First Searches

[pathfinder73]

The lack of reciprocity issue had been soon and widely commented on forums. It is therefore not amazing that Mrs McCann answers it in her "account of the truth".
The first time-line places Mrs McCann's "discovery" around 9:50. It tended then to be shifted later.
Imo, for many reasons (among which the assumption that each checked on his kids), Mr Oldfield entry in the flat at 21h30 was complacent saying (in order to avoid neglect accusation). As Mr McCann checked the kids around 21h10 and as they were checking every 30 minutes, logically Mrs McCann had to go at around 21h45. This would explain why she didn't offer to check the Oldfield baby : he had been checked 15 minutes before.

Yes pushing the timeline on (Kate leaving tapas bar to check) to 10pm is for obvious reasons but if they have got other eyewitnesses to come forward then they will be looking into the disappearance of another between 10-10.15pm.

[AnneGuedes]

Looking at the witnesses' statements, you'll see that the same event (or what seems to be) is located at different times. Some posters even checked if by chance summertime was recent and people hadn't yet corrected their watch.
One of the most amazing cases is Mr Salcedas who changed time drastically between his first statement and his rogatory one. Was he influenced by his cousin ?

[DCI]

The lack of reciprocity issue had been soon and widely commented on forums. It is therefore not amazing that Mrs McCann answers it in her "account of the truth".
The first time-line places Mrs McCann's "discovery" around 9:50. It tended then to be shifted later.
Imo, for many reasons (among which the assumption that each checked on his kids), Mr Oldfield entry in the flat at 21h30 was complacent saying (in order to avoid neglect accusation). As Mr McCann checked the kids around 21h10 and as they were checking every 30 minutes, logically Mrs McCann had to go at around 21h45. This would explain why she didn't offer to check the Oldfield baby : he had been checked 15 minutes before.

Its no different to Martin Smith saying they saw the carrier at 10pm, then tells newspapers it was between 9.45 and 9.50.

[pathfinder73]

Who from the Tapas 9 went searching in the direction of the arrow in the 10pm searches? No one it seems but that's very unlikely if you were going in different directions.

[AnneGuedes]

Its no different to Martin Smith saying they saw the carrier at 10pm, then tells newspapers it was between 9.45 and 9.50.

I agree the Smiths should be interviewed, with the bar tickets present, to determine at which time they left the bar and what kind of small groups they formed.

[AnneGuedes]

Who from the Tapas 9 went searching in the direction of the arrow in the 10pm searches? No one it seems but that's very unlikely if you were going in different directions.

None of them followed the arrow, at least at first. They went to the plausible places where Madeleine could be found : the alley path, even the bottom of it (if you go forwards instead of turning right between G5 and G6), the short cut, the supermarket (which is under "Portugal" on your map).

[pathfinder73]

"From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added." (Neil Berry)

"After 22:00 we were still sitting on the veranda in the Berry apartment. We heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. My testimony dated 6th of May 2007 related the details of the conversation we overheard and the information regarding the paper that Neil and I used in the searches. I cannot add any more details save those which have already been given in this testimony." (Raj Balu)

The previous statements are not in the files? Important don't you think.

[AnneGuedes]

"From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added." (Neil Berry)

"After 22:00 we were still sitting on the veranda in the Berry apartment. We heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. My testimony dated 6th of May 2007 related the details of the conversation we overheard and the information regarding the paper that Neil and I used in the searches. I cannot add any more details save those which have already been given in this testimony." (Raj Balu)

The previous statements are not in the files? Important don't you think.

I've looked for them many times, they're not in the files. There are not the only files mentioned by existing files that aren't in the files.
Melchior Gomes, who said all files were in the DVD except for the "paedophiles" ones was lucky to be virtually in Court...

[pathfinder73]

Thanks Anne. It looks like the black bag eye witness is also missing that is mentioned in Kate's book. Yes?

Portuguese police claim that a witness saw her and her husband carrying something in a large black bag on the evening of May 3.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id378.html

[AnneGuedes]

Portuguese police claim that a witness saw her and her husband carrying something in a large black bag on the evening of May 3.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id378.html

? There's nothing of that kind in the files.

[Mr Gray]

Thanks Anne. It looks like the black bag eye witness is also missing that is mentioned in Kate's book. Yes?

Portuguese police claim that a witness saw her and her husband carrying something in a large black bag on the evening of May 3.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id378.html

Looks like you are making it up as you go along...

[pathfinder73]

Do you mean Kate did as it's in her book?

[Mr Gray]

Do you mean Kate did as it's in her book?

what page

[pathfinder73]

242

[pathfinder73]

? There's nothing of that kind in the files.

It would be impossible to know how many files are missing. If Kate's black bag witness is true then very important witness statements are being held back. That kind of statement is what I've been looking for (to fit in with my theory) and now I can't see it.