CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[stephen25000]

If Kate and Gerry KNOW that they were not involved and they KNOW that Madeleine was incapable of opening the window and opening the shutter .. and also incapable of leaving the apartment by any of the routes mentioned why shouldn't they use the word "abducted"? 

Using ANY word BUT "abducted" is an invention of this forum + possibly other Mccann opposing forums. Everyone else uses the word.
SY use the word "abducted".   


They were doing half hour checks, even Amaral basically believes that.  Mrs Fenn was an old woman.  Most people of her age have hearing difficulties.  If she was more ddeaf in one ear than the other, she would,nt have a clue which direction the crying came from and there were other children adjacent and nearby.   
Had one of the Mccann children been crying that long and hard, all three would have been at it.  She only heard one.   Therefore it wasn't any of thev Mccann children IMHO

Chaplins Bar is another myth to beat The Mccanns with .... and pretend that they were a long way away

We ate there.  It is a restaurant, which was packed when we went there. 

The waiters and others say that The Mccanns ate every night in the Tapas restaurant, other than the first night when they ate at the Millenium.  With all due respect, you are listening to too many people who like to spread myths ... and watching too many HideHo videos


You are not thinking that Gerry was involved now are you Rob, because the way you have worded that sounds like you might be?

Seems Gerry probably met Jez in the middle of the road and started their chat there.  A vehicle was coming, so they backed the way the pram was pointing. that is to the kerb on the west side of the road.  THere were cars etc parked there (Stephen Carpenters statement) and they slotted themselves between them to protect themselves.   I cant see Jez still standing in the road if the pram was exposed to danger.


That is how I see it, but maybe it goes against YOUR theory cos I cant understand that you are not taking on board the fact that three lots of different people have very definitely pointed to Gerry and Jez being by the Alleyway.

IMO

You have no idea who was involved in Madeleine's disappearance, if anyone  was, of course.

Merely, your unsubstantiated pointers.

[G-Unit]

If Kate and Gerry KNOW that they were not involved and they KNOW that Madeleine was incapable of opening the window and opening the shutter .. and also incapable of leaving the apartment by any of the routes mentioned why shouldn't they use the word "abducted"? 

Using ANY word BUT "abducted" is an invention of this forum + possibly other Mccann opposing forums. Everyone else uses the word.
SY use the word "abducted".   


They were doing half hour checks, even Amaral basically believes that.  Mrs Fenn was an old woman.  Most people of her age have hearing difficulties.  If she was more ddeaf in one ear than the other, she would,nt have a clue which direction the crying came from and there were other children adjacent and nearby.   
Had one of the Mccann children been crying that long and hard, all three would have been at it.  She only heard one.   Therefore it wasn't any of thev Mccann children IMHO

Chaplins Bar is another myth to beat The Mccanns with .... and pretend that they were a long way away

We ate there.  It is a restaurant, which was packed when we went there. 

The waiters and others say that The Mccanns ate every night in the Tapas restaurant, other than the first night when they ate at the Millenium.  With all due respect, you are listening to too many people who like to spread myths ... and watching too many HideHo videos


You are not thinking that Gerry was involved now are you Rob, because the way you have worded that sounds like you might be?

Seems Gerry probably met Jez in the middle of the road and started their chat there.  A vehicle was coming, so they backed the way the pram was pointing. that is to the kerb on the west side of the road.  THere were cars etc parked there (Stephen Carpenters statement) and they slotted themselves between them to protect themselves.   I cant see Jez still standing in the road if the pram was exposed to danger.


That is how I see it, but maybe it goes against YOUR theory cos I cant understand that you are not taking on board the fact that three lots of different people have very definitely pointed to Gerry and Jez being by the Alleyway.

IMO

The important word in that first sentence is 'if' in my opinion.

[sadie]

The important word in that first sentence is 'if' in my opinion.

Of course they KNOW if they were involved ... and more than anyone else in the World, they KNOW if Madeleine was capable of doing all the things that some of you ascribe to her.  Because of her height and weight, she is mechanically disadvantaged to do several of the things that are ascribed to her.

[sadie]

You have no idea who was involved in Madeleine's disappearance, if anyone  was, of course.

Merely, your unsubstantiated pointers.

Well that answer came out of the blue.  Nothing to do with my post

[Benice]

Which is why Amaral was so suspicious when GM changed his story about which door he used to gain access to 5a.

If Gerry changing his statement about the doors was of any importance -  especially if it raised suspicions with the PJ  -  then surely the reason he gave for changing it would have been recorded in detail in his statement.      On the other hand if the reason was to correct a misunderstanding by the PJ officer or the interpreter - then IMO that may be something which the PJ may not have been particularly inclined to advertise IMO.   

However, there is no mention whatsoever of the reason Gerry gave - which imo Amaral has used to his own advantage in the same way he used the lack of a witness statement by JT to his own advantage when he wrongly claimed in his book that she had ''formally'' identified Murat as the man she saw on 3rd May.    She did no such thing - but the reason why he could say that she did -  was because there was no witness statement by JT to prove him wrong.    Similarly - there is no witness statement from Gerry giving his reason for correcting his previous statement to prevent Amaral from inferring that his change of statement was suspicious.

AIMHO

[faithlilly]

If Gerry changing his statement about the doors was of any importance -  especially if it raised suspicions with the PJ  -  then surely the reason he gave for changing it would have been recorded in detail in his statement.      On the other hand if the reason was to correct a misunderstanding by the PJ officer or the interpreter - then IMO that may be something which the PJ may not have been particularly inclined to advertise IMO.   

However, there is no mention whatsoever of the reason Gerry gave - which imo Amaral has used to his own advantage in the same way he used the lack of a witness statement by JT to his own advantage when he wrongly claimed in his book that she had ''formally'' identified Murat as the man she saw on 3rd May.    She did no such thing - but the reason why he could say that she did -  was because there was no witness statement by JT to prove him wrong.    Similarly - there is no witness statement from Gerry giving his reason for correcting his previous statement to prevent Amaral from inferring that his change of statement was suspicious.

AIMHO

This was the reason Gerry gave...'Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.'

Don't you think if it was the PJ/translator who had made a mistake Gerry would have said so ?

[Angelo222]

Is this image at this location https://youtu.be/atfDV7imHHY?t=683  suppose to represent Gerry and Jez talking on the opposite side of the road to Jane?
It has the word's "Jane Tanner's witness statement"  on it but Jane never said they were across the other side of the road.

The image at this spot is not accurate either as Jane describes the child as limp.  and here the legs are toned.  https://youtu.be/atfDV7imHHY?t=718

At https://youtu.be/atfDV7imHHY?t=761 they tell a new variation of the truth .  Matthew only had to look into his own and the McCann's not "all the children".
It shows Matt coming from the Tapas and then going into the McCann's apartment.  This is not the order described in his statement.  He does his apartment first in his statement.

https://youtu.be/atfDV7imHHY?t=800  Gerry: "At no point other than that night did I stick my head in..."
That is quite an admission don't you think?

Isn't it interesting that they would take part in a fictitional documentary controlled by their paid puppet yet never took part in an official reconstruction where the questions wouldn't have been so comfortable?

Once a detective establishes doubt in anyone's version of events he is entitled to pursue his suspicions further.

[pathfinder73]

If Gerry changing his statement about the doors was of any importance -  especially if it raised suspicions with the PJ  -  then surely the reason he gave for changing it would have been recorded in detail in his statement.      On the other hand if the reason was to correct a misunderstanding by the PJ officer or the interpreter - then IMO that may be something which the PJ may not have been particularly inclined to advertise IMO.   

However, there is no mention whatsoever of the reason Gerry gave - which imo Amaral has used to his own advantage in the same way he used the lack of a witness statement by JT to his own advantage when he wrongly claimed in his book that she had ''formally'' identified Murat as the man she saw on 3rd May.    She did no such thing - but the reason why he could say that she did -  was because there was no witness statement by JT to prove him wrong.    Similarly - there is no witness statement from Gerry giving his reason for correcting his previous statement to prevent Amaral from inferring that his change of statement was suspicious.

AIMHO

My theory: Gerry used his key on that check but that didn't tally with an unlocked patio door so it had to be changed. The key would be used for two reasons:

1. The patio door was in fact locked at that time.

2. The front key door became the nearest entrance. If so, how? My theory explains how it became the nearest entrance.

[sadie]

The path doesn't look too dark to me.  Haven't you already claimed that the patio and path were well lit by the street lamp?

NO LIGHTS along that alleyway Angello. 

referring to the white blobs that look like lights on your photo Angelo
 
 
I have magnified this photo x 200, but am unable to post the magnified image.  I see no lamps, or lights, on here
 


 Nor on this very clear image.  No lights (white blobs) on here
 

 
Getting dark and I see no sign of any lights along the alleyway here.  This image clearly shows how the Mccann apartment patio area was illuminated by the street lamp opposite
 

 
Pitch black down that Alleyway
 

 

Have magnified this x 300 and no signs of lighting here either
 

 
No lights visible here and a high wall an the left, the tapas side. 
I would think that the alleyway would be extremely dark at night.   I remember it as being totally dark
 


view from the balcony that i call the watchers balcony.   Allowing for perspective, see how much higher that alleyway wall is relative to the policeman.
 

It would be VERY dark along there and IMO no woman would feel safe walking along there on her own.
 
 
 
IMO, the photo you show has probably been photo-shopped, the white lighting has been added.   That is unless the lights are affixed to the alleyway wall on the tapas side.  I cant pick them out on Google earth.  If affixed there, they would cast no light over the walkway or the apartments.  Almost pitch black along that alleyway Angelo.  Creepy.
 
AIMHO
 
 

[pathfinder73]

Hard to see somebody on that road NOT. The evidence seems to indicate that Jane avoided Gerry and turned left (Jez was facing the side gate and Gerry facing him so they were not looking up or down the road) and took the other route back.

4078    “Okay. And what did you think of them at that stage?”

Reply    “Yeah they were nice, normal people, yeah you know, sort of, that’s the thing, I mean Gerry, the sort of person Gerry is, I could never see us being best buddies because he’s very, we’re very different. I think he’s very err he’s quite forthright and so I don’t think we’d ever be best friends but there’s no problem there or anything like that you know, I feel bad saying that because it makes it sound like there is a problem but there’s not but you know it’s not, whereas Kate I was really, I was getting to know Kate quite well but yeah I think Gerry is sort of like more of a man’s man maybe.”

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

[sadie]

Hard to see somebody on that road NOT. The evidence seems to indicate that Jane avoided Gerry and turned left (Jez was facing the side gate and Gerry facing him so they were not looking up or down the road) and took the other route back.

4078    “Okay. And what did you think of them at that stage?”

Reply    “Yeah they were nice, normal people, yeah you know, sort of, that’s the thing, I mean Gerry, the sort of person Gerry is, I could never see us being best buddies because he’s very, we’re very different. I think he’s very err he’s quite forthright and so I don’t think we’d ever be best friends but there’s no problem there or anything like that you know, I feel bad saying that because it makes it sound like there is a problem but there’s not but you know it’s not, whereas Kate I was really, I was getting to know Kate quite well but yeah I think Gerry is sort of like more of a man’s man maybe.”

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

If a big van such as the one that a man, whose name I forget, was sleeping in was one of the vehicles parked along there (Stephen Carpenters statement) and it was close and between that street lamp and Gerry and Jez, the area would be in shadow and pretty dark.

[pathfinder73]

If a big van such as the one that a man, whose name I forget, was sleeping in was one of the vehicles parked along there (Stephen Carpenters statement) and it was close and between that street lamp and Gerry and Jez, the area would be in shadow and pretty dark.

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”

Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised, because that would have obscured my view of the person walking, so I can’t think of, I can’t think of any, no”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

"I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm

[sadie]

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”

Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised, because that would have obscured my view of the person walking, so I can’t think of, I can’t think of any, no”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

"I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm

It was Stephen Carpenter who mentioned the cars

[Benice]

This was the reason Gerry gave...'Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.'

Don't you think if it was the PJ/translator who had made a mistake Gerry would have said so ?

How do we know that he didn't?     IMO he did - as he must have explained to the PJ  the reason WHY he wanted changes made to his previous statement.   That's just common sense.    The above statement is not verbatim and is only a summarised version   - so we have no idea of what discussion took place regarding this subject.   

I cannot believe that any police officer worth his salt would NOT have asked him for an explanation as to why he wanted to change his previous statement if Gerry had not already explained why.      The fact that his reason for wanting to change his statement is not recorded says it all IMO.

Re your first para above.  Those are the changes Gerry made, they do not give the reason why he made them.

AIMHO

.

[pathfinder73]

It was Stephen Carpenter who mentioned the cars

His wife heard somebody calling for Madeleine? What time did the Carpenters leave? Russell did not see any parked cars when he left to check at 21:25.

"I didn’t see any cars parked or anyone standing around or loitering."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm