Wandering Off Topic

[Robittybob1]

Rachael Matthew and Russell didn't go into 5A, they stayed at the bottom of the steps, so Kate didn't give any description of the child's pyjamas to 'everyone' at the table in the apartment. The only table where everyone but Jane was present seems to have been the Tapas table.

I'm a bit surprised by that summary.  Either I'm wrong or you.  You reckon Matt never went into the apartment?

[Robittybob1]

At around 10pm, Kate, Madeleine's mother, went to her apartment to check on her children. She came back totally shocked, shouting, saying that Madeleine was no longer in her bedroom. At that time all the adults were in the restaurant. Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter [external blinds].

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
Just on the face of it Matt is saying the whole group went into the room.  Well we know that Dianne and Jane are excluded from that group.

[misty]

Where & when did the group write the timeline on the colouring book? Was that at the table in 5a?

[Robittybob1]

ON his next statement he says he went inside but not into the bedroom

"Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.

so was previous description just from what others said or was that all visible from the door.  I think it was possible to see the window open shutter up from the doorway but he would need to be in the apartment.

From Rachel's statement it doesn't read that she went into the apartment either but went to her apartment and checked her kids.  So the two females in the apartment are Kate and Fiona.

[Robittybob1]

But Rachel does confirm Jane comment that it was Rachel who was first told about the Tanner sighting.

I went to talk to Jane and said you know, that Madeleine had disappeared and the window was open and the shutter was up, erm and then Jane said to me that when she'd come back to do her check, erm she'd seen somebody carrying a child, walking kind of across the top of the T junction, as she, as she'd been walking up from the, from the Ocean Club, they'd been walking across the top of the road and we kind of said well you know, could have been, not could have been anyone but still sure it couldn't have been Madeleine because Gerry, cos you know if when she was, when she left the table to come up to do her check, Gerry was talking to Jez in the road, erm and so we, you know we had this discussion between ourselves, oh you know, it couldn't have been Madeleine because you know Gerry had only just checked and he was standing in the road and surely he would have seen, or you know surely somebody couldn't have taken her that quickly cos Gerry had literally just come out of the apartment, erm and we kind of you know battered that idea back and forward between us for you know, a couple of minutes, erm but you know, anyway'.
01.19.48 1578 'So what time did Jane tell you this''
 Reply 'It must have been about, erm ten past ten or something, quarter past ten I guess'.
1578 'And whereabouts did she tell you''
 Reply 'We were just outside her apartment but there was like a space between the apartments, erm sort of courtyard-y bit'.
1578 'From the car park entrance or the pool side''
 Reply 'Yeah, no the car park entrance'.
1578 'And who was present when she was telling you this''
 Reply 'No just me, just me, cos erm Fi was with Kate and, and Gerry and, well with Kate and Gerry I think and all the boys were sort of, had started to look around and started to, Matt had gone to the Police Station to, no gone to the Ocean Club to phone the Police'.
1578 'What was Janes demeanour when she was telling you this''
 Reply 'Erm she was quite shocked, well we were kind of bit puzzled, cos we thought well you know, could it really have been cos Gerry had just been in, erm but it was a bit of a sort of Jane was like, everybody gob smacked really that you know, she could well have seen Madeleine, erm but we did, you know we, we didn't have this discussion about whether it could have been just because of the sort of time of Gerry going in and him standing outside talking to Jez and you know, it would have been, somebody would have had to you know, sort of be very quick, or have been in the room when Gerry had gone in, we didn't talk about that at that time but, you know afterwards, erm obviously that was, I think we kept, yeah I mean we basically came to the conclusion that somebody would have had to have been in the room when Gerry had gone in to check'.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

[Robittybob1]

So it comes down to how did Fiona know what Madeleine was wearing so soon after this for the next person that Jane must talk to would be Fiona and those two describe the pyjamas AFAIK.

Reply 'So anyway Jane and I you know talked about that and, and then I can't remember whether she told, I think she told Fiona then, erm I mean basically you know as soon as the Police arrived, she told, she told the Police'.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

So what does Fiona say?

Rachel also says:

