Please list all the translation errors in the PJ files

[Mr Gray]

do you think if this had  happened in the uk the police would  have been the same as  the pj??  i think the uk  police would have charged the mcanns imo  they would have here

Charged them with what

[Carana]

I disagree. Mainly because he corrected it on 10th May, acknowledging that he  said it on 4th May.

When would he have had an opportunity to correct it prior to 10 May?

There had been time to get a translation organised by then. If he had read through it on 10 May and found an error "That's not what I said"... what would the PJ officer record? Is it really likely that a misunderstanding would be recorded as anything other than that the issue had been clarified?

[Carana]

Here's an alternative.

Hypothesis:

There wasn't a misunderstanding or confusion as to what Gerry had actually said that morning concerning which door he'd used to check on the children.

- What would be the point of lying (when the police officer hadn't picked up on why the patio door was left open when Matt checked in the same statement... And Kate had stated that they'd entered via the patio as the next witness to be interviewed,  but anyway).

- What logical motive could there have been?

- How would falsely asserting that he'd entered via the front door at a potentially crucial time lend credence to a faked abduction scenario?

[G-Unit]

Here's an alternative.

Hypothesis:

There wasn't a misunderstanding or confusion as to what Gerry had actually said that morning concerning which door he'd used to check on the children.

- What would be the point of lying (when the police officer hadn't picked up on why the patio door was left open when Matt checked in the same statement... And Kate had stated that they'd entered via the patio as the next witness to be interviewed,  but anyway).

- What logical motive could there have been?

- How would falsely asserting that he'd entered via the front door at a potentially crucial time lend credence to a faked abduction scenario?

i posted that Gerald Mccann changed his account of which door he and his wife used to check their children on 3rd May. I gave no opinion of why he would make that mistake, it's just one of the inconsistencies which exist in this case. Why do people ask me to then explain the inconsistency? I could speculate, but that's all it would be, just as other's opinions are just speculation.

[faithlilly]

Here's an alternative.

Hypothesis:

There wasn't a misunderstanding or confusion as to what Gerry had actually said that morning concerning which door he'd used to check on the children.

- What would be the point of lying (when the police officer hadn't picked up on why the patio door was left open when Matt checked in the same statement... And Kate had stated that they'd entered via the patio as the next witness to be interviewed,  but anyway).

- What logical motive could there have been?

- How would falsely asserting that he'd entered via the front door at a potentially crucial time lend credence to a faked abduction scenario?

It wouldn't but as supporters never tire of telling us the parents were frantic, so probably not in a great state of mind to consider all the angles. However once he had realised that if the man Tannner saw had abducted Madeleine  using the window  ( as the McCanns wanted the world to believe ) and he had used the front door he couldn't have missed the open window when he made his 9.15 check.

Of course this probably only became apparent when he sat down and thought about it calmly. Much like Kate changing her statement to the curtains being closed then whooshing open as opposed to fully open as she stated in her first statement after no doubt realising that if Tanner had seen the abductor then the children's bedroom curtains would have to have been open at Oldfield's check.

[G-Unit]

It wouldn't but as supporters never tire of telling us the parents were frantic, so probably not in a great state of mind to consider all the angles. However once he had realised that if the man Tannner saw had abducted Madeleine  using the window  ( as the McCanns wanted the world to believe ) and he had used the front door he couldn't have missed the open window when he made his 9.15 check.

Of course this probably only became apparent when he sat down and thought about it calmly. Much like Kate changing her statement to the curtains being closed then whooshing open as opposed to fully open as she stated in her first statement after no doubt realising that if Tanner had seen the abductor then the children's bedroom curtains would have to have been open at Oldfield's check.

Speculative, but it makes sense. I'd forgotten about the open/closed curtains. 

[Mr Gray]

i posted that Gerald Mccann changed his account of which door he and his wife used to check their children on 3rd May. I gave no opinion of why he would make that mistake, it's just one of the inconsistencies which exist in this case. Why do people ask me to then explain the inconsistency? I could speculate, but that's all it would be, just as other's opinions are just speculation.

We do not know he did change his account as we do not have a verbatim record of what he said

[Alfred R Jones]

It wouldn't but as supporters never tire of telling us the parents were frantic, so probably not in a great state of mind to consider all the angles. However once he had realised that if the man Tannner saw had abducted Madeleine  using the window  ( as the McCanns wanted the world to believe ) and he had used the front door he couldn't have missed the open window when he made his 9.15 check.

Of course this probably only became apparent when he sat down and thought about it calmly. Much like Kate changing her statement to the curtains being closed then whooshing open as opposed to fully open as she stated in her first statement after no doubt realising that if Tanner had seen the abductor then the children's bedroom curtains would have to have been open at Oldfield's check.

He happily missed seeing JT on the street, why would he have any problem with missing an open window too?  He could just say he never noticed it, it's no biggie.

[pathfinder73]

We do not know he did change his account as we do not have a verbatim record of what he said

He signed it. It is clear he used a key and then changed it. Matt's check is the most revealing. An unlocked door, no open window, door half-open again  &%+((£.

"MATHEW returned saying only "it is all calm", he having entered by the rear door, given that he did not have the key and it was usual for them to enter in that way."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Gerry was the person who used that key to open the apartment for Kate and the kids. So who would have the key on 3 May? Gerry.

[faithlilly]

He happily missed seeing JT on the street, why would he have any problem with missing an open window too?  He could just say he never noticed it, it's no biggie.

Don't be silly Alfie. Of course it's a biggie.

[Eleanor]

Don't be silly Alfie. Of course it's a biggie.

How is it a biggie?

[faithlilly]

How is it a biggie?

Do you mean why Eleanor ?

The father of a missing child, according to his first statement, walked within inches of the open window through which he believed his daughter was abducted and didn't notice it was open.  That is a big mistake no matter what way you slice it.

[Alfred R Jones]

Do you mean why Eleanor ?

The father of a missing child, according to his first statement, walked within inches of the open window through which he believed his daughter was abducted and didn't notice it was open.  That is a big mistake no matter what way you slice it.

And yet he denies seeing his very important alibi when she walks past him - didn't end up putting him behind bars did it?

[Mr Gray]

Do you mean why Eleanor ?

The father of a missing child, according to his first statement, walked within inches of the open window through which he believed his daughter was abducted and didn't notice it was open.  That is a big mistake no matter what way you slice it.

Then that would indicate the first statement was misunderstood by the translator

[Alfred R Jones]

Do you mean why Eleanor ?

The father of a missing child, according to his first statement, walked within inches of the open window through which he believed his daughter was abducted and didn't notice it was open.  That is a big mistake no matter what way you slice it.

It's not a "big mistake" - if he'd walked past an open window without noticing it was open it would simply have said "this man is not very observant", something we already know from his failure to see Jane Tanner walking by.  Either way, it's no biggie.