of providing a timeline to the police?  When would it have been more appropriate to do so in your view?  A few weeks later maybe?

[Vertigo Swirl]

This group weren't content with varying memories though, were they. They attempted, as a group, to produce a very detailed account with times attached. It didn't help them or the investigation, however, because it raises suspicion when stories change.

How very evil of them to attempt to put together a timeline of events, what WERE they thinking?  There should really be a law against it IMO.

[Brietta]

Really? Do you have cites?

How tiresome and predictable 😁     You of course know that my cite is in the PJ files posted on the internet by Levy.

[G-Unit]

How tiresome and predictable 😁     You of course know that my cite is in the PJ files posted on the internet by Levy.

As are a lot of mine, but I supply them when asked. Please have the courtesy to do the same and comply with forum protocols.

[Brietta]

As are a lot of mine, but I supply them when asked. Please have the courtesy to do the same and comply with forum protocols.

    😁You are goading 😁 again😁

You KNOW that my information comes from the PJ Files but you also know that CMOMM is awash with comment ~ some of it repeated on other like minded nonsense sites.
Please desist from your pointless point scoring ... it is tremendously boring as well flaunting publicly yet again http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12132.msg656079#msg656079

I've just checked back and I have told you my source is the PJ files ... you really are all out to foment dissent n'est ce pas!

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

How very evil of them to attempt to put together a timeline of events, what WERE they thinking?  There should really be a law against it IMO.

It’s utterly bizarre though in my opinion. In an imaginary scenario where a child is missing the comings and goings are far less important than the time the child was last seen. We can see from the PJ files and Amaral’s book that the group timeline and the individual timelines, rightly or wrongly, arrouse suspicion.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It’s utterly bizarre though in my opinion. In an imaginary scenario where a child is missing the comings and goings are far less important than the time the child was last seen. We can see from the PJ files and Amaral’s book that the group timeline and the individual timelines, rightly or wrongly, arrouse suspicion.

What is utterly bizarre in my opinion is your opinion that writing a timeline (which included times of checks on the children) is utterly bizarre.

[jassi]

It’s utterly bizarre though in my opinion. In an imaginary scenario where a child is missing the comings and goings are far less important than the time the child was last seen. We can see from the PJ files and Amaral’s book that the group timeline and the individual timelines, rightly or wrongly, arrouse suspicion.

Basically constructing a defence for McCann against neglect. Good to know they could see where their priority lay.

IMO

[Brietta]

Basically constructing a defence for McCann against neglect. Good to know they could see where their priority lay.

IMO

What absolute nonsense!  After fruitlessly searching for Madeleine the best way the material witnesses could think of to assist the police was to produce a timeline of their movements.

Do you think they shouldn't have done that?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

What absolute nonsense!  After fruitlessly searching for Madeleine the best way the material witnesses could think of to assist the police was to produce a timeline of their movements.

Do you think they shouldn't have done that?

With hindsight maybe not. They could individually relate the facts as they remember them to the Police as and when requested. The Police are capable of realising that a small discrepancy in a time is normal. The important point (if it's an abduction) is to establish the last time the missing child was seen. What the collusion with a group timeline has done, in the eyes of the PJ,  rightly or wrongly, and commented on in the Chief Inspector's report is to make it appear that none of the group individually are telling the truth (that's according to them not me). This then arouses suspicion. I'm sure the same situation repeated in the UK would also create the same difficulties. I'm struggling to see a case where group witness collusion is encouraged or seen as helpful.

My own personal opinion, which I am free to express legally, is that I concur with Jassi's comments above.Of course that doesn't mean I'm correct and no inference can be taken from the fact, that like you, I have formed my own opinion of events based upon the available evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

With hindsight maybe not. They could individually relate the facts as they remember them to the Police as and when requested. The Police are capable of realising that a small discrepancy in a time is normal. The important point (if it's an abduction) is to establish the last time the missing child was seen. What the collusion with a group timeline has done, in the eyes of the PJ,  rightly or wrongly, and commented on in the Chief Inspector's report is to make it appear that none of the group individually are telling the truth (that's according to them not me). This then arouses suspicion. I'm sure the same situation repeated in the UK would also create the same difficulties. I'm struggling to see a case where group witness collusion is encouraged or seen as helpful.

My own personal opinion, which I am free to express legally, is that I concur with Jassi's comments above.Of course that doesn't mean I'm correct and no inference can be taken from the fact, that like you, I have formed my own opinion of events based upon the available evidence.

This was a bunch of people desperately trying to think of anything that might assist in the search for Madeleine, they were feeling powerless, out of control and this exercise gave them something to focus on.  My opinion.  If a timeline of their movements wasn’t important or relevant  why did the police want to do a reconstitution of them anyway?  Whose account should they have relied on?