it just seemed too much of a coincidence that you know it couldn't be insignificant, erm so you know Jane said she'd tell the Police as soon as they arrived, which she did, erm and erm she didn't describe the pyjamas to me then, erm it was only really, I think it was the next day or perhaps even the day after that, that Jane, Fiona and I had a conversation about the pyjamas that the child was wearing, erm and Jane had said that they were sort of white with sort of pink flowers or something on and they had a bit of a, like a trim around the bottom, erm and Fiona said she'd asked Kate erm about the pyjamas, you know, what sort of pyjamas Madeleine was wearing, erm and sort of later that day I think you know, Fi came back and said basically Jane had described the pyjamas that Madeleine was wearing, so you know, that absolutely convinced us that this person walking away was carrying Madeleine, erm you know Jane, I mean none of us knew, I mean I suppose I, I might have known what bed clothes, erm what pyjamas Evie and Ella wore but that was only cos quite often they came to read stories in our apartment, or you know if Grace went there, but otherwise you know, we didn't ever seen any of the other children at bed time, erm you know, I know Jane hadn't seen the twins or Madeleine at bed time, so she would have no idea what pyjamas, or you know, or what Madeleine wore to bed, whether they were pyjamas or a nightie whatever, so erm, so it was you know sort of like the two, I think it must have been on the Saturday, erm that the pyjamas, Jane described the pyjamas to Fiona and Fiona found out from Kate, erm what Madeleine's pyjamas were like and they were the same as the ones that Jane had described'.

Here she is saying Fiona asks about the pyjamas later the next day but somehow she talks to Jane before that.

[Robittybob1]

What does Fiona say about talking to Jane?

She was never in Madeleine's family apartment.

She knew Madeleine well and describes her as very intelligent and she would not go with stranger without screaming or protesting unless she was very tired or sleeping.

As regards the episode with Jane - she [Jane] only told her that she had seen an individual with a child in his arms, not knowing if it was Madeleine

I presume "She was never in Madeleine's family apartment" means prior to the alert.
She doesn't mention describing the pyjamas with Jane.

Her second statement is all about Murat.
Her rogatory statement:

'Is there anything at this present moment about what we have been talking about that you wish to elaborate on or what you have said has jolted something else in your memory that you haven't already said''
 
 
 Reply
 'There's something I want to get in, which is something that happened a few days after, erm, with regards to Jane. You were saying, did she offer any description, which she didn't to me but, I'm trying to think whether it was the Saturday paper or the Sunday paper, my mum had bought a paper and it was in our apartment lying around and I had read it sort of the day, you know, I think it was the Saturday paper, I had read it and, erm, it said in this paper a description of what Madeleine was wearing and it put white pyjama bottoms and I read it and thought, well that's wrong, because I know I was with Kate on the night as she was giving her description and I knew it had a pattern on the bottoms and a frill at the bottom, so I remember being a bit, huh, well that's just wrong, you know, how can they get it wrong, this is a National Newspaper. But then Jane came later that day and read the same report and she said just off the top, you know, after reading it out loud, 'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas' and I said 'Well what were they' and she said 'Well they had, I'm sure they had some sort of pattern on them and a roll-up or some detail at the bottom'. And at that point my blood ran cold, because they were Madeleine's pyjamas. And, you know, that was the description she gave, having not seen Kate, having not talked to, to anybody about what Madeleine was wearing. And, erm, and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'.
 
 01.21.51
 1485
 'Yeah. And who was that to, that was to the Local Press, was it''
 
 
 Reply
 'What, the newspaper''
 
 
 1485
 'Yeah'.
 
 
 Reply
 'No, it wasn't, it was a National Newspaper that put'.
 
 
 1485
 'It was a National one, was it''
 
 
 Reply
 'Yeah, yeah, as I say, I think it, I think it was soon after, I think it was the Saturday, my mum might still even have the paper actually, she was the only one buying any, huh, erm'.

Was it ever published in a Newspaper the type of pyjamas Madeleine was wearing?

Lets focus on her conversation with Jane again:

But then Jane came later that day and read the same report and she said just off the top, you know, after reading it out loud, 'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas' and I said 'Well what were they' and she said 'Well they had, I'm sure they had some sort of pattern on them and a roll-up or some detail at the bottom'. And at that point my blood ran cold, because they were Madeleine's pyjamas. And, you know, that was the description she gave, having not seen Kate, having not talked to, to anybody about what Madeleine was wearing. And, erm, and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'.

To me that is a complete contradiction"  Jane says "'Well maybe it wasn't Madeleine I saw then, if she was wearing white pyjamas, because they weren't white pyjamas'" whereas Fiona says "and I think we both, you know, just thought there's no doubt in our minds that that was Madeleine'."  Is Fiona saying she knew more about the pyjamas than what was published in the paper?  Yes she is as she says Kate told her, but had not discussed this with Jane.  Does Jane remember this dramatic conversation with Fiona and the article in the Newspaper?

[Robittybob1]

I find Jane particularly honest here: Saying how events subsequent have influenced her initial memory.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

4078    “And when you noticed the detail was it in any colour?”
Reply    “I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so”.
 
4078    “And, overall, what colour would you say the pyjama bottoms were?”
Reply    “Erm, I can’t, I can’t remember, I mean, I, I can’t remember, well I can’t remember now, but I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.  It’s harder because now I know what the pyjamas were so I can’t”.

I think, just going back a bit, over again, this is something, I think when I realised the true significance of what I’d seen as well was almost like a couple of days afterwards when, erm, erm, I was talking to Fi about the pyjamas, because again it seems madness now why I hadn’t asked Kate and Gerry before this what the pyjamas were like, but it’s all sort of rha rha, you know, so I didn’t know what, what Madeleine’s pyjamas were before this.  And I’d actually read in a paper that they were white, it was in the Telegraph, I think it was the day afterwards Dianne had bought a Telegraph paper and in there it was saying she was wearing plain white pyjamas, so I think when I read that I almost thought ‘Oh maybe I have got it wrong’, you know, because I’d, out of everything, I thought ‘Oh they weren’t just plain white’, I thought they had got some sort of thing on it.  So I think it might have actually been the next morning, which would probably be the Saturday morning, I think I said something to, about oh, to Fi ‘Oh what were the pyjamas like’ and she actually described the pyjamas and she sort of said ‘Oh no that is what they were like’.  And that was, I think that was almost the moment when I couldn’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that, you know.  And then that’s, again, it’s sort of sounds, in hindsight, it all sounds like a long period of time, but I think that was when I thought ‘No, that was definitely’, you know, when she described what they, it was almost like ‘Well that’s exactly what I have described to’, you know, ‘to the Police the day after’”.
4078    “So in your own mind you couldn’t quite talk yourself out of it”.
Reply    “No, that was then and, I mean, and Fi said she could see the, you know, the horror on my face as I sort of realised that, it was sort of then, that was like ‘Well, no, I can’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that because this is’.  I mean, I think I was fairly certain anyway, but that was, I couldn’t convince myself then that it wasn’t”.

So Madeleine's pyjamas were described in the paper incorrectly as compared to Fiona's recollection.
But one would think the paper would describe the pyjamas as Kate recollected but maybe not.

[Robittybob1]

Kate only made one interview but in that she describes the pyjamas Madeleine was wearing:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.

http://www.gettyimages.co.nz/detail/news-photo/kate-and-gerry-mccann-parents-of-missing-4-year-old-british-news-photo/74437110
http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/crimewatchappeal.jpg&target=tlx_picpf3r

[Robittybob1]

Did Kate describe the description of the pyjamas before 10:20 with the group?  So that Fiona and Jane could even discuss this at the time of the alert?

[Robittybob1]

What does Kate say?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Concerning Madeleine, she is Caucasian, white, aged four years (12/05/2003) about 90cm tall. Very slim, dark blond hair; shoulder-length. Left eye blue-green same as the right, which has a brown spot. She has a small brown spot on the skin of her left leg as well as sunburn on her right forearm. She has no scars. At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.

I doubt if she figured all that out in the first 10 minutes after the alert.

[Robittybob1]

In the arguido statement 6th Sept.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm

They arrived at the apartment around 5:40PM, earlier than usual, because Madeleine was tired, their other friends were at the beach and Gerry had an all-male tennis game at 6:00PM. At the flat they both bathed the children, and close to 6:00PM Gerry went to the tennis courts, soon after the children had finished their bath. They entered the apartment by the main door, with the key. She does not know if it was locked, and presumes it was Gerry who opened it. At lunch time they also entered by the same door.

After the children's bath, already alone, she put pyjamas and nappies on the twins, gave them each a glass of milk and biscuits. Before bathing the children and because it was early, they had thought of taking them to the recreation area, but then decided against this because of tiredness.

I get the feeling redressing the kids was Kate's job for Gerry had to rush off to the tennis again.  So I doubt if Gerry says much about the pyjamas but we'll have a look.

[Robittybob1]

What does Gerry say on the 4th May?

With regard to Madeleine, he describes her as being of Caucasian race, with quite white skin, four years old (12-05-2003), almost 90 cm in height. She has a slim build
dark blond hair which is straight and shoulder length. Her left eye is blue and green and her right eye is green with a brown mark in the pupil. She has a small brown birthmark ,on the knee of her left leg
he does not remember any others. She did not have any scars. At the time of her disappearance she was wearing pyjamas, the trousers were white with a floral pattern, and the short-sleeved top was predominantly pink and there was a blue and grey figure of a donkey on the front, with the inscription "Eeyore".

I have a feeling that is word for word very close to what Kate has said.

At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE," an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.

So that was a prepared bit for sure.

On the 10th he shows a more typical male response: 

Asked, he relates that he does not recall to have described exactly the type of pyjamas (colour, designs, etc.) that MADELEINE had worn at the time she disappeared.

Without his notes he doesn't remember.
And nothing about the pyjamas in his arguido statement 7th Sept 07.

[xtina]

interesting read for some

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/wearent-writing-about-investigations.html

[stephen25000]

interesting read for some

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/wearent-writing-about-investigations.html

An interesting read and a precise  analysis of what has happened to Amaral, courtesy of the Mccanns and their 'followers'.

IMHO naturally.