Timeline May 3rd

[pathfinder73]

I appreciate that this scrutiny of the timeline is important to some posters here.
Do you believe this scrutiny has taken place by the various police investigations since Madeleine`s disappeatance?
If it has .Do you believe the investigation have ignored the discrepancies or resolved the discrepancies?

They should have resolved the timeline after 13 years. You ask Matt - how did you know what time it was when Kate left the table? His answer should be - I checked my watch and it was 9:50. Simple!

[Erngath]

They should have resolved the timeline after 13 years. You ask Matt - how did you know what time it was when Kate left the table? His answer should be - I checked my watch and it was 9:50. Simple!

Nope.
I don't do the scrutiny of the timeline but you do.
I asked if your scrutiny of the timeline will have in your opinion taken place by the investigation by any police force?
Either, Portuguese, British, German and if.so.have these inaccuracies which you have detailed been ignored by these investigations.

[pathfinder73]

The timeline will be resolved by SY and the PJ. They are working together and can contact the relevant witnesses to confirm or deny certain times.

The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key - Scotland Yard 2013

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24509235

[Erngath]

The timeline will be resolved by SY and the PJ. They are working together and can contact the relevant witnesses to confirm or deny certain times.

The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key - Scotland Yard 2013

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24509235

out

Seven years ago?
So still time to bring Kate and Gerry to trial for whatever you believe them to be guilty of??

[pathfinder73]

out

Seven years ago?
So still time to bring Kate and Gerry to trial for whatever you believe them to be guilty of??

They also released the Smithman efits in 2013 and he's still not been identified.

[Erngath]

They also released the Smithman efits in 2013 and he's still not been identified.

Indeed.
Do you believe this is a point of concern by  the current investigation by either the Portuguese, UK and now the German police?

[Robittybob1]

The timeline will be resolved by SY and the PJ. They are working together and can contact the relevant witnesses to confirm or deny certain times.

The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key - Scotland Yard 2013

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24509235

They all be saying,"I can't remember now it was too long ago".

[Brietta]

Indeed.
Do you believe this is a point of concern by  the current investigation by either the Portuguese, UK and now the German police?

I think the only timeline of interest to anyone who matters for quite some time has been Brueckner's.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The statement does not say if it was a male or a female voice.

But you've liked a post earlier by Dave that mocks anyone that suggests the statements (from Portugal) are in any way reliable. So which is it? Do you accept the statements and if so which ones.... then we can look at the timeline as you see it.

I accept the statements are more or less an accurate representation of what the witnesses saw and heard or thought they saw and heard and the time they thought they saw or heard it.  I accept the possibility / likelihood of human fallibility  at every stage of the witness statement process.  It isn’t necessary to try and make every single piece of the jigsaw fit together withing the framework of the timeline you know, as you will find it impossible to do so.  You have to use a modicum of judgement and common sense to work out the most likely chain of events even if not every single witness statement supports it. 

[pathfinder73]

They all be saying,"I can't remember now it was too long ago".

Nonsense. He signed his statement confirming that time!

[Robittybob1]

Nonsense. He signed his statement confirming that time!

And now they could claim not even remembering signing that.   Look at Prince Andrew and his bad memory, or is it?  You can't make a person remember something if they don't want to.

[Brietta]

Does SC’s wife say it was a female voice? In their April 200& statement I just remember a reference to “a voice” but the line of questioning appears quite poor given the possible significance of “a voice” saying “Madeleine, Madeleine” at some point “around 9:15 to 9:30”

I think the problem you may be having is that you appear to be trying to make a mountain out of a molehill or something out of nothing.
It really is nothing too.  Have you ever seen Mrs Carpenter's statement ... I haven't ... I've only read hearsay?  There is probably a good reason why she had nothing to say if you carefully read her (deaf ???) husband's statement on her behalf.

Snip
At approximately half past eight, Gerry and Kate and their group of approximately ten people were already seated at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them, we spoke of tennis amongst other things, I vaguely remember that Gerry and Kate and other people from the group would leave the table in intervals (inaudible), I think it was to check on the children , but I do not remember with what frequency or how many times the people left the table to check on the children.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment. She does not remember where the sound came from or whether it was in an urgent tone, not paying any more attention to it and only remembered the following day when we heard about Madeleine's disappearance".

https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

[Brietta]

I accept the statements are more or less an accurate representation of what the witnesses saw and heard or thought they saw and heard and the time they thought they saw or heard it.  I accept the possibility / likelihood of human fallibility  at every stage of the witness statement process.  It isn’t necessary to try and make every single piece of the jigsaw fit together withing the framework of the timeline you know, as you will find it impossible to do so.  You have to use a modicum of judgement and common sense to work out the most likely chain of events even if not every single witness statement supports it.

None of the holidaymakers were caring about time.  Even Stephen Carpenter was pretty vague,  But he seems quite certain the McCann party were seated by half eight ... possibly because he either looked at his watch or had calculated it from the time of his booking.

[faithlilly]

I think the problem you may be having is that you appear to be trying to make a mountain out of a molehill or something out of nothing.
It really is nothing too.  Have you ever seen Mrs Carpenter's statement ... I haven't ... I've only read hearsay?  There is probably a good reason why she had nothing to say if you carefully read her (deaf ???) husband's statement on her behalf.

Snip
At approximately half past eight, Gerry and Kate and their group of approximately ten people were already seated at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them, we spoke of tennis amongst other things, I vaguely remember that Gerry and Kate and other people from the group would leave the table in intervals (inaudible), I think it was to check on the children , but I do not remember with what frequency or how many times the people left the table to check on the children.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment. She does not remember where the sound came from or whether it was in an urgent tone, not paying any more attention to it and only remembered the following day when we heard about Madeleine's disappearance".

https://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN-CARPENTER.htm

What possible reason could SC have for making up what he said his wife told him ?

I noticed you edited my post but didn’t reply to it.

You really do have problems answering my rather straightforward questions, don’t you Brietta ?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Indeed.
Do you believe this is a point of concern by  the current investigation by either the Portuguese, UK and now the German police?

Absolutely. No-one disputes Smithman. It seems possible (even probable) that this is indeed a person carrying MM away from apartment 5a. SY now agree. CM imo has (quite possibly) missed the early opportunity to publicise this sighting. John, on this forum, has explained why. Yet if it's so easy to prove it's not GM this makes no sense. It's not GM (he has an alibi) so finding out who he was should have been, imo, the central priority.