Goncalo Amaral interviewed after the Appeal Court decision.

[Eleanor]

It's always best to stick to what they actually say because the bits added on are your opinion. Charlotte was a mine of information it seems. No twins in the room before the police arrived? I thought it was Emma Knight who got a description of the clothes from Fiona? Very interesting;

She had worked for Mark Warner on two previous occasions....................We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment........"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends........The nanny was one of three staff who steered Mrs McCann to the nearby reception area, where they asked her to describe what Madeleine was wearing.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html#ixzz4bQZJrwgD
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

You might do well to take your own advice.

[G-Unit]

You might do well to take your own advice.

I beg your pardon? Please provide more information so I can reply.

[Eleanor]

I beg your pardon? Please provide more information so I can reply.

Read your own post.

[G-Unit]

Read your own post.

I did, it's fine. 

[Robittybob1]

It's always best to stick to what they actually say because the bits added on are your opinion. Charlotte was a mine of information it seems. No twins in the room before the police arrived? I thought it was Emma Knight who got a description of the clothes from Fiona? Very interesting;

She had worked for Mark Warner on two previous occasions....................We told the head of department what had happened and she took us straight to the apartment........"There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns' friends........The nanny was one of three staff who steered Mrs McCann to the nearby reception area, where they asked her to describe what Madeleine was wearing.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html#ixzz4bQZJrwgD
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

She doesn't say which room she was aware that the twins were or were not in.  I'm thinking she is a bit confused as to which room she was looking at.
But having worked there for two years previously there could have been multiple lost children that all had been found until the McCann incident.

[Robittybob1]

Back to the video https://youtu.be/-FKsKD78Qsc?t=1544:  (This bit seems to be extraneous to the public file!) "One thing seems certain; the (McCann's) first floor neighbour, Pamela Fenn, saw David P.ayne, around 19:00 hours, on the McCann's balcony."

I checked the statement by Mrs Fenn and there is nothing that confirms this allegation http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm.

[Robittybob1]

This next bit was what prompted me to start the thread https://youtu.be/-FKsKD78Qsc?t=1691.  Was the second timeline found days later?
" Days later, the police find among Kate's papers a manuscript (draft) with the hours of the rounds (checking) written on it -"

Was one produced by Kate and the other Russell?

Video:  "except, this differed from the one her friend Russell gave to the PJ."
Next subtitle:  "There are lapses in the memory of the McCann's friends (account of events) and (worse) contradictory versions of the same (alleged events)."
Next: "The police never knew with rigour (with any degree of certainty) the steps (movements) of each of them during that dinner."
Next: "There are only four moments that coincide (and these are) the only ones corroborated by witnesses."
Next which is the one I'd say Goncalo has completely wrong!: "At 21:00 hours, two men get up from the table - one is Russell O'Brien, and the other Gerry McCann."

My research of the timeline it was Matt Oldfield that went back before Gerry.

Next: "They set of to the apartments (ostensibly) to check on their children.  In order to reach the apartment,...."
"...Gerry has to leave the Ocean Club and walk 20 meters of a dimly lit street to reach the small access gate to the apartment."
Next: "(after checking on the children and) on the way back to his dinner Gerry encounters Jeremy Wilkins .....
Next [miss out some boring stuff]: "... The two ...chat for a while.   The street is deserted."

Will Goncalo admit Jane goes past them????

Next: "(Meanwhile) Jane Tanner the partner of Russell O'Brien worries about his abscence from  the (dinner) table and gets up (to look for him). "

That sounds like completely made up by GA!

Next: "Later she assures the police that between 21 and 21:05 hours she saw a stranger carrying a child in his arms .....[sick of typing]"
Next: "and on which at that very same time, Gerry stood chatting with Jeremy.  (But) neither Gerry or Jeremy saw anyone passing by nor even for that matter noticed Jane Tanner's presence (walking past them)."

Next: " Around 21:30 hours Gerry returns to the restaurant table.  Russell had not yet arrived back (from his check)."

Next: "He finally returns close to 22 hours - nearly half an hour after Gerry."

I just can't believe that Goncalo is not aware of the documented movements of the T9.  It has been an eye opener to read that he doesn't even know what happened that night.

"

[G-Unit]

This next bit was what prompted me to start the thread https://youtu.be/-FKsKD78Qsc?t=1691.  Was the second timeline found days later?
" Days later, the police find among Kate's papers a manuscript (draft) with the hours of the rounds (checking) written on it -"

Was one produced by Kate and the other Russell?

Video:  "except, this differed from the one her friend Russell gave to the PJ."
Next subtitle:  "There are lapses in the memory of the McCann's friends (account of events) and (worse) contradictory versions of the same (alleged events)."
Next: "The police never knew with rigour (with any degree of certainty) the steps (movements) of each of them during that dinner."
Next: "There are only four moments that coincide (and these are) the only ones corroborated by witnesses."
Next which is the one I'd say Goncalo has completely wrong!: "At 21:00 hours, two men get up from the table - one is Russell O'Brien, and the other Gerry McCann."

My research of the timeline it was Matt Oldfield that went back before Gerry.

Next: "They set of to the apartments (ostensibly) to check on their children.  In order to reach the apartment,...."
"...Gerry has to leave the Ocean Club and walk 20 meters of a dimly lit street to reach the small access gate to the apartment."
Next: "(after checking on the children and) on the way back to his dinner Gerry encounters Jeremy Wilkins .....
Next [miss out some boring stuff]: "... The two ...chat for a while.   The street is deserted."

Will Goncalo admit Jane goes past them????

Next: "(Meanwhile) Jane Tanner the partner of Russell O'Brien worries about his abscence from  the (dinner) table and gets up (to look for him). "

That sounds like completely made up by GA!

Next: "Later she assures the police that between 21 and 21:05 hours she saw a stranger carrying a child in his arms .....[sick of typing]"
Next: "and on which at that very same time, Gerry stood chatting with Jeremy.  (But) neither Gerry or Jeremy saw anyone passing by nor even for that matter noticed Jane Tanner's presence (walking past them)."

Next: " Around 21:30 hours Gerry returns to the restaurant table.  Russell had not yet arrived back (from his check)."

Next: "He finally returns close to 22 hours - nearly half an hour after Gerry."

I just can't believe that Goncalo is not aware of the documented movements of the T9.  It has been an eye opener to read that he doesn't even know what happened that night.

"

He wasn't the only one;

Thus, at around 9pm, her husband went to the apartment to make sure the twins, as well as Madeleine, were OK, then he went back to the restaurant. Her husband said that the children were doing well and that he had bumped into the person with whom he had played tennis, a person who has two children. At the same time, one of the group of friends, Russell, went to see his children, without checking on the interviewee's children.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

[Robittybob1]

He wasn't the only one;

Thus, at around 9pm, her husband went to the apartment to make sure the twins, as well as Madeleine, were OK, then he went back to the restaurant. Her husband said that the children were doing well and that he had bumped into the person with whom he had played tennis, a person who has two children. At the same time, one of the group of friends, Russell, went to see his children, without checking on the interviewee's children.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Are you trying to say that Goncalo treated Kate's one and only statement as gospel? 
It is clear from the entire group Russell and Matt went together not Russell and Gerry.  Or do you agree with Goncalo?

[stephen25000]

Are you trying to say that Goncalo treated Kate's one and only statement as gospel? 
It is clear from the entire group Russell and Matt went together not Russell and Gerry.  Or do you agree with Goncalo?

You appear to take the McCann's words as gospel.

[Robittybob1]

Thanks for the correction:  it should have been "Ye of little faith, prove that to me or eat your words".

My timeline was based on looking at all the Tapas 9 statements not just Kate's one.  Kate's statement is clearly a translation error.  The words "same time" is referring to Matt's visit in the next sentence.

[G-Unit]

Are you trying to say that Goncalo treated Kate's one and only statement as gospel? 
It is clear from the entire group Russell and Matt went together not Russell and Gerry.  Or do you agree with Goncalo?

I'm not trying to say anything, just pointing out what Kate McCann said.

[Robittybob1]

I'm not trying to say anything, just pointing out what Kate McCann said.

well how do account for GA getting the timeline so wrong?
Does anyone agree with me he got the timeline wrong?

[G-Unit]

Ye of little faith, prove that to me your eat your words.

My timeline was based on looking at all the Tapas 9 statements not just Kate's one.  Kate's statement is clearly a translation error.  The same time is referring to Matt's visit in the next sentence.

Looking at all the statements made on 4th May only two people mention Matthew's check at around 9pm; Matthew himself and Russell. There's no 'clearly' involved, the assertion of translation errors is based on no evidence whatsoever.

[Robittybob1]

Looking at all the statements made on 4th May only two people mention Matthew's check at around 9pm; Matthew himself and Russell. There's no 'clearly' involved, the assertion of translation errors is based on no evidence whatsoever.

Isn't it true the Paynes also agree Matt was there up around the apartments at 9:00 PM

And Russell makes it clear he had only just arrived before the Paynes did.