UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Air Con on February 27, 2014, 10:23:22 PM
-
Posters don't want to admit that there are errors in the translation and then posts this...
According to her father, Madeleine had gone out twice through the south door on that day. In the morning to go to the creche and after lunch to go to the pool.
It might explain why Numi, who went inside of the flat, spent some time by the south door.
Are we really to believe that Gerry referred to the "south" door...this PROVES there are errors in the translations...particularly re the dooors
Here's a thought.
The definitive use of north and south doors in the paperwork is to define which door is which.
Such as:
GM: I entered through the front door.
PJ: The door on the south facing side of the building?
Not everyone refers to the entrance doors to their house as front and back. I don't.
By specifically referring to doors as north and south they are clarifying exactly which door is being spoken about.
-
Here's a thought.
The definitive use of north and south doors in the paperwork is to define which door is which.
Such as:
GM: I entered through the front door.
PJ: The door on the south facing side of the building?
Not everyone refers to the entrance doors to their house as front and back. I don't.
By specifically referring to doors as north and south they are clarifying exactly which door is being spoken about.
spin as much as you want ...Gerry never referred to the doors as north and south as anne has done ,,,translator errors
-
Here's a thought.
The definitive use of north and south doors in the paperwork is to define which door is which.
Such as:
GM: I entered through the front door.
PJ: The door on the south facing side of the building?
Not everyone refers to the entrance doors to their house as front and back. I don't.
By specifically referring to doors as north and south they are clarifying exactly which door is being spoken about.
Yes, especially if one of them isn't even... a door.
-
spin as much as you want ...Gerry never referred to the doors as north and south as anne has done ,,,translator errors
Read my post again.
Where did I say that GM refers to the doors as being north and south?
I merely said that it may have been done to clarify which door he was talking about as not all people refer to the entrances to their houses as being the front and back door. I don't.
-
In the UK the main doors into a house or flat are usually called front doors.
-
They could call them anything, as long as they clarify which is which.
In this case, the PJ refer to the Front door as the street side door and the back door as the sliding, resort side door.
Quite simple. Even Gerry and Kate agree with the terminology.
There is no problem or confusion unless you wish to change the terminology to suit yourself.
-
In the UK the main doors into a house or flat are usually called front doors.
And there's the quandary.
A lot of housing developments are designed to look nice from the road they front and will have only a small access path across them.
The main access to the houses will be at the back where there will be communal parking and garages etc. These access doors will be the main ones.
So, which is the front door? The one that looks like it's on the front of the house or the one, which you say is more commonly used, is at the back where you park the car.
That could easily be the reason for the clarification of front/back to north/south.
-
And there's the quandary.
A lot of housing developments are designed to look nice from the road they front and will have only a small access path across them.
The main access to the houses will be at the back where there will be communal parking and garages etc. These access doors will be the main ones.
So, which is the front door? The one that looks like it's on the front of the house or the one, which you say is more commonly used, is at the back where you park the car.
That could easily be the reason for the clarification of front/back to north/south.
The front door and the front garden are positioned at the main entrance at a house.
-
For crying out loud.....it is quite clear which door Gerry was referring to when he said he entered using his key because it was locked....the front door/north door/brown wooden door/the door with the big round handle...it so obviously was NOT the patio door which HAS NO KEY to enter with!
No translation errors whatsoever!
-
The front door and the front garden are positioned at the main entrance at a house.
But you clearly stated that the front door is the one that is used as the primary access. Which is not my belief.
Obviously your experience at owning your own architectural design practice usurps mine so I'll have to bow to your greater experience.
-
But you clearly stated that the front door is the one that is used as the primary access. Which is not my belief.
Obviously your experience at owning your own architectural design practice usurps mine so I'll have to bow to your greater experience.
@)(++(*
-
For crying out loud.....it is quite clear which door Gerry was referring to when he said he entered using his key because it was locked....the front door/north door/brown wooden door/the door with the big round handle...it so obviously was NOT the patio door which HAS NO KEY to enter with!
No translation errors whatsoever!
ROFL
-
But you clearly stated that the front door is the one that is used as the primary access. Which is not my belief.
Obviously your experience at owning your own architectural design practice usurps mine so I'll have to bow to your greater experience.
In the UK it is only front door and the garden door, garden door being on the back of the house with the back garden.. so in the case of 5A the front door is the one with the key and the back door is the one with sliding doors.. ie. patio doors.
I am sorry OP, I apologise if I was too harsh!
-
Block 5 has all main access doors on the north side and all lounges on the south side.
This is optimal design given the sun direction and the slope.
Traditionally in the UK, lounge and main access door are at same end, so some UK peeps cant get head around them being at opposite ends ;)
-
For crying out loud.....it is quite clear which door Gerry was referring to when he said he entered using his key because it was locked....the front door/north door/brown wooden door/the door with the big round handle...it so obviously was NOT the patio door which HAS NO KEY to enter with!
No translation errors whatsoever!
Wonderful, Red!
-
You have to realise that the south door isn't a door (in Portuguese a door-window) since you can't open it from both sides. The mechanism to open it isn't as simple as pulling the latch of the door lock.
Patio door and internal locking mechanism.
Simple press-button lock.
(http://i.imgur.com/9xy0iee.jpg?1)
-
For crying out loud.....it is quite clear which door Gerry was referring to when he said he entered using his key because it was locked....the front door/north door/brown wooden door/the door with the big round handle...it so obviously was NOT the patio door which HAS NO KEY to enter with!
No translation errors whatsoever!
I don't think that a translation error is likely, either. However, there could easily have been confusion between a description of the apartment and which door was front or back.
I would find it quite extraordinary if the first witness (just hours after the event) wouldn't have been asked to give a general layout of the flat (but that doesn't appear in the statement, quite possibly because it wasn't verbatim). The easiest thing for both the police officer and the interpreter would be to make a quick sketch (as scribbled notes
or mentally) so that they could follow what Gerry was saying. If one or the other had already noted that the front door required a key, it really isn't that difficult to get mixed up between front and back. The statement wasn't verbatim.
I can't think of any plausible reason why Gerry would have said that he'd taken the long way round, yet state that he had gone out via the unlocked veranda door (correction: he didn't state which door he'd gone out from in his first statement) and that Matt had gone in and out via the unlocked veranda in the same statement, and Kate (the next witness) only stated going in and out via the same veranda door.
Initial lost-in-understanding seems far more likely to me. In any case, the issue was eventually spotted and cleared up in Gerry's subsequent interview.
-
I don't think that a translation error is likely, either. However, there could easily have been confusion between a description of the apartment and which door was front or back.
I would find it quite extraordinary if the first witness (just hours after the event) wouldn't have been asked to give a general layout of the flat (but that doesn't appear in the statement, quite possibly because it wasn't verbatim). The easiest thing for both the police officer and the interpreter would be to make a quick sketch (as scribbled notes
or mentally) so that they could follow what Gerry was saying. If one or the other had already noted that the front door required a key, it really isn't that difficult to get mixed up between front and back. The statement wasn't verbatim.
I can't think of any plausible reason why Gerry would have said that he'd taken the long way round, yet state that he had gone out via the unlocked veranda door and that Matt had gone in and out via the unlocked veranda in the same statement, and Kate (the next witness) only stated going in and out via the same veranda door.
Initial lost-in-understanding seems far more likely to me. In any case, the issue was eventually spotted and cleared up in Gerry's subsequent interview.
Spin it any way you want.
I would imagine both police and interpreters know the difference between the two types of doors! and which one is entered using a key and which one isn't.
-
Spin it any way you want.
I would imagine both police and interpreters know the difference between the two types of doors! and which one is entered using a key and which one isn't.
I'm not spinning anything, Red. I find confusion that morning entirely plausible, between a distraught and exhausted dad, an officer who would not necessarily have been familiar with the layout and someone who had been called in at short notice to help interpret.
Would you exclude potential confusion?
-
I'm not spinning anything, Red. I find confusion that morning entirely plausible, between a distraught and exhausted dad, an officer who would not necessarily have been familiar with the layout and someone who had been called in at short notice to help interpret.
Would you exclude potential confusion?
The question, the only one, is "why do you include it ?".
You don't admit that two Portuguese speakers, the police officer and the interpreter, designated the south issue as a door-window (signed statement in Portuguese), i.e not a proper door. Curious.
You don't admit that it is a floor length window , the name of it in English being "French window". Curious.
You don't admit that this sort of layout is common in Portugal where the notion of "back door" doesn't exist. Curious.
In big villas and flats, there used to be a "service door", reserved to employees.
Finally you insist that "with his key" could be some "add in translation". @)(++(*
-
Spin it any way you want.
I would imagine both police and interpreters know the difference between the two types of doors! and which one is entered using a key and which one isn't.
Mr McCann had certainly a reason for saying he entered through the door with his key, a very normal act that any of us does daily.
About the French window being slightly open, after all we just have the McCann word for it (and Mr Oldfield's who exemplarily demonstrated that he had a strange idea of the McCann kids bedroom). If we believe Mrs Payne, this French window had been left open to let Madeleine go out in case she'd wake up and look for her parents.
-
I can't think of any plausible reason why Gerry would have said that he'd taken the long way round, yet state that he had gone out via the unlocked veranda door
You don't find plausible that Mr McCann said "he took the long way round, yet stated that he had gone went out via the unlocked veranda door", but he never said this, Carana ! Read :
at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, went to his children's bedroom and checked that the twins were fine, as was Madeleine. "He then went to the WC" where he remained for a few moments, left, and bumped into a person he had played tennis
1) Mr McCann says clearly he entered using a key.
2) He's not suggesting he used another issue to get out.
3) You don't mention it, but Mr McCann said clearly that his wife had entered the flat with the key, as well.
-
The question, the only one, is "why do you include it ?".
You don't admit that two Portuguese speakers, the police officer and the interpreter, designated the south issue as a door-window (signed statement in Portuguese), i.e not a proper door. Curious.
You don't admit that it is a floor length window , the name of it in English being "French window". Curious.
You don't admit that this sort of layout is common in Portugal where the notion of "back door" doesn't exist. Curious.
In big villas and flats, there used to be a "service door", reserved to employees.
Finally you insist that "with his key" could be some "add in translation". @)(++(*
Thanks for answering better than I could
Indeed, "add in translation"rather than "lost in translation"here
-
I'm not spinning anything, Red. I find confusion that morning entirely plausible, between a distraught and exhausted dad, an officer who would not necessarily have been familiar with the layout and someone who had been called in at short notice to help interpret.
Would you exclude potential confusion?
I'm convinced it was as a result of an early misunderstanding about which doors were used - and that misunderstanding carried on throughout the interview unnoticed at the time. If it was a deliberate lie by Gerry -then why would he want the PJ to think he taken the long way round? What did he have to gain by claiming that ? Not a thing from what I can see. He'd already said that they had left through the unlocked patio doors - and that's how MO had entered 5a.
IMO there is no credible reason why GM should purposely walk past a door a mere few feet away -giving him access to 5a- and instead choose to walk up the hill, round the corner, over the car park and back down the path in front of the apartments to achieve the exactly same thing. i.e. entry into 5A. - especially if he intended to use the bathroom?
It makes no sense whatsoever for him to do that - and the fact that the interviewing officer did not ask GM WHY he would do something so inexplicable also convinces me that he wasn't au fait with the layout of 5a or the surrounding area during that very first interview. If he had been familiar then he would have realised straightaway how strange it would be for Gerry to have done that - and he would have asked him for an explanation - and it would have been at that point that the confusion was cleared up. imo. But it's clear that he didn't ask GM that glaringly obvious question.
I also think it's possible that when writing up the summary - the officer may have chosen to make reference to ''the key' of his own volition to clarify in his report which door he quite genuinely thought GM was referring to at that time.
All IMHO.
-
I'm convinced it was as a result of an early misunderstanding about which doors were used - and that misunderstanding carried on throughout the interview unnoticed at the time. If it was a deliberate lie by Gerry -then why would he want the PJ to think he taken the long way round? What did he have to gain by claiming that ? Not a thing from what I can see. He'd already said that they had left through the unlocked patio doors - and that's how MO had entered 5a.
IMO there is no credible reason why GM should purposely walk past a door a mere few feet away -giving him access to 5a- and instead choose to walk up the hill, round the corner, over the car park and back down the path in front of the apartments to achieve the exactly same thing. i.e. entry into 5A. - especially if he intended to use the bathroom?
It makes no sense whatsoever for him to do that - and the fact that the interviewing officer did not ask GM WHY he would do something so inexplicable also convinces me that he wasn't au fait with the layout of 5a or the surrounding area during that very first interview. If he had been familiar then he would have realised straightaway how strange it would be for Gerry to have done that - and he would have asked him for an explanation - and it would have been at that point that the confusion was cleared up. imo. But it's clear that he didn't ask GM that glaringly obvious question.
I also think it's possible that when writing up the summary - the officer may have chosen to make reference to ''the key' of his own volition to clarify in his report which door he quite genuinely thought GM was referring to at that time.
All IMHO.
Trying to spread a collective belief ? Using the pretext that it "made no sense" to go the long way when the short one is available ?
But what if Mr McCann didn't lie when he said he entered through the door with his key, but didn't say the truth about Mr Oldfield (who wasn't given any key) entering through the open French window?
Pretending that Mr McCann's incoherences betray the mistakes of the PJ and the interpreter sounds very much like a conspiracy theory..
-
Trying to spread a collective belief ? Using the pretext that it "made no sense" to go the long way when the short one is available ?
But what if Mr McCann didn't lie when he said he entered through the door with his key, but didn't say the truth about Mr Oldfield (who wasn't given any key) entering through the open French window?
Pretending that Mr McCann's incoherences betray the mistakes of the PJ and the interpreter sounds very much like a conspiracy theory..
So why do you think GM lied about which door he used? What did he have to gain by trying to convince the PJ that he used the front door? What was his motive for doing that?
It's not a sin for anyone to make mistakes. No-one is perfect - even PJ officers and interpretors.
-
I'm convinced it was as a result of an early misunderstanding about which doors were used - and that misunderstanding carried on throughout the interview unnoticed at the time. If it was a deliberate lie by Gerry -then why would he want the PJ to think he taken the long way round? What did he have to gain by claiming that ? Not a thing from what I can see. He'd already said that they had left through the unlocked patio doors - and that's how MO had entered 5a.
IMO there is no credible reason why GM should purposely walk past a door a mere few feet away -giving him access to 5a- and instead choose to walk up the hill, round the corner, over the car park and back down the path in front of the apartments to achieve the exactly same thing. i.e. entry into 5A. - especially if he intended to use the bathroom?
It makes no sense whatsoever for him to do that - and the fact that the interviewing officer did not ask GM WHY he would do something so inexplicable also convinces me that he wasn't au fait with the layout of 5a or the surrounding area during that very first interview. If he had been familiar then he would have realised straightaway how strange it would be for Gerry to have done that - and he would have asked him for an explanation - and it would have been at that point that the confusion was cleared up. imo. But it's clear that he didn't ask GM that glaringly obvious question.
I also think it's possible that when writing up the summary - the officer may have chosen to make reference to ''the key' of his own volition to clarify in his report which door he quite genuinely thought GM was referring to at that time.
All IMHO.
No, this is his first statement, he never said in that he left through the patio doors!
As for mentioning Matt using the patio door, how do you know something didnt click in his mind midstream the statement and say that! It was after all a lengthy process, and he had time to think out implications if he wanted to add in that the patio door was open after all. GMs mind as we all know is faster than his mouth can keep up with.
As for the PJ officer doing a summary and adding use of a key, thats ridiculous, no PJ officer did any summary, witnesses words were translated by translators, recorded, read back to the witnesses in English and then signed. Why on earth would any police officer add anythng just because he thought that is probably what someone meant! listen to yourself. Its barrel scraping time again. lets face it you have no idea whatsoever what is the truth and why GM or anyone else would say what they did say. But do carry on the apologising and blame shifting.
All IMO of course
-
So why do you think GM lied about which door he used? What did he have to gain by trying to convince the PJ that he used the front door? What was his motive for doing that?
It's not a sin for anyone to make mistakes. No-one is perfect - even PJ officers and interpretors.
I don't think he lied, Benice, in his first statement, about the door he used.
I think the Oldfield only occurred for the sake of regular checks.
Mr McCann was exhausted, physically and emotionally, yes, hence the incoherence.
The golden and universal rule is that the first statement has more chances to be close to reality than any of the following ones.
-
pls dont say north window, some will say well, unless you draw a birds eye picture for the police, no one can know what youre talking about
@)(++(*
"Front bedroom" or "Back bedroom" are ambiguous as they depend on fluid opinions of what front and back mean.
"Child bedroom" or "Adult bedroom" are ambiguous because some tourists may use the north bedroom for adults and the south bedroom for children, the bedrooms are not labelled.
In this particular apartment, "North bedroom" and "South bedroom" are the accurate method to describe which bedroom unambiguously.
-
"Front bedroom" or "Back bedroom" are ambiguous as they depend on fluid opinions of what front and back mean.
"Child bedroom" or "Adult bedroom" are ambiguous because some tourists may use the north bedroom for adults and the south bedroom for children, the bedrooms are not labelled.
In this particular apartment, "North bedroom" and "South bedroom" are the accurate method to describe which bedroom unambiguously.
I agree with that. Nothing predisposes the south bedroom to be the parents' one, actually it's strange they didn't chose that one to be able to hear better an eventual crying.
-
I don't think he lied, Benice, in his first statement, about the door he used.
I think the Oldfield only occurred for the sake of regular checks.
Mr McCann was exhausted, physically and emotionally, yes, hence the incoherence.
The golden and universal rule is that the first statement has more chances to be close to reality than any of the following ones.
I would agree with that Anne if it wasn't for the fact that the language barrier presented the distinct possibility of genuine misunderstandings occurring between 3 people. Especially, during the very first interview when everything was unfamiliar and new to everyone involved and GM was still in the first traumatic throes of every parent's worst nightmare - and IMO would have been finding it very difficult to concentrate.
-
No, this is his first statement, he never said in that he left through the patio doors!
As for mentioning Matt using the patio door, how do you know something didnt click in his mind midstream the statement and say that! It was after all a lengthy process, and he had time to think out implications if he wanted to add in that the patio door was open after all. GMs mind as we all know is faster than his mouth can keep up with.
As for the PJ officer doing a summary and adding use of a key, thats ridiculous, no PJ officer did any summary, witnesses words were translated by translators, recorded, read back to the witnesses in English and then signed. Why on earth would any police officer add anythng just because he thought that is probably what someone meant! listen to yourself. Its barrel scraping time again. lets face it you have no idea whatsoever what is the truth and why GM or anyone else would say what they did say. But do carry on the apologising and blame shifting.
All IMO of course
If the statements had been recorded, what was actually said would be clear. Some people are saying that they were, in which case, why not present verbatim transcriptions?
I just double-checked on a detail, you're right that he didn't specify which door he walked out of in his first statement. However, it was underlined that the patio door was never locked and that there is where Matt entered and left.
If there was no misunderstanding, why does the statement mention a lateral entrance??
-
The question, the only one, is "why do you include it ?".
You don't admit that two Portuguese speakers, the police officer and the interpreter, designated the south issue as a door-window (signed statement in Portuguese), i.e not a proper door. Curious.
You don't admit that it is a floor length window , the name of it in English being "French window". Curious.
You don't admit that this sort of layout is common in Portugal where the notion of "back door" doesn't exist. Curious.
In big villas and flats, there used to be a "service door", reserved to employees.
Finally you insist that "with his key" could be some "add in translation". @)(++(*
Whether it's a solid wooden door, or a sliding glass door, they are both entrances. Was the orientation of north-south established in that first interview? If so, and if all the details were clear, why does the statement mention a lateral entrance without specifying what it was lateral to?
-
If the statements had been recorded, what was actually said would be clear. Some people are saying that they were, in which case, why not present verbatim transcriptions?
I just double-checked on a detail, you're right that he didn't specify which door he walked out of in his first statement. However, it was underlined that the patio door was never locked and that there is where Matt entered and left.
If there was no misunderstanding, why does the statement mention a lateral entrance??
Yes, it would be crazy for someone to lie about the door they entered by, to make it seem like the apartment was secure against a child wandering out or an intruder entering, but then in same statement to say oh BTW the lounge patio door was not locked.
IMO these two 4th May statements are likely to be wrongly transcribed.
-
This door lark is becoming like Jim Bowen's famous "Come and have a look at what you would have won".
Which door would Matt and Gerry have gone through had they gone through a door?
Then mistranslations etc. A large number of mainland Europeans speak English. Most Brits don't speak English any too well let alone a foreign language then judge all others by themselves. imo of course. 8(>(( Err.... f***ing tosser innit.
-
Yes, it would be crazy for someone to lie about the door they entered by, to make it seem like the apartment was secure against a child wandering out or an intruder entering, but then in same statement to say oh BTW the lounge patio door was not locked.
IMO these two 4th May statements are likely to be wrongly transcribed.
I find it quite plausible that there was a lost-in-comprehension issue in Gerry's 4 May statement. It was the first interview, Gerry had had only a couple of hours rest, the PJ officer would not necessarily have received a report about the layout of the apartment from the officers who were there in the early hours of the morning and there's no reason to suppose that the lady who served as an interpreter had any prior knowledge either.
-
Yes, it would be crazy for someone to lie about the door they entered by, to make it seem like the apartment was secure against a child wandering out or an intruder entering, but then in same statement to say oh BTW the lounge patio door was not locked.
IMO these two 4th May statements are likely to be wrongly transcribed.
Maybe he got confused if both northside and southside (bedroom window door) entrances were used. Only one door uses a key to enter i.e. the northside front door not the southside back patio door.
-
I find it quite plausible that there was a lost-in-comprehension issue in Gerry's 4 May statement. It was the first interview, Gerry had had only a couple of hours rest, the PJ officer would not necessarily have received a report about the layout of the apartment from the officers who were there in the early hours of the morning and there's no reason to suppose that the lady who served as an interpreter had any prior knowledge either.
@)(++(*
And the sceptics who believe that signed statements are genuine are part of the conspiracy...
ROFL !
-
The question, the only one, is "why do you include it ?".
You don't admit that two Portuguese speakers, the police officer and the interpreter, designated the south issue as a door-window (signed statement in Portuguese), i.e not a proper door. Curious.
You don't admit that it is a floor length window , the name of it in English being "French window". Curious.
You don't admit that this sort of layout is common in Portugal where the notion of "back door" doesn't exist. Curious.
In big villas and flats, there used to be a "service door", reserved to employees.
Finally you insist that "with his key" could be some "add in translation". @)(++(*
door
noun, often attributive \ˈdȯr\
: a movable piece of wood, glass, or metal that swings or slides open and shut so that people can enter or leave a room, building, vehicle, etc.
: a part of an object (such as piece of furniture or an appliance) that swings or slides open and shut
: the opening for a door : the entrance to a room or building
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/door
-
IMO these two 4th May statements are likely to be wrongly transcribed.
@)(++(*
Like Mrs Fenn's !
Like all the elements that led the MP to ask for a reconstitution... instead of just erasing them for being faulty !
ROFL !
-
door
noun, often attributive \ˈdȯr\
: a movable piece of wood, glass, or metal that swings or slides open and shut so that people can enter or leave a room, building, vehicle, etc.
: a part of an object (such as piece of furniture or an appliance) that swings or slides open and shut
: the opening for a door : the entrance to a room or building
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/door
@)(++(*
How do people enter when the French window is shut ?
-
Whether it's a solid wooden door, or a sliding glass door, they are both entrances.
No, and it has nothing to do with the material.
Why did they (say) they left it open ? What would happen if they had shut it ?
-
There are 3 external doors (openings you can walk through).
- in the hall, the lounge, and the south bedroom.
There are 4 external windows (openings you can not walk through).
- in the north bedroom, the kitchen, and two in the living area
-
This door lark is becoming like Jim Bowen's famous "Come and have a look at what you would have won".
Which door would Matt and Gerry have gone through had they gone through a door?
Then mistranslations etc. A large number of mainland Europeans speak English. Most Brits don't speak English any too well let alone a foreign language then judge all others by themselves. imo of course. 8(>(( Err.... f***ing tosser innit.
8)--))
This is gotten sooo ridiculous.....instead of people answering the question why Gerry said he used A KEY, (not forgettitng saying his wife did too) which only opens ONE DOOR, and a point many are avoiding, we have reams of posts about him not having much sleep, PJ deciding to add to his statements to clarify "what they thought he meant", dictionary definitions of what the word door means, clarifications about what doors or windows you can and cant walk through, imaginations and presumptions about local police needing a sketch of the flat before they understood any word being spoken, police and interpreters being "confused", much ado about northside, southside, side aways , things lost in translation etc etc etc
End of the day statement was signed after being read back to him in English
Wheres the Hedex?
Im out of this little Shakespearean debacle of much ado about nothing and protesting too much
@)(++(*
-
8)--))
This is gotten sooo ridiculous.....instead of people answering the question why Gerry said he used A KEY, (not forgettitng saying his wife did too) which only opens ONE DOOR, and a point many are avoiding, we have reams of posts about him not having much sleep, PJ deciding to add to his statements to clarify "what they thought he meant", dictionary definitions of what the word door means, clarifications about what doors or windows you can and cant walk through, imaginations and presumptions about local police needing a sketch of the flat before they understood any word being spoken, police and interpreters being "confused", much ado about northside, southside, side aways , things lost in translation etc etc etc
End of the day statement was signed after being read back to him in English
Wheres the Hedex?
Im out of this little Shakespearean debacle of much ado about nothing and protesting too much
@)(++(*
But Gerry doesn't know what was then written down in Portuguese...he only has the translators word for it
-
Ah so the translators wrote down one thing but read out another, to trick Gerry Mccann into signing something he didnt say, ie that entered the flat using his key, evil conspiratorial people I agree
8-)(--)
Out of this thread!!!
-
Ah so the translators wrote down one thing but read out another, to trick Gerry Mccann into signing something he didnt say, ie that entered the flat using his key, evil conspiratorial people I agree
8-)(--)
Out of this thread!!!
No one tricked anyone and no one lied...you are unwilling to accept reality and that is that people make mistakes
-
@)(++(*
And the sceptics who believe that signed statements are genuine are part of the conspiracy...
ROFL !
There are so many conspiracy theories that I'm not sure which one you are referring to.
All I'm trying to say is that I find it totally plausible that there could have been confusion in Gerry's initial interview. I can't think of any plausible reason why he would have said that he'd gone to the front door (i.e. the long way), particularly when he needed a pee and said in the same statement that Matt had gone in and out via the unlocked veranda glass sliding door. This same phrasing was used in the noted response as to how Kate had got in and out, yet, Kate, the second witness that day, clearly stated which entrance she had used.
-
No one tricked anyone and no one lied...you are unwilling to accept reality and that is that people make mistakes
So why did you say Gerry only had the translators word for it before he signed, what WERE you insinuating! You need to flesh out your arguments and accusations so people can actually understand what you actually MEAN.
Off you go and do so now, I might read for humour purposes obviously but wont be responding on this waste of time thread any more.
-
So why did you say Gerry only had the translators word for it before he signed, what WERE you insinuating! You need to flesh out your arguments and accusations so people can actually understand what you actually MEAN.
Off you go and do so now, I might read for humour purposes obviously but wont be responding on this waste of time thread any more.
Its quite simple...Gerry only had the translators word for what was written down...he signed because he was not concerned...at that point he was not arguido.....I'm fairly sure non of those statements could be used against Gerry in court because he had not been "cautioned"
-
There are 3 external doors (openings you can walk through).
- in the hall, the lounge, and the south bedroom.
There are 4 external windows (openings you can not walk through).
- in the north bedroom, the kitchen, and two in the living area
@)(++(*
Now a door is an opening you can walk through ! I hope your door isn't of that type, Pegasus!
-
There are so many conspiracy theories that I'm not sure which one you are referring to.
All I'm trying to say is that I find it totally plausible that there could have been confusion in Gerry's initial interview. I can't think of any plausible reason why he would have said that he'd gone to the front door (i.e. the long way), particularly when he needed a pee and said in the same statement that Matt had gone in and out via the unlocked veranda glass sliding door. This same phrasing was used in the noted response as to how Kate had got in and out, yet, Kate, the second witness that day, clearly stated which entrance she had used.
This is typical of conspiracy adepts. Would Mrs McCann confess she killed Madeleine unintentionally, you'll certain say that she was not in her right mind when she confessed.
@)(++(*
-
wont be responding on this waste of time thread any more.
I hope so.
-
What a load of crap.
There was no "lost in translation" in this case!!!!!
Gerry changed his story! End of!
Oh and everyone might ask themselves why they wanted us to believe Tanner also went the long way for her "check" - who would voluntarily "nip out before the starters" and take the long way????
No one!
But it HAD to be that way to account for Tannerman!
-
the bizarre theories posted on here have a serious flaw...Gerry carried out the perfect crime...left no forensic evidence...fooled SY...but didn't manage to get his story straight in his statments...translation errors...100%
-
@)(++(*
Now a door is an opening you can walk through ! I hope your door isn't of that type, Pegasus!
A door even if it is 90% glazed is still a door.
-
A door even if it is 90% glazed is still a door.
Since you walk through glass, this is a door ! I wonder what Alice would have thought of that looking one.
-
The general idea applied with great success by most people experienced in these matters is to open the door before walking through the resulting opening ;)
-
Gerry's second statement -Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.
Not a translation error then!
-
Another informative little titbit concerning the patio doors... when the preferred entry for the abductor was via the bedroom window, Gerry stated this -He mentions that they were seated at the table, in a position that allowed the deponent to see almost the entire back door of his apartment, through which they left and entered and which gave access to the living room.
On having to review their preferred means of entry for the abductor to the patio doors Kate states this -She makes a sketch of the table and says that both she and Gerry were not facing the apartments. Sketch attached.
-
Gerry's second statement -Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.
Not a translation error then!
No - a misunderstanding about doors IMO.
Unless of course, someone can come up with the reason why GM would want the PJ to think that he deliberately ignored the unlocked patio door - a mere few feet away - and decided for some inexplicable reason to take the much longer route - to achieve exactly the same goal - i.e. simply to enter 5A.
What would be his explanation for doing that - when he'd already stated that the patio door was unlocked?
I notice another 'clue' in GMs statement from the PJ officer which indicates to me that confusion had probably occurred over the doors - and where they were situated.
Quote
The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked.
Unquote.
What side door? There are none.
The fact that confusion over the doors had previously occurred is mentioned by the UK police officer during JT's rogatory interview is also very pertinent IMO.
-
I find it quite plausible that there was a lost-in-comprehension issue in Gerry's 4 May statement. It was the first interview, Gerry had had only a couple of hours rest, the PJ officer would not necessarily have received a report about the layout of the apartment from the officers who were there in the early hours of the morning and there's no reason to suppose that the lady who served as an interpreter had any prior knowledge either.
I quite agree Carana. And IMO there's no reason to suppose that the interpreter had previous experience of a Glaswegian accent either. Or that misunderstandings could have occurred if her own accent was strong.
IMO The language barrier, coupled with unfamiliar different cultures - was always a huge obstacle - from the POV of both sides - in this case.
-
I quite agree Carana. And IMO there's no reason to suppose that the interpreter had previous experience of a Glaswegian accent either. Or that misunderstandings could have occurred if her own accent was strong.
IMO The language barrier, coupled with unfamiliar different cultures - was always a huge obstacle - from the POV of both sides - in this case.
As I have said before it is absolutely ridiculous to claim that there are no errors in the translations...we just don't know how many
-
No - a misunderstanding about doors IMO.
Unless of course, someone can come up with the reason why GM would want the PJ to think that he deliberately ignored the unlocked patio door - a mere few feet away - and decided for some inexplicable reason to take the much longer route - to achieve exactly the same goal - i.e. simply to enter 5A.
What would be his explanation for doing that - when he'd already stated that the patio door was unlocked?
I notice another 'clue' in GMs statement from the PJ officer which indicates to me that confusion had probably occurred over the doors - and where they were situated.
Quote
The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked.
Unquote.
What side door? There are none.
The fact that confusion over the doors had previously occurred is mentioned by the UK police officer during JT's rogatory interview is also very pertinent IMO.
You have to factor in that in Gerry's mind at the time of his interview was that the claim of the unlocked patiodoors was purely for the use of Mathew to enable a 9.30 check without seeing what due to Tanner's sighting would have been an open bedroom window... that Smith sighting of Gerry has caused them no end of problems!
-
This is typical of conspiracy adepts. Would Mrs McCann confess she killed Madeleine unintentionally, you'll certain say that she was not in her right mind when she confessed.
@)(++(*
As regards a confession, not necessarily. My opinion would depend on the totality of facts and circumstances.
Concerning potential errors, there are several reasons why I find mistakes in the original statement plausible.
- The inevitable chaos of that first morning;
- The urgent nature of getting the ball rolling as fast as possible to mobilise the search to actually find her. At that point, even if he had noticed what may have appeared to be minute accuracies, spending ages trying to correct them would have been less important than getting that ball rolling;
- The fact that I find it inconceivable that questions hadn't been asked about the layout of the apartment, even though they don't appear in the statement. A scribbled sketch or notes would have helped to make sense of what he was saying. There is therefore room to note that one door required a key to get in, the other was open and to simply get back and front doors mixed up when typing up the report.
- Personal experience, albeit in thankfully less dramatic circumstances. I'd had everything stolen, including photographic equipment and - more importantly - my passport. Despite the fact that a friend acted as an interpreter, I just assumed that the officer in a sleepy local police station had taken the details down accurately. I was in a rush, and when the document was presented to me, my friend pointed out the main details; I could decipher "passport" and the make of the gear and signed on the dotted line.
It wasn't until quite some time later, when I understood the language better and happened to stumble upon and read the statement for myself, that I realised that numerous (ultimately irrelevant) details bore no resemblance to what I had actually relayed to my friend. My friend spoke both languages fluently and had been with me at the time of the incident (unlike the interpreter on that first morning), so I doubt that the error came from that person.
-
Gerry's second statement -Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.
Not a translation error then!
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Closed versus locked? If you close a door but can open it without it a key, it is simply closed. If you need a key to open it from the outside, then it is locked. Apparently, the front door required a key to open it, therefore it could be considered as locked. However, if the concept of locking a door of this type is understood as dead-locking it, then there is also room for confusion depending on whether you simply shut it or used a key.
-
You have to factor in that in Gerry's mind at the time of his interview was that the claim of the unlocked patio doors was purely for the use of Mathew to enable a 9.30 check without seeing what due to Tanner's sighting would have been an open bedroom window... that Smith sighting of Gerry has caused them no end of problems!
And Madeleine was seen wearing long sleeves and not short ones by the Smiths. 2 people know where Madeleine really is. Without a confession things are hard - maybe they should get tough and ask for a lie detector test for the tapas 9 and promote it in the media anyone who refuses to take one.
1. You changed that door position to promote an abductor didn't you? (starts scratching ear)
2. The patio door had to be unlocked at 9.30 because Madeleine had already been moved out of the apartment. Isn't that the truth?
3. You moved Madeleine out of the apartment on your check?
-
Another informative little titbit concerning the patio doors... when the preferred entry for the abductor was via the bedroom window, Gerry stated this -He mentions that they were seated at the table, in a position that allowed the deponent to see almost the entire back door of his apartment, through which they left and entered and which gave access to the living room.
On having to review their preferred means of entry for the abductor to the patio doors Kate states this -She makes a sketch of the table and says that both she and Gerry were not facing the apartments. Sketch attached.
Again, a verbatim record of the interview might have helped to clarify this. What did he actually say? "I", or "we"? Why would he have said "I", when all the other members of the group, plus the restaurant staff and the other guests could have given statements to contradict his own view of the apartment? If any of the group had looked up and had seen an unexpected shadowy figure entering via the veranda door, they would have alerted Kate and Gerry.
-
You have to factor in that in Gerry's mind at the time of his interview was that the claim of the unlocked patiodoors was purely for the use of Mathew to enable a 9.30 check without seeing what due to Tanner's sighting would have been an open bedroom window... that Smith sighting of Gerry has caused them no end of problems!
I'm not following your logic, I'm afraid.
-
It wasn't until quite some time later, when I understood the language better and happened to stumble upon and read the statement for myself, that I realised that numerous (ultimately irrelevant) details bore no resemblance to what I had actually relayed to my friend. My friend spoke both languages fluently and had been with me at the time of the incident (unlike the interpreter on that first morning), so I doubt that the error came from that person.
How are you sure that the officer who attended you in Portimao was the same who attended Mr McCann ?
Don't you think that a story about the disappearance of a child is heard more carefully in the details than the report about a stolen camera ? You got what you needed to go to the British Consulate and have a document to substitute your passport.
-
You have to factor in that in Gerry's mind at the time of his interview was that the claim of the unlocked patiodoors was purely for the use of Mathew to enable a 9.30 check without seeing what due to Tanner's sighting would have been an open bedroom window... that Smith sighting of Gerry has caused them no end of problems!
Sorry - I'm not sure what your point is.
You still have to explain why Gerry would choose to walk past the unlocked patio door - and take the much longer route to enter 5A - when he could just nip up the steps and be in 5A in seconds. That makes no sense.
Why would he go the long way round?
-
Again, a verbatim record of the interview might have helped to clarify
There was none, the PJ needed practical informations to look better for an abducted child and not to frame staging parents (in spite of what conspiracy adepts believe).
Sempiternally come back on this topic is vain.
What is interesting and available is to compare statement 1 with statement 2 of the same person, more than each statement with reality. Statements have always errors, whether the witness is sincere or not.
It is a fact that Mr McCann said something in his first statement, and another in the second (after having concocted meanwhile with the group the third collective time line).
It is also interesting to compare Mr McCann's first statement with Mrs McCann's one, both ot them having been made in the presence of the same interpreter.
Insisting to attribute the discrepancies to that interpreter and the PO (who certainly understood what the witnesses said) is clearly an attempt to give credit to some conspiracy.
-
Sorry - I'm not sure what your point is.
You still have to explain why Gerry would choose to walk past the unlocked patio door - and take the much longer route to enter 5A - when he could just nip up the steps and be in 5A in seconds. That makes no sense.
Why would he go the long way round?
Maybe he intended to just listen under the window and then needed a toilet or just changed his mind and wanted to 'see as well as listen'
-
Why would he go the long way round?
Perhaps simply because he forgot they had left the other French window open.
-
Gerry's second statement -Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.
Not a translation error then!
He couldn't "close" it, as one can close a door without locking it, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to enter again. He had to leave it slightly open.
Mr McCann misleadingly named that window-door a "back door" (porta das traseiras in Portuguese translation).
-
Perhaps simply because he forgot they had left the other French window open.
Why would he forget something he had done every night previously? That makes no sense. The only way they left and re-entered 5A during the evenings was through the patio doors. That's not something that would slip your mind imo.
-
Perhaps simply because he forgot they had left the other French window open.
Or he went in the northside using key because that was now the nearest side for him to enter after he did something. He left via the southside patio door which means it is now unlocked before the next check at 9.30 which was originally Kate's check.
-
Or he went in the northside using key because that was now the nearest side for him to enter after he did something. He left via the southside patio door which means it is now unlocked before the next check at 9.30.
It does seem plausible to me that he would leave via the south (patio) door.
-
Or he went in the northside using key because that was now the nearest side for him to enter after he did something. He left via the southside patio door which means it is now unlocked before the next check at 9.30 which was originally Kate's check.
I really don't think they left open a French window they blocked in day time when the most precious they had was inside, vulnerable. It doesn't make sense with Mrs Payne's report.
Mr McCann said the truth, he entered with his key (they would do the listening at the blocked French window) and he had something to do which he finally didn't achieve because he heard or saw JW coming up the hill with the pushchair. He went out, this time, leaving the Frenchwindow slightly open.
-
I really don't think they left open a French window they blocked in day time when the most precious they had was inside, vulnerable. It doesn't make sense with Mrs Payne's report.
Mr McCann said the truth, he entered with his key (they would do the listening at the blocked French window) and he had something to do which he finally didn't achieve because he heard or saw JW coming up the hill with the pushchair. He went out, this time, leaving the Frenchwindow slightly open.
Yes that's possible but with speed being the number 1 factor IMO if he accessed 5A then it was via the south bedroom door not the patio door which was locked.
-
Why would he forget something he had done every night previously? That makes no sense. The only way they left and re-entered 5A during the evenings was through the patio doors. That's not something that would slip your mind imo.
But the detail of the last time Mr McCann ever set eyes on his precious daughter, where he stopped and just stood looking at her & was thinking how beautiful she was, her position on the bed or in, that is something that would just slip his mind IYO?
-
Yes that's possible but with speed being the number 1 factor IMO if he accessed 5A then it was via the south bedroom door not the patio door which was locked.
It's possible that he went out through the bedroom French window, but someone could note that those shutters were abnormally open.
-
But the detail of the last time Mr McCann ever set eyes on his precious daughter, where he stopped and just stood looking at her & was thinking how beautiful she was, her position on the bed or in, that is something that would just slip his mind IYO?
?{)(**
The under the cover of Mrs McCann because it was cold vs the on the cover of Mr McCann because it was hot is one of the favourite mistranslations of the conspiracy supporters !
-
The simple truth is that they didn't leave the patio doors unlocked, that was a lie to facilitate the fabricated 9.30 check by Oldfield a scenario that had to evolve because of the Smith family sighting.
The only truthful part of the 3 different timelines that were produced without the assistance of Dianne Webster is the meeting between Gerry and Jes!
-
?{)(**
The under the cover of Mrs McCann because it was cold vs the on the cover of Mr McCann because it was hot is one of the favourite mistranslations of the conspiracy supporters !
It is an easy mistake to make Anne; after all in most European languages the words for hot and cold are SO similar. It is easy to see how the untrained translators, who are so central to this case, would have made the error. 8)><(
-
It is an easy mistake to make Anne; after all in most European languages the words for hot and cold are SO similar. It is easy to see how the untrained translators, who are so central to this case, would have made the error. 8)><(
?{)(**
Likely the reason why taps have either blue or red centres instead of the words "cold" and "hot" !
-
Or he went in the northside using key because that was now the nearest side for him to enter after he did something. He left via the southside patio door which means it is now unlocked before the next check at 9.30 which was originally Kate's check.
I take it you mean ''after he did something'' criminal? If that was the case - then surely he would want to hide the fact that he used the front door from the PJ at all costs?
-
There was none, the PJ needed practical informations to look better for an abducted child and not to frame staging parents (in spite of what conspiracy adepts believe).
Sempiternally come back on this topic is vain.
What is interesting and available is to compare statement 1 with statement 2 of the same person, more than each statement with reality. Statements have always errors, whether the witness is sincere or not.
It is a fact that Mr McCann said something in his first statement, and another in the second (after having concocted meanwhile with the group the third collective time line).
It is also interesting to compare Mr McCann's first statement with Mrs McCann's one, both ot them having been made in the presence of the same interpreter.
Insisting to attribute the discrepancies to that interpreter and the PO (who certainly understood what the witnesses said) is clearly an attempt to give credit to some conspiracy.
I'm hardly promoting a conspiracy when I've been trying to explain why I find it logical that there could have been mistakes.
-
I take it you mean ''after he did something'' criminal? If that was the case - then surely he would want to hide the fact that he used the front door from the PJ at all costs?
What was the easiest way for an abductor to enter? The key was a non-incriminating factor as well but it changed to unlocked patio in his 2nd statement because he had contradicted Kate's 1st statement of the patio door always being kept unlocked. That is also the easiest way for an abductor to gain entry and to start moving doors back and forth for the hell of it.
-
What was the easiest way for an abductor to enter? The key was a non-incriminating factor as well but it changed to unlocked patio in his 2nd statement because he had contradicted Kate's 1st statement of the patio door always being kept unlocked. That is also the easiest way for an abductor to gain entry and to start moving doors back and forth for the hell of it.
None of that answers my question. If Gerry had used the front door as part of some 'sinister' action - then surely he would have wanted to conceal that fact from the PJ - and would not have mentioned the front door at all? Why give them clues?
It had already been confirmed in his first statement that the patio doors were unlocked - so it wasn't changed in his 2nd statement.
-
I'm hardly promoting a conspiracy when I've been trying to explain why I find it logical that there could have been mistakes.
Sorry, but your constant and by unsupported doubts concerning written and signed statements (not denounced in her book by the interest part, Mrs McCann) are promoting some kind of conspiracy aimed to blame the McCanns in order to protect the PJ.
-
Sorry, but your constant and by unsupported doubts concerning written and signed statements (not denounced in her book by the interest part, Mrs McCann) are promoting some kind of conspiracy aimed to blame the McCanns in order to protect the PJ.
I'm trying to understand this... Expressing my view, with reasons, as to why there could have been genuine mistakes is promoting a conspiracy theory? Seriously?
-
Apologies if I am wrong but didn't GM say that he left his keys on the kitchen worktop sometime after entering the apartment through the front door?
-
Sorry, but your constant and by unsupported doubts concerning written and signed statements (not denounced in her book by the interest part, Mrs McCann) are promoting some kind of conspiracy aimed to blame the McCanns in order to protect the PJ.
Anne - No-one is promoting a conspiracy. It's plain common sense that mistakes and misunderstandings will take place when there is a language barrier to contend with.- and especially when statements have been translated and re-translated by different people - some professional some amateurs. To suggest that not a single mistake by anyone was possible is preposterous. IMO
The following are the words of a Translator - are you suggesting he/ she is lying?
TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
04-Processo 04 Page 905 to 917
[M Oldfield's Statement 10th May Again, there were several omissions from, and errors in, the original Portuguese. I corrected those that I found. Also, much of the Portuguese statement is written with a convoluted 'future + past' verb construct that attributes an 'uncertainty' to the words, whereas I have translated much of it in a non-literal manner to make it read more definitively. Hence, the reader must understand that neither the Portuguese nor my translation necessarily constitute the exact words spoken by Oldfield. If you read MO's Rogatory Letter testimony you will get a sense of the difficulty the Portuguese interpreter faced when listening to this man.]
Unquote
That statement alone proves that 'translating' was not the 'walk in the park' some people would like to think it is.
-
Anne - No-one is promoting a conspiracy. It's plain common sense that mistakes and misunderstandings will take place when there is a language barrier to contend with.- and especially when statements have been translated and re-translated by different people - some professional some amateurs. To suggest that not a single mistake by anyone was possible is preposterous. IMO
The following are the words of a Translator - are you suggesting he/ she is lying?
TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
04-Processo 04 Page 905 to 917
[M Oldfield's Statement 10th May Again, there were several omissions from, and errors in, the original Portuguese. I corrected those that I found. Also, much of the Portuguese statement is written with a convoluted 'future + past' verb construct that attributes an 'uncertainty' to the words, whereas I have translated much of it in a non-literal manner to make it read more definitively. Hence, the reader must understand that neither the Portuguese nor my translation necessarily constitute the exact words spoken by Oldfield. If you read MO's Rogatory Letter testimony you will get a sense of the difficulty the Portuguese interpreter faced when listening to this man.]
Unquote
That statement alone proves that 'translating' was not the 'walk in the park' some people would like to think it is.
I agree, Benice.
There were a few other statements that mentioned inaccuracies. They weren't recorded verbatim, but as a summary of what was understood at the time. Misunderstandings are just that. The issue, in my view, is about not acknowledging the fact of how confusion can occur and to then accuse people of lying... whether it is the witnesses, the interpreters or the police officers. Without evidence of any of the three parties actually lying for any reason, the most logical explanation, in my view and in view of the circumstances, is that there were quite simply mistakes blown out of all proportion.
-
I'm trying to understand this... Expressing my view, with reasons, as to why there could have been genuine mistakes is promoting a conspiracy theory? Seriously?
Absolutely !
-
Absolutely !
Ok. I rest my case.
-
Anne - No-one is promoting a conspiracy. It's plain common sense that mistakes and misunderstandings will take place when there is a language barrier to contend with.- and especially when statements have been translated and re-translated by different people - some professional some amateurs. To suggest that not a single mistake by anyone was possible is preposterous. IMO
The following are the words of a Translator - are you suggesting he/ she is lying?
TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
04-Processo 04 Page 905 to 917
[M Oldfield's Statement 10th May Again, there were several omissions from, and errors in, the original Portuguese. I corrected those that I found. Also, much of the Portuguese statement is written with a convoluted 'future + past' verb construct that attributes an 'uncertainty' to the words, whereas I have translated much of it in a non-literal manner to make it read more definitively. Hence, the reader must understand that neither the Portuguese nor my translation necessarily constitute the exact words spoken by Oldfield. If you read MO's Rogatory Letter testimony you will get a sense of the difficulty the Portuguese interpreter faced when listening to this man.]
Unquote
That statement alone proves that 'translating' was not the 'walk in the park' some people would like to think it is.
It's certainly better to be able to check the Portuguese signed statement and I'm not saying that there are no mistakes in the translations. I have corrected some of them. I've no idea whether Albym is lusophone.
The important statements had the best interpreters and great care was brought in making sure the witness's statement was respected before he signed it.
When the English translation says "back door", it translates the word "porta das traseiras" of the statement in Portuguese. As I said before this is not the word a Portuguese speaker would use to call the French window.
-
None of that answers my question. If Gerry had used the front door as part of some 'sinister' action - then surely he would have wanted to conceal that fact from the PJ - and would not have mentioned the front door at all? Why give them clues?
It had already been confirmed in his first statement that the patio doors were unlocked - so it wasn't changed in his 2nd statement.
There is nothing suspicious about using the key. That is the normal way to gain access to a locked secure apartment. But Kate said that the patio door was unlocked so why use a key? The patio door is the nearest side from the tapas bar so you would use that way. He wouldn't think that was important when he said it probably thinking of it being non-incriminating. But if he did in fact use the key then WHY?
1. He used the key because the apartment was locked including the patio door and it was the only way he could enter.
2. He used the key because that was the nearest side to enter.
-
There is nothing suspicious about using the key. That is the normal way to gain access to a locked secure apartment. But Kate said that the patio door was unlocked so why use a key? The patio door is the nearest side from the tapas bar so you would use that way. He wouldn't think that was important when he said it probably thinking of it being non-incriminating. But if he did in fact use the key then WHY?
1. He used the key because the apartment was locked including the patio door and it was the only way he could enter.
2. He used the key because that was the nearest side to enter.
3. There was a confusion about which door was actually used, only one of which required a key to enter.
-
3. There was a confusion about which door was actually used, only one of which required a key to enter.
There is no confusion over which door used a key. They had been using the key for 6 days so they knew which door it was!
-
There is no confusion over which door used a key. They had been using the key for 6 days so they knew which door it was!
The French window was said "left unclosed", in fact, for the abductor to get in, since the investigators could only take at face value the McCanns' word for the shutters/window entry (imagining that the cleaning lady could swear that the window was locked).
-
There is no confusion over which door used a key. They had been using the key for 6 days so they knew which door it was!
The McCanns would have known what was considered to be the back and the front, but what about the interpreter and the police officer?
-
The McCanns would have known what was considered to be the back and the front, but what about the interpreter and the police officer?
Very easy, being a ground floor : porta da rua vs porta das traseiras, if the witness insisted in calling "door" what isn't actually one and insisted in using erroneously "closing" instead of "leaving slightly open".
-
3. There was a confusion about which door was actually used, only one of which required a key to enter.
There was also confusion because some described the door facing onto the carpark as the back door and some described it as the front door. And the same goes for the Patio door - with some describing it as the front door and some the back door. IIRC To avoid further confusion it was suggested by the UK police officer interviewing JT that they referred to one door as the poolside door and the other as the roadside door.
I can't believe that anyone reading this thread cannot see how easy it was for a misunderstanding to occur during that very first interview over the doors.
Corrected to change 'carpark' door to 'roadside door.
-
There was also confusion because some described the door facing onto the carpark as the back door and some described it as the front door. And the same goes for the Patio door - with some describing it as the front door and some the back door. IIRC To avoid further confusion it was suggested by the UK police officer interviewing JT that they referred to one door as the poolside door and the other as the carpark door.
I can't believe that anyone reading this thread cannot see how easy it was for a misunderstanding to occur during that very first interview over the doors.
Give examples please ! It's a bit boring because it forces you to read all statements, but if you intend to convince, you can't escape it.
-
... using erroneously "closing" instead of "leaving slightly open".
The door-window (or whatever we call it) in the lounge.
Are you sure that it auto-locks when closed?
If there is no autolock, then (standing outside) a person can slide it fully closed, and still be able later (standing outside) to slide it open.
-
I'll drink to that Red cheers.
The Law of Triviality n that
Isnt it just
8(>((
Bottoms up friend
-
Give examples please ! It's a bit boring because it forces you to read all statements, but if you intend to convince, you can't escape it.
IMO reading through the thread there's plenty of confusion going on amongst posters about the doors. And all our discussions are in English.
-
Give examples please ! It's a bit boring because it forces you to read all statements, but if you intend to convince, you can't escape it.
Anne please dont waste Benices time.
Surely by this time you have read all the statements.
Surely by this time you know which is the front door and which the back and surely you MUST have noticed the discrepancies in the early statements and articles.
-
The door-window (or whatever we call it) in the lounge.
Are you sure that it auto-locks when closed?
If there is no autolock, then (standing outside) a person can slide it fully closed, and still be able later (standing outside) to slide it open.
If it were possible, no insurance would accept a contract. And insurance is required by law.
-
If it were possible, no insurance would accept a contract. And insurance is required by law.
Are you sure Anne? I have been in many hotels where the door can be locked from the inside but not from the outside.
-
Source: Volume 4a page 970
Prints on "exterior da janela/porto da sala" (exterior of window/door of lounge).
There is no handle on exterior so this is where a person on balcony places their hand to slide it open or shut.
-
Has Gerry McCann ever said that he never told the Portuguese police that he used his key to get into the apartment that night ?
Just wondering why people here are denying he said it, if he's never denied it himself
-
Has Gerry McCann ever said that he never told the Portuguese police that he used his key to get into the apartment that night ?
Just wondering why people here are denying he said it, if he's never denied it himself
I'm afraid this will never be an argument for those who systematically denigrate the interpreters and the translators of the files for not being "professionals" ! They'll insinuate that Mr McCann's denial was lost in translation.
-
Has Gerry McCann ever said that he never told the Portuguese police that he used his key to get into the apartment that night ?
Just wondering why people here are denying he said it, if he's never denied it himself
Gerry confirms that he said it here;
Gerry's second statement -Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.
-
There was also confusion because some described the door facing onto the carpark as the back door and some described it as the front door. And the same goes for the Patio door - with some describing it as the front door and some the back door. IIRC To avoid further confusion it was suggested by the UK police officer interviewing JT that they referred to one door as the poolside door and the other as the carpark door.
I can't believe that anyone reading this thread cannot see how easy it was for a misunderstanding to occur during that very first interview over the doors.
Here's a different area of confusion in Gerry's first statement.
At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness' apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building.
(...)
The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked.
Since when was the French window lateral to the building? Access to the French window was via the gate and that was lateral to the building.
-
Here's a different area of confusion in Gerry's first statement.
At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness' apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building.
(...)
The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked.
Since when was the French window lateral to the building? Access to the French window was via the gate and that was lateral to the building.
Does perpendicular, adjacent, lateral etc matter? Gerry said he used A KEY...thats all that matters and there was Only ONE DOOR he could have used it on...end of
-
See photo on this thread about 6 posts up
Anyone notice in that photo, of prints on the "janela/porta da sala", that on the glass there is a warning sticker ?
-
See photo on this thread about 6 posts up
Anyone notice in that photo, of prints on the "janela/porta da sala", that on the glass there is a warning sticker ?
Can you read it ?
-
With a little research, yes I can read it, I will post the text soon
P.S. Here it is : the exact same sticker in a flat in block 6 (photo by Jeanne D'Arc)
and 5A forensics photo
-
With a little research, yes I can read it, I will post the text soon
P.S. Here it is : the exact same sticker in a flat in block 6 (photo by Jeanne D'Arc)
and 5A forensics photo
This warning didn't help on the third of May. The French window was open (according to Mrs McCann and Mr Payne), Mrs McCann was having a shower and the three kids were on their own.
-
Are you sure Anne? I have been in many hotels where the door can be locked from the inside but not from the outside.
Usually on upper floor balconies....
-
Here's a different area of confusion in Gerry's first statement.
At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness' apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building.
(...)
The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked.
Since when was the French window lateral to the building? Access to the French window was via the gate and that was lateral to the building.
I agree, in fact anyone reading that who didn't know would probably think there was door on the side of the property.
IMO If there had been a verbatim record of that first interview I think readers - with their benefit of hindsight, would have had no difficulty in spotting how a misunderstanding first arose.
Another example of how translating and retranslating can produce errors is mentioned in Kate's book about her diary which was translated from English to Portuguese and then back to English.
Quote
''I was really upset'' had become ''I was fed up''
''I never felt that relaxed'' had become 'I'd never felt so relaxed''
Unquote
In that last example by changing just two little words i.e.
''that'' to ''so''
and
''I'' to ''I'd''
the opposite meaning of what she had really said was wrongly conveyed to the reader.
-
I agree, in fact anyone reading that who didn't know would probably think there was door on the side of the property.
IMO If there had been a verbatim record of that first interview I think readers - with their benefit of hindsight, would have had no difficulty in spotting how a misunderstanding first arose.
Another example of how translating and retranslating can produce errors is mentioned in Kate's book about her diary which was translated from English to Portuguese and then back to English.
Quote
''I was really upset'' had become ''I was fed up''
''I never felt that relaxed'' had become 'I'd never felt so relaxed''
Unquote
In that last example by changing just two little words i.e.
''that'' to ''so''
and
''I'' to ''I'd''
the opposite meaning of what she had really said was wrongly conveyed to the reader.
The translator (may be Google robot) didn't treat it like literature !
A key in a statement is different matter, whether you like or not.
-
Does perpendicular, adjacent, lateral etc matter? Gerry said he used A KEY...thats all that matters and there was Only ONE DOOR he could have used it on...end of
It may do, Red. If there is one mistake concerning what was said in relation to entrances to the apartment in a single statement, I find it legitimate to question whether there was also a mistake concerning which door was used.
-
It may do, Red. If there is one mistake concerning what was said in relation to entrances to the apartment in a single statement, I find it legitimate to question whether there was also a mistake concerning which door was used.
Not unless the translator put words into gerrys mouth ie he used his KEY
an issue people are avoiding like the plague on ths thread!
-
Not unless the translator put words into gerrys mouth ie he used his KEY
an issue people are avoiding like the plague on ths thread!
As I've said umpteen times, we don't know what Gerry actually said as opposed to what the PJ officer assumed he'd understood concerning which door was which and which required a key to enter.
And, yet again, a verbatim statement would have clarified this point.
-
In the first witness statements to the Portuguese police it is recorded that Gerry entered the apartment through the door, using his key and that Kate found the curtains in the children's room open when she entered
We know that the McCanns have since said differently
In her book Kate makes reference to those first statements and speaks of her concern that some parts of them might have been 'lost in translation' ( unfortunately, she does not take the opportunity to mention which parts she is refering to )
Kate, here, is speaking of a meeting she and Gerry had with the first private investigators on the scene ( Control Risks ) The meeting took place on Sunday, the 13th of May, three days after Gerry had made his second statement to the police ( on the 10th of May ) ... Kate, herself, had been scheduled to make her second statement on the 11th of May but Alan Pike had asked for it to be postponed due to his concerns for her wellbeing
"By the Sunday evening, we found ourselves giving our statements again, this time to a couple of investigators fron Control Risks. We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation. We also felt that these accounts were not sufficiently thorough and wanted to have every detail we could remember registered properly. Ufortunately, in our haste to pass the new statements on to the PJ, we made the mistake of assuming that the transcripts would be correct and discovered only many months later that these, too, contained inaccuracies. And they had been given and recorded in English !"
I don't think the statements made by Kate and Gerry to Control Risks appear anywhere in the files ( although, Kate says they were passed to the PJ ) but the point is, even those statements, made and recorded in English, contained what Kate refers to as 'inaccuracies'
She does not specify what the inaccuracies were but there must surely come a time when it seems more likely that the McCanns were, quite simply, changing their story rather than everyone else getting it wrong
-
In the first witness statements to the Portuguese police it is recorded that Gerry entered the apartment through the door, using his key and that Kate found the curtains in the children's room open when she entered
We know that the McCanns have since said differently
In her book Kate makes reference to those first statements and speaks of her concern that some parts of them might have been 'lost in translation' ( unfortunately, she does not take the opportunity to mention which parts she is refering to )
Kate, here, is speaking of a meeting she and Gerry had with the first private investigators on the scene ( Control Risks ) The meeting took place on Sunday, the 13th of May, three days after Gerry had made his second statement to the police ( on the 10th of May ) ... Kate, herself, had been scheduled to make her second statement on the 11th of May but Alan Pike had asked for it to be postponed due to his concerns for her wellbeing
"By the Sunday evening, we found ourselves giving our statements again, this time to a couple of investigators fron Control Risks. We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation. We also felt that these accounts were not sufficiently thorough and wanted to have every detail we could remember registered properly. Ufortunately, in our haste to pass the new statements on to the PJ, we made the mistake of assuming that the transcripts would be correct and discovered only many months later that these, too, contained inaccuracies. And they had been given and recorded in English !"
I don't think the statements made by Kate and Gerry to Control Risks appear anywhere in the files ( although, Kate says they were passed to the PJ ) but the point is, even those statements, made and recorded in English, contained what Kate refers to as 'inaccuracies'
She does not specify what the inaccuracies were but there must surely come a time when it seems more likely that the McCanns were, quite simply, changing their story rather than everyone else getting it wrong
Obviously! It smacks of "protesting too much" and "covering all bases"
IMO
ETA It is bizarre and unfathomable why Kate Mccann was NEVER interviewd again until months later being the actual person that found her kid missing
-
In the first witness statements to the Portuguese police it is recorded that Gerry entered the apartment through the door, using his key and that Kate found the curtains in the children's room open when she entered
We know that the McCanns have since said differently
In her book Kate makes reference to those first statements and speaks of her concern that some parts of them might have been 'lost in translation' ( unfortunately, she does not take the opportunity to mention which parts she is refering to )
Kate, here, is speaking of a meeting she and Gerry had with the first private investigators on the scene ( Control Risks ) The meeting took place on Sunday, the 13th of May, three days after Gerry had made his second statement to the police ( on the 10th of May ) ... Kate, herself, had been scheduled to make her second statement on the 11th of May but Alan Pike had asked for it to be postponed due to his concerns for her wellbeing
"By the Sunday evening, we found ourselves giving our statements again, this time to a couple of investigators fron Control Risks. We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation. We also felt that these accounts were not sufficiently thorough and wanted to have every detail we could remember registered properly. Ufortunately, in our haste to pass the new statements on to the PJ, we made the mistake of assuming that the transcripts would be correct and discovered only many months later that these, too, contained inaccuracies. And they had been given and recorded in English !"
I don't think the statements made by Kate and Gerry to Control Risks appear anywhere in the files ( although, Kate says they were passed to the PJ ) but the point is, even those statements, made and recorded in English, contained what Kate refers to as 'inaccuracies'
She does not specify what the inaccuracies were but there must surely come a time when it seems more likely that the McCanns were, quite simply, changing their story rather than everyone else getting it wrong
Excellent observations, Icabodcrane !
How they noticed inaccuracies many months after is a mystery.
These statements aren't in the files and there's no mention of their existence there. Control Risk is described in the files as having asked access to the vila for "cleaning" it on the documents topic.