Author Topic: Timeline May 3rd  (Read 129370 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #690 on: July 07, 2020, 07:58:58 PM »
Maybe Dianne stayed there to finish the wine?

Well, it was Free.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #691 on: July 07, 2020, 10:20:37 PM »
Maybe Dianne stayed there to finish the wine?
Nice.
Now, are you serious about getting to the truth of the timeline?  Because you have studiously avoided commenting on the three statements I have linked to today - why?
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 10:22:39 PM by Vertigo Swirl »
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #692 on: July 07, 2020, 10:25:14 PM »
The statistics also point to stranger abduction being rare.so in the last 15 years how many stranger abductions have there been in Portugal...if Maddie was abducted would that fit in with the stats .yes it would

That's the statistical equivalent of the tail wagging the dog!

The statistical reality is that in cases of missing children abduction by a stranger is incredibly rare. It is not a statistical probability.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #693 on: July 07, 2020, 10:32:30 PM »
That's the statistical equivalent of the tail wagging the dog!

The statistical reality is that in cases of missing children abduction by a stranger is incredibly rare. It is not a statistical probability.

If it's got statistics then it's a possibility.

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #694 on: July 07, 2020, 10:35:20 PM »
Furthermore, what are we to make of this waiter's testimony?
"When asked, he says that on 3rd May he only remembers that one guest from the table left for about 10 minutes, given that when he was about to serve the respective plate he was told to hold the food back for a few minutes, and that it was about 15 minutes before the guest returned, at about 21.45".

Was this guest returning after having left the table with the rest of the group after the alarm was raised around 9.20pm, to finish his steak?  After all why waste a perfectly good steak just because a child has gone missing!

It contradicts what MO says.... I'm pretty sure you'd prefer the MO version. He says the re-heated food had been eaten before the 21:25 check with ROB?

"then Russell came back and they actually redid his food, erm, I mean, he was eating it when the next sort of checks went, which were about half an hour later'
4078: 'So you think it was about half an hour between your check''
Reply: 'It would have been around that sort of time and the reason I think thirty minutes is because I, I don't know whether this is memory now or whether it's since we've been talking about it, Gerry said or Kate said, it's about thirty minutes since the last check, we ought to go, so that's why I think it's thirty minutes, erm, because I think that main course would have taken a bit longer because, you know, Russell came back and we started chatting, you know, how's Evie and all that sort of thing, erm, so, I think he was still eating at the time, so we waited until he'd finished before we went'.

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #695 on: July 07, 2020, 10:39:25 PM »
If it's got statistics then it's a possibility.

Absolutely! It's a distinct possibility. I just don't see any evidence for it and our Dave won't point me in the right direction.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #696 on: July 07, 2020, 10:43:45 PM »
Absolutely! It's a distinct possibility. I just don't see any evidence for it and our Dave won't point me in the right direction.

Think Logistics.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #697 on: July 07, 2020, 10:55:16 PM »
It contradicts what MO says.... I'm pretty sure you'd prefer the MO version. He says the re-heated food had been eaten before the 21:25 check with ROB?

"then Russell came back and they actually redid his food, erm, I mean, he was eating it when the next sort of checks went, which were about half an hour later'
4078: 'So you think it was about half an hour between your check''
Reply: 'It would have been around that sort of time and the reason I think thirty minutes is because I, I don't know whether this is memory now or whether it's since we've been talking about it, Gerry said or Kate said, it's about thirty minutes since the last check, we ought to go, so that's why I think it's thirty minutes, erm, because I think that main course would have taken a bit longer because, you know, Russell came back and we started chatting, you know, how's Evie and all that sort of thing, erm, so, I think he was still eating at the time, so we waited until he'd finished before we went'.

Why would I prefer one version over another?   Which version do you prefer?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #698 on: July 07, 2020, 11:11:28 PM »
Absolutely! It's a distinct possibility. I just don't see any evidence for it and our Dave won't point me in the right direction.
If Davel won’t help, why not ask Holly? She believes Madeleine was abducted by strangers yet she never gets asked by those of a sceptical persuasion to justify her beliefs.  Why not?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline faithlilly

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #699 on: July 07, 2020, 11:20:44 PM »
The statistics also point to stranger abduction being rare.so in the last 15 years how many stranger abductions have there been in Portugal...if Maddie was abducted would that fit in with the stats .yes it would

Absolute nonsense.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #700 on: July 08, 2020, 12:00:11 AM »
Why would I prefer one version over another?   Which version do you prefer?

I prefer G-Units "question everything... accept nothing" model.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #701 on: July 08, 2020, 07:14:49 AM »
I prefer G-Units "question everything... accept nothing" model.
Aww, bless.  The only problem with that is it gets you absolutely nowhere.  At sone point you have to accept some things otherwise you just go round in circles, it’s pointless imo.  G-Unit herself seemed to come to a conclusion (very rare I know) when she decided it would be highly unlikely for the chef to get his times wrong and that therefore in her opinion the alarm was raised as he said at around 9.20pm but she seems to have backtracked a bit since. 
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Lace

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #702 on: July 08, 2020, 12:08:11 PM »
Who is that witness? The waiter who served them is a credible witness to what was going on that night! He said David and Matt were searching that area.

Gerry has never said he was searching the pool area.

The very same witness said this  - 

 I would normally see them during the day if I went to the complex for a swim, or when they were going to get their children for lunch in the zone next to the Tapas. Nothing in their behaviour called my attention. They dined in the restaurant every night from Sunday until Thursday when Madeleine disappeared. The table was booked then for 19H30 to 20H00. It was nine adults in total, four couples and an older woman who was also with them. I always found them educated, good clients. They appeared to get along well amongst each other and each time I served the table they would comment on the food. It was a happy group who would often laugh during dinner. There was a man who particularly stood out from the rest of the group as she spoke a lot and told many jokes. At this time, I did not know who he was, but later found out it was Madeleine McCanns father. Frequently, when I served the table I noticed that one or two elements of the group had left the restaurant. I could not imagine where they had gone to. After seeing the news stories, I figured that they had gone to check on their children. On some occasions, I also saw some infant monitors on the same table but never related this to the facts.


So he is saying that Gerry stood out from the crowd as he spoke a lot and told many jokes.   You say he wouldn't have recognised him searching around the pool?   He realised afterwards he was Madeleine's father,  I don't think he would say that if he wasn't sure.   Just because Gerry doesn't mention he searched around the pool doesn't mean he didn't he was seen.   The nanny said he looked under cars too,  did he mention that?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #703 on: July 08, 2020, 12:15:11 PM »
Absolutely! It's a distinct possibility. I just don't see any evidence for it and our Dave won't point me in the right direction.

Ive tried and im happy to do so again...So first..
what is the probablity of the parents being involved?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #704 on: July 08, 2020, 12:16:28 PM »
Absolute nonsense.

As is applying statistics to show parental involvement....my statistics are bang on