Something's puzzling me.

by inspirespirit 24.07.14 11:16

I go with the 'no abduction' theory. I had also thought that the 'neglect' didn't happen and was a smoke screen away from the real crime. However, if, as is said, someone each evening was away from the evening meal and therefore looking after all the children together, how come Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying for over an hour on Tuesday night? She would surely have also heard someone trying to calm her down if someone was with her?

by HelenMeg 24.07.14 11:28

inspirespirit wrote:I go with the 'no abduction' theory. I had also thought that the 'neglect' didn't happen and was a smoke screen away from the real crime. However, if, as is said, someone each evening was away from the evening meal and therefore looking after all the children together, how come Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying for over an hour on Tuesday night? She would surely have also heard someone trying to calm her down if someone was with her?

Well I am of those who believe that Mrs Fenn was 'helping' team Mc Cann when she 'heard the crying', as a friend of Mrs Murat. I dont believe the group neglected their children or left them alone therefore, yes, how could Mrs Fenn hear her crying. Maybe M was already dead by then anyway. A mystery.

by Claire25 24.07.14 11:42

I have wondered if all the other children were sleeping in the paynes appt and mm was in 5a on her own before so she didn't disturb the others. I think one of the nannies initially said that the twins were being bought back to 5a when she arrived just after the alarm was raised.

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

by View-from-Ireland 24.07.14 12:07

Claire25 wrote:

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

This is what I have always believed is the most likely answer.

by inspirespirit 24.07.14 12:16

View-from-Ireland wrote:
Claire25 wrote:

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

This is what I have always believed is the most likely answer.

oh wow. That is an interesting thought.

by Carrry On Doctor 24.07.14 12:32

View-from-Ireland wrote:
Claire25 wrote:

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

This is what I have always believed is the most likely answer.

An interesting thought and quite plausible. IMO there are many things that point to an event happening much earlier in the holiday and a staged abduction on the 3rd.

However, surely Mrs Fenn could tell the difference between the cry of an adult and that of a child ? How specific was Mrs Fenn about this ?

by inspirespirