The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Reference Forum for all information regarding translations and PT Law etc and other useful information.

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 08, 2008 7:15 am

blondie2 wrote:
tylersmum wrote:Payne wasn't in the cover-up as it would have been necessary to involve the rest of your family and the mother in law would not play ball.
She wouldn't even back the others up on the checking times by saying that everyone was responsible their own children.

>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't understand what you mean by the three covering for the phone intercept and do you thihk that Oldfield was being set up.

Sorry am getting confused!

Sorry for disappearing but I got called out.

Information is that the phones of the Tapas 9 were intercepted.
Shortly after the confrontation would one should have thought would put the spotlight on Murat in fact there seemed to be a shift towards the McCanns.
One reason for this would be that the realised that the alleged sighting of Murat was bogus and was made up by the 3 of the Tapas 7.
This could have been due to phone intercepts obtained in this country as the Tapas 7 were back home by then.
The problem with a phone intercept done here is that it cannot be used as evidence on for investigative purposes.
So there could be a phone intercept of the 3 planning to falsely accused Murat but it cannot be used to charge the 3 with perverting the course of justice.
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 08, 2008 7:36 am

cushty wrote:
tylersmum wrote:Payne wasn't in the cover-up as it would have been necessary to involve the rest of your family and the mother in law would not play ball.
She wouldn't even back the others up on the checking times by saying that everyone was responsible their own children.


why would his mother-in-law need to know if he lied about calling into 3A around 6pm?

She wouldn't need to know about the 6.30 check but then again at that time Madeleine was probably still alive.
But later when RO'B and MO were running backwards and forwards he couldn't join in.
One of the first things that the police would have done is to ask a persons immediate family to corroborate timings.So if MO says he checked the children at 9.30 it is expected that RO would have supported this.
Diane Webster was not prepared to support anyones story saying that there was no agreement to check each others children at all.That was not very helpful to the other 3 couples but at least they could say that they had an agreement but it would not be possible in light of her statement for Payne to claim that he was involved.
Thats why I think they all knew because Diane Websters entire behaviour was of someone who didn't want to know.Reports indicate that she showed no emotion at the reports of Madeleine being missing her behaviour just doesn't seem right
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 08, 2008 7:48 am

Brit Abroad wrote:I posted much of this on the Main Madeleine Thread in another discussion regarding the removal of the body and the sightings.

Image

If this is the image that Smith was referring to then Sean is being carried in a totally different way to how JT described bundleman carrying the child.

BO'D said:

Talking about evening of 2nd May
"My phone rang as our food arrived; our baby had woken up. I walked the round trip to collect him from the kiddie club, then back to the restaurant. He kept crying and eventually we left our meal unfinished and walked back again to the club to fetch our sleeping daughter. Jes carried her home in a blanket........"

Talking about night of 3rd May:
"Our baby would not sleep and at about 8.30pm, Jes took him out for a walk in the buggy to settle him. Gerry was on his way back from checking on his children and the two men stopped to have a chat. They talked about daughters, fathers, families. Gerry was relaxed and friendly. They discussed the babysitting dilemmas at the resort and Gerry said that he and Kate would have stayed in too, if they had not been on holiday in a group. Jes returned to our apartment just before 9.30pm................................"


What BO'D tells us is that there was someone walking carrying a child in a blanket (Jes) but this was the night of 2nd May. (the Chaplins/screaming child night).

Maybe JT was transposing a sighting of Jes to the night of the 3rd. Maybe the Smiths are mistaken which night it was they saw the man carrying the child. Maybe JT did see someone carrying the body away and knew it was RO ... but said it looked like GM. Maybe JT did see someone she really thought to be GM. Maybe, maybe, maybe .............

BO'D also tells us that on 3rd May Gerry and Jes discussed babysitting dilemmas when they were chatting in the street. But if other reports are correct Gerry did not have had any "babysitting dilemma" on this particular night because MW had offered babysitting for 3rd (but the McCanns had cancelled it ...... one has to ask why?).

Walking the streets with a drugged, dying or dead child in your arms would be a pretty stupid thing for anyone to do, IMO.

It has been suggested that G might have accidentally killed M in anger when he went on his check and panicked ..... had to get the body out quickly before K came. No! All he needed to do would be ensure that K didn't do any of the kiddie checks .... fairly easy I would have thought. .. "You stay there, darling, I'll go!". In any case, there would have been the cleaning up to do before anyone else entered the apartment!

I think these sightings can only be of real importance to the investigation if the identity of 'bundle/egg/smith/man' has been established by them. It hasn't, ... as far as we know at least. But probably TylersMum can put me right there!

We could discuss all this forever (and have) but will it get us anywhere? :D

Karmaera said:
Ahhhh...but then we're dealing with a corpse that is in the next stage of decay and it would be overwhelmed with flies. I highly doubt that one could carry a corpse through Praia da luz, with a cloud of flies swarming and not have anyone not notice the uniqueness of it.


Next stage of decay? ... after less than 24 hours at most? ......Certainly not likely. And clouds of flies .... I don't think that likely in cool weather and at night, with all due respect.

If anything that picture shows how easy it would have been to transport a dead child therough the streets at night.
The picture of Gerry carrying the child looks no different to those that one sees from war zones and disaters areas of people carrying a dead child.

It would certainly be easy to carry a child through 500 yards of street at night than to spend an entire day pretending a missing child is actually present. It now seems clear that JT adopted the unnatural carrying posture of "bundleman" in order to distance him from the Smith's sighting .

As to the Smiths being mistaken on the date of the sighting it would be hard for the entire family to make a mistake and remember the family flew back to Portugal to give statements to the PJ.
These people are not attention seekers infact thery have avoided attention and are amongst the few witnesses in this case who have emerged with any credit.
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby JillyComeLately » Thu May 08, 2008 7:54 am

.
I believe Madeleine died on the night of 2-3rd May, possibly around midnight.

The day of the 3rd was spent covering it up (cleaning, washing curtains, moving body) and the evening was a staged charade for an abduction.
.
"It is a fact that in the right formation, the lifting power of many wings can achieve twice the distance of any bird flying alone."
User avatar
JillyComeLately
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 3703
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:39 pm

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Indiansummer » Thu May 08, 2008 8:05 am

Morning CW :D
Morning all
I have some questions for all:

Can anybody explain when the PJ suspected the parents?
I think they found an apartment very clean, the Twins in deep sleep, there were inconsistencies between the witnesses, burglary or not . Simple things that are instantly visible. He flew to the UK, to take a pillow for DNA to ? Were there none in Portugal? No bed sheets? No clothes of M.? No toothbrush-no DNA in the apartment of M? I can not understand-at least after a few days they would have the parents must monitor.
The father was the last-according to his statement - seen M. alive!
Let us assume that nobody left the Tappas round -there were no checks (as in the earlierstatements of the waiter.)Only one man left the table-presumably O'Brien. He was absent for long periods of time without witnesses, where he was. Why he is not a suspect?
I think, he has a big,big problem.
Last edited by Indiansummer on Thu May 08, 2008 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"The truth is coming like a train"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yz3HTefNxfc
Indiansummer
Suspect
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:52 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Hellsbells » Thu May 08, 2008 8:28 am

Indiansummer wrote:Morning CW :D
Morning all
I have some questions for all:

Can you explain when the PJ suspected the parents?
I think they found an apartment very clean, the Twins in deep sleep, there were inconsistencies between the witnesses, burglary or not . Simple things that are instantly visible. He flew to the UK, to take a pillow for DNA to ? Were there none in Portugal? No bed sheets? No clothes of M.? No toothbrush-no DNA in the apartment of M? I can not understand-at least after a few days they would have the parents must monitor.
The father was the last-according to his statement - seen M. alive!
Let us assume that nobody left the Tappas round -there were no checks (as in the earlierstatements of the waiter.)Only one man left the table-presumably O'Brien. He was absent for long periods of time without witnesses, where he was. Why he is not a suspect?


This was always niggling me and seemed so obvious but it just confirms to me that the PJ must have something pretty indicative against K&G
Hellsbells
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:29 pm

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Gigolo » Thu May 08, 2008 8:28 am

tylersmum wrote:
blondie2 wrote:
tylersmum wrote:Payne wasn't in the cover-up as it would have been necessary to involve the rest of your family and the mother in law would not play ball.
She wouldn't even back the others up on the checking times by saying that everyone was responsible their own children.

>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't understand what you mean by the three covering for the phone intercept and do you thihk that Oldfield was being set up.

Sorry am getting confused!

Sorry for disappearing but I got called out.

Information is that the phones of the Tapas 9 were intercepted.
Shortly after the confrontation would one should have thought would put the spotlight on Murat in fact there seemed to be a shift towards the McCanns.
One reason for this would be that the realised that the alleged sighting of Murat was bogus and was made up by the 3 of the Tapas 7.
This could have been due to phone intercepts obtained in this country as the Tapas 7 were back home by then.
The problem with a phone intercept done here is that it cannot be used as evidence on for investigative purposes.
So there could be a phone intercept of the 3 planning to falsely accused Murat but it cannot be used to charge the 3 with perverting the course of justice.


What credibility do you think can be placed on the report that it was a Portuguese police informer, who drew their attention to Mr Murat first, as early as the 6th of May.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ssian.html
Gigolo
Suspect
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 7:58 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby pakeha2007 » Thu May 08, 2008 8:35 am

Good morning, all.
Excellent point, Indiansummer:
"...He flew to the UK, to take a pillow for DNA to ? Were there none in Portugal? No bed sheets? No clothes of M.? No toothbrush-no DNA in the apartment of M?..."

Very peculiar indeed. No toothbrush?
pakeha2007
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Indiansummer » Thu May 08, 2008 8:39 am

Hellsbells wrote:
Indiansummer wrote:Morning CW :D
Morning all
I have some questions for all:

Can you explain when the PJ suspected the parents?
I think they found an apartment very clean, the Twins in deep sleep, there were inconsistencies between the witnesses, burglary or not . Simple things that are instantly visible. He flew to the UK, to take a pillow for DNA to ? Were there none in Portugal? No bed sheets? No clothes of M.? No toothbrush-no DNA in the apartment of M? I can not understand-at least after a few days they would have the parents must monitor.
The father was the last-according to his statement - seen M. alive!
Let us assume that nobody left the Tappas round -there were no checks (as in the earlierstatements of the waiter.)Only one man left the table-presumably O'Brien. He was absent for long periods of time without witnesses, where he was. Why he is not a suspect?


This was always niggling me and seemed so obvious but it just confirms to me that the PJ must have something pretty indicative against K&G

Yes possible.But perhaps he had the time to hide the body .Probably even to kill, perhaps after an abuse, or accidentally?
One way - that K. and G. never recognise .Was o'brien not the one who no longer works? From what he lives ?
Last edited by Indiansummer on Thu May 08, 2008 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
"The truth is coming like a train"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yz3HTefNxfc
Indiansummer
Suspect
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:52 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 08, 2008 8:52 am

Gigolo wrote:
tylersmum wrote:
blondie2 wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't understand what you mean by the three covering for the phone intercept and do you thihk that Oldfield was being set up.

Sorry am getting confused!

Sorry for disappearing but I got called out.

Information is that the phones of the Tapas 9 were intercepted.
Shortly after the confrontation would one should have thought would put the spotlight on Murat in fact there seemed to be a shift towards the McCanns.
One reason for this would be that the realised that the alleged sighting of Murat was bogus and was made up by the 3 of the Tapas 7.
This could have been due to phone intercepts obtained in this country as the Tapas 7 were back home by then.
The problem with a phone intercept done here is that it cannot be used as evidence on for investigative purposes.
So there could be a phone intercept of the 3 planning to falsely accused Murat but it cannot be used to charge the 3 with perverting the course of justice.


What credibility do you think can be placed on the report that it was a Portuguese police informer, who drew their attention to Mr Murat first, as early as the 6th of May.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ssian.html

Highly credible but then again paid informers probably named nearly everyone in PDL.
One of the problems experienced with the Soham murder inquiry was that once the Daily Express stuck up a £1,000,000 reward the inquiry became bogged down with informants trying to claim the reward.
With £ 2.5 million at stake people who informed for a living were probably working overtime.
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Indiansummer » Thu May 08, 2008 8:59 am

Just another question:
The reward is only suspended for the safe return of the girl? Right?
Not for references to the discovery of the presumably dead girl. Or what was really happened with the child?
"The truth is coming like a train"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yz3HTefNxfc
Indiansummer
Suspect
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:52 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby boring monday » Thu May 08, 2008 9:08 am

Alpine Aster wrote:
Trinket wrote:
Alpine Aster wrote:Trinket:
The incinerator--no human remains there, because one bone is always left after human cremation and dogs can still find them
Aster:
One bone is always left after Human Cremation? you said , yes hip joints metal yes but how can one bone always be left?.


There is this one bone that doesn't seem to burn up. I've seen photos of it before. It's got a distinctive shape.
I recently saw one on television here in the US that came from an urn that washed up in a creek and was recovered by police. They took it to an undertaker and he identified the bone, fishing it out of the ashes with long tweezers and said it was a human. He also fished out a necklace and declared it was most likely a woman who was cremated, based on the weight of the burned chain--it was delicate, burnt chain.
They also found staples--most likely from recent surgery,
They never found who dumped the urn, but they gave it a proper burial at the end of the show
I've heard since then, from another source, that there is always that one bone that doesn't burn.
Isn't THAT interesting!
:alien:


Yes it is, thanks for your reply I learn something new everyday.


I think it's one on the bone in the ear - incus? :?
User avatar
boring monday
New In Town
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:43 pm

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Hunger4Unger » Thu May 08, 2008 9:09 am

Renoir wrote:widowan2 - that reminds me - there was a thread -' I believe it was an abduction' or something like that. I reckon it was someone trawling for info. to use, and everyone wrote back to say why it couldn't be one. Very specific questions!!! And very useful answers, for someone who needed to 'fill the holes' as it were! :wink:


Nah, that was me, no sinister motive here.

I was duped by the McScams for a very brief while.

Now fully back on board.
Hunger4Unger
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: Hull, England

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby tylersmum » Thu May 08, 2008 9:27 am

Indiansummer wrote:Just another question:
The reward is only suspended for the safe return of the girl? Right?
Not for references to the discovery of the presumably dead girl. Or what was really happened with the child?

It is for the return of the child and the arrest and conviction of the people reponsible.
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: The case of today by Coldwater MK II

Postby Gigolo » Thu May 08, 2008 9:40 am

There is an interesting poll on the bottom left of the page, 69% of people who voted do not believe the case will have a resolution.
http://jn.sapo.pt/
Gigolo
Suspect
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 7:58 am

PreviousNext

Return to Maddy - Reference Forum and Investigations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests
cron