24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Madeleine Beth McCann went missing from PDL in Portugal on the 3rd May 2007, there are so many unanswered questions, please discuss

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby Violet3A » Thu May 29, 2008 8:17 pm

I have to say that I read many many months ago that there were witness statments saying nobody had left the table to check the children. So why did they say checks were made if they were not.
Violet3A
Suspect
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:25 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby TimH » Thu May 29, 2008 8:19 pm

Arguida wrote:Not sure you can charge the Tanner's with neglect. If Jane arrived late and O'Brian left the table and was gone most of the night then how can u say someone was not looking after their children. It seems more like they were taking turns.


We don't really know where O'Brien was...the "taking care of the sick child" has never been confirmed, to my knowledge. There are also witness statement that claim Tanner never left the table.

If O'Brien can't prove he was with the children and another witness says he wasn't where he said he was claims to have been, witnesses put Tanner at the table all night...there goes their protection from child neglect charges. They wouldn't agree to go back for the reconstruction, so I think it is highly likely their children were alone, too, and they know the PJ can prove it.
TimH
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:52 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby TimH » Thu May 29, 2008 8:23 pm

Violet3A wrote:I have to say that I read many many months ago that there were witness statments saying nobody had left the table to check the children. So why did they say checks were made if they were not.


You know...I think in the early aftermath, the McCanns didn't think they would ever be questioned about anything. After all, an "abductor" had stolen their child, they got the British embassy involved, they had a love fest going on with the British press, and they seemed to be protected from the hard questions.

I don't think, at this time last year, they could have foreseen the mess they have created for themselves and their friends existing as it does today.
TimH
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:52 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby RstJ » Thu May 29, 2008 8:27 pm

Violet3A wrote:I have to say that I read many many months ago that there were witness statments saying nobody had left the table to check the children. So why did they say checks were made if they were not.


Because they needed to inject some credibility into their story. We left them alone for an hour and a half doesn't sound so good. So it became half-hourly checks.

RstJ
RstJ
Suspect
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby cushty » Thu May 29, 2008 8:29 pm

RstJ wrote:
Violet3A wrote:I have to say that I read many many months ago that there were witness statments saying nobody had left the table to check the children. So why did they say checks were made if they were not.


Because they needed to inject some credibility into their story. We left them alone for an hour and a half doesn't sound so good. So it became half-hourly checks.

RstJ



four or five hours on other nights, I suspect
User avatar
cushty
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 3271
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby quark1 » Thu May 29, 2008 8:41 pm

You say
Meadow wrote:I find it increasingly impossible to believe, particularly as I been on the ''forums'' now a year. That Madeleine was ''not around'' for the whole of the 3rd.

Once and for all, nothing happened to Madeleine on the 2nd.

I think there would have been a human outcry by now, if Madeleine was not seen by anyone all day of the 3rd.

It is easy after a year to believe anything, but I'm sure by now there would have been a queue a mile long stating they did not see her on the 3rd and how suspicious it was.

It has never happened.

Equally I grant you, there hasn't exactly been a half mile queue to say they actually saw her, either

>> Photo at the pool
>> Nanny Baker.



If you have been 'on the forums' for a year Meadow you must know that NOBODY has even publicly stated that they saw Maddie that day :shock:

And there HAS been a 'bit of a queue' to say they 'didn't' see her!

Bridget O'Donnell made a point of saying that she didn't see Maddie in the 10 blonde little girls at the kids club.

Oldfield made a point of saying that he didn't see Maddie on his 'check' (he says he just listened at the door).

And Payne seems to have refuted the idea that he 'saw' her at 6.30!!


So there has been more in the queue saying they DIDN'T see her than there has been in the queue saying they DID! (that queue contains just one person. Pennington (NOT Baker, as you have said. Baker has NEVER said anything. She may have been 'said' to have seen Maddie (by Clarice!) but she herself has never spoken)

So; Only Pennington has ever said publicly that she saw Maddie. And she told the Mail that it was at 'high'tea at 5.30 until 6.00. And she told Despatches (on camera) that the last time she saw the 'family' was lunch time! So not what you would call credible. Especially as she was a nanny to the 3months-2years children, so did NOT look after Maddie!

She has also disappeared off the radar, so mention of her ever by Clarice. Strange :|


You say; 'Once and for all, nothing happened to Maddie on the 2nd'.

Please substantiate that statement.

Have you got any names of people publicly saying they saw Maddie? (apart from Pennington!).

Anybody??
quark1
On Parole
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby RstJ » Thu May 29, 2008 8:57 pm

TimH wrote:We don't really know where O'Brien was...the "taking care of the sick child" has never been confirmed, to my knowledge.


This one has been at the back of my mind for a long time. Sick child...if Madeleine were not present at Kids Club that day, what would be the most obvious reason given? That she stayed at the apartment sick. I know that's never been advanced in any MSM source, but I can't help wondering if the "sick child" was actually Madeleine.

RstJ
RstJ
Suspect
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby sims2222 » Thu May 29, 2008 9:21 pm

RstJ wrote:
TimH wrote:We don't really know where O'Brien was...the "taking care of the sick child" has never been confirmed, to my knowledge.


This one has been at the back of my mind for a long time. Sick child...if Madeleine were not present at Kids Club that day, what would be the most obvious reason given? That she stayed at the apartment sick. I know that's never been advanced in any MSM source, but I can't help wondering if the "sick child" was actually Madeleine.

RstJ


.....And what if bundleman was actually just that, a man with a bundle of sheets or covers, and a pair of pink pyjamas on his way to the launderette ...... don't want to bother the maids with tasks like this now.
sims2222
New In Town
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:17 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby TimH » Thu May 29, 2008 9:31 pm

quark1 wrote:You say
Meadow wrote:I find it increasingly impossible to believe, particularly as I been on the ''forums'' now a year. That Madeleine was ''not around'' for the whole of the 3rd.

Once and for all, nothing happened to Madeleine on the 2nd.

I think there would have been a human outcry by now, if Madeleine was not seen by anyone all day of the 3rd.

It is easy after a year to believe anything, but I'm sure by now there would have been a queue a mile long stating they did not see her on the 3rd and how suspicious it was.

It has never happened.

Equally I grant you, there hasn't exactly been a half mile queue to say they actually saw her, either

>> Photo at the pool
>> Nanny Baker.



If you have been 'on the forums' for a year Meadow you must know that NOBODY has even publicly stated that they saw Maddie that day :shock:

And there HAS been a 'bit of a queue' to say they 'didn't' see her!

Bridget O'Donnell made a point of saying that she didn't see Maddie in the 10 blonde little girls at the kids club.

Oldfield made a point of saying that he didn't see Maddie on his 'check' (he says he just listened at the door).

And Payne seems to have refuted the idea that he 'saw' her at 6.30!!


So there has been more in the queue saying they DIDN'T see her than there has been in the queue saying they DID! (that queue contains just one person. Pennington (NOT Baker, as you have said. Baker has NEVER said anything. She may have been 'said' to have seen Maddie (by Clarice!) but she herself has never spoken)

So; Only Pennington has ever said publicly that she saw Maddie. And she told the Mail that it was at 'high'tea at 5.30 until 6.00. And she told Despatches (on camera) that the last time she saw the 'family' was lunch time! So not what you would call credible. Especially as she was a nanny to the 3months-2years children, so did NOT look after Maddie!

She has also disappeared off the radar, so mention of her ever by Clarice. Strange :|


You say; 'Once and for all, nothing happened to Maddie on the 2nd'.

Please substantiate that statement.

Have you got any names of people publicly saying they saw Maddie? (apart from Pennington!).

Anybody??


I have never seen a source, other than the McCanns and Pennington, state they saw Maddie on the 3d. That is one of the reasons for the speculation on the authenticity of the pool photo with Maddie has come up...that and questions about why the McCanns waited so long to release it. So far is the only piece of evidence out in the public domain that seems to show she was alive on the 3d.

Baker has never made a public statement. A "friend" is the closest the press was ever able to come to an interview...she emphatically said she wouldn't discuss the case. That "friend" could have been Clarrie for all we know.
TimH
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:52 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby redsquare » Thu May 29, 2008 9:41 pm

RstJ wrote:
redsquare wrote:<...>
Yes, but that's the general alert according to the McCanns.


Could be later, I guess. I have noticed a tendency as time goes on for Kate to add buffer time (searching the apartment 3 times) to when she noticed MM gone and when she raised the alarm.

On other topic: I think the 23:45 is the time the PJ were called by the GNR. An independent witness in the Dispatches programme said the GNR arrived at 10:50 and she heard Gerry speak to them and he immediately insisted his child hadn't wandered off, she'd been abducted.


I wonder who was suggesting she'd wandered off. Guess it could have been GNR, MW staff, or anybody. Whatever the case, by May 5 (press time anyway) PJ was stating "abduction" and even that they had a suspect. Guess Team Gerry started framing Murat almost from the get-go.


RstJ


This was the full quote from June Wright, a resident of Luz, on the Dispatches documentary, which I transcribed myself:

"I arrived at the Ocean Club reception at around about 10 to 11 and at the time that we arrived a police car arrived - and as the police officer got out a man approached him, who I now know is Gerry McCann and said that his daughter had been abducted. That there was no way that she could have opened the shutters herself, she'd definitely been taken."

As far as I'm aware this is the only reliable, first-hand, witness account in the public domain and shows Gerry's instant insistance that this was an abduction. I don't treat Pennington's accounts as reliable and we've never heard Mrs Fenn speak for herself, other than that clip where she gets a bit angry and says she's never even spoken to the press.

Yes, on other point, there does appear to have been some crisis time-management going on. That's what inclines me towards a 22:30 raising of the alarm, giving the group the maximum time to 'sort things out' and then subsequent attempts to reduce this time in order to make the 'window of opportunity' as small as possible.
redsquare
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:26 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 29, 2008 10:04 pm

TimH wrote:
quark1 wrote:You say
Meadow wrote:I find it increasingly impossible to believe, particularly as I been on the ''forums'' now a year. That Madeleine was ''not around'' for the whole of the 3rd.

Once and for all, nothing happened to Madeleine on the 2nd.

I think there would have been a human outcry by now, if Madeleine was not seen by anyone all day of the 3rd.

It is easy after a year to believe anything, but I'm sure by now there would have been a queue a mile long stating they did not see her on the 3rd and how suspicious it was.

It has never happened.

Equally I grant you, there hasn't exactly been a half mile queue to say they actually saw her, either

>> Photo at the pool
>> Nanny Baker.



If you have been 'on the forums' for a year Meadow you must know that NOBODY has even publicly stated that they saw Maddie that day :shock:

And there HAS been a 'bit of a queue' to say they 'didn't' see her!

Bridget O'Donnell made a point of saying that she didn't see Maddie in the 10 blonde little girls at the kids club.

Oldfield made a point of saying that he didn't see Maddie on his 'check' (he says he just listened at the door).

And Payne seems to have refuted the idea that he 'saw' her at 6.30!!


So there has been more in the queue saying they DIDN'T see her than there has been in the queue saying they DID! (that queue contains just one person. Pennington (NOT Baker, as you have said. Baker has NEVER said anything. She may have been 'said' to have seen Maddie (by Clarice!) but she herself has never spoken)

So; Only Pennington has ever said publicly that she saw Maddie. And she told the Mail that it was at 'high'tea at 5.30 until 6.00. And she told Despatches (on camera) that the last time she saw the 'family' was lunch time! So not what you would call credible. Especially as she was a nanny to the 3months-2years children, so did NOT look after Maddie!

She has also disappeared off the radar, so mention of her ever by Clarice. Strange :|


You say; 'Once and for all, nothing happened to Maddie on the 2nd'.

Please substantiate that statement.

Have you got any names of people publicly saying they saw Maddie? (apart from Pennington!).

Anybody??


I have never seen a source, other than the McCanns and Pennington, state they saw Maddie on the 3d. That is one of the reasons for the speculation on the authenticity of the pool photo with Maddie has come up...that and questions about why the McCanns waited so long to release it. So far is the only piece of evidence out in the public domain that seems to show she was alive on the 3d.

Baker has never made a public statement. A "friend" is the closest the press was ever able to come to an interview...she emphatically said she wouldn't discuss the case. That "friend" could have been Clarrie for all we know.

Why should anyone make a statement that they saw Madeleine in the daytime on May 3rd?
It is only on forums such as this that the May 2nd theory reigns so why should a paper bother with witnesses to say where Madeleine was on May 3rd?
If Madeleine was not in the creche as the McCanns claim don't you think that the PJ are capable of proving?
It is interesting that if Madeleine died as claimed on midnight May 2nd that according to the court ruling that none of the Tapas 9 communicated by telephone till 8 pm
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby cushty » Thu May 29, 2008 10:09 pm

the PJ will most certainly have nailed down the last sighting of Madeleine many many months ago, so it does seem a bit pointless us lot arguing about it over and over again

is it really vital to the case anyway - neither date lets anyone off the hook, does it?
User avatar
cushty
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 3271
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby RstJ » Thu May 29, 2008 10:12 pm

redsquare wrote:<...>

Yes, on other point, there does appear to have been some crisis time-management going on. That's what inclines me towards a 22:30 raising of the alarm, giving the group the maximum time to 'sort things out' and then subsequent attempts to reduce this time in order to make the 'window of opportunity' as small as possible.


I've never believed in any plot among the Tapas other than an agreement not to talk to the press formed both from PJ's "secrecy laws" and Gerry McCann's personal request. I don't doubt there was a space of time between raising the alarm inside the OC among the other Tapas and calling the police. Not sure what was going on. Looks like British LE was very curious about this space of time as well as they specifically requested witnesses to contact them who had been part of that initial search that took place before Portuguese police (probably GNR meant here) arrived.


RstJ
RstJ
Suspect
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby RstJ » Thu May 29, 2008 10:18 pm

sims2222 wrote:<...>
.....And what if bundleman was actually just that, a man with a bundle of sheets or covers, and a pair of pink pyjamas on his way to the launderette ...... don't want to bother the maids with tasks like this now.


More likely it's a parent hauling a sleeping kid back to a holiday apartment, just as Tanner initially thought.

RstJ
RstJ
Suspect
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: 24 Horas - 29/5/2008

Postby sims2222 » Thu May 29, 2008 10:24 pm

RstJ wrote:
sims2222 wrote:<...>
.....And what if bundleman was actually just that, a man with a bundle of sheets or covers, and a pair of pink pyjamas on his way to the launderette ...... don't want to bother the maids with tasks like this now.


More likely it's a parent hauling a sleeping kid back to a holiday apartment, just as Tanner initially thought.

RstJ


Or a cover story just in case anyone saw your partner carrying dirty sheets and dirty pyjamas on the way to the launderette or tip - best to say he's only 5'8" too ....... just to avoid implicating anyone...
sims2222
New In Town
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Justice for Madeleine

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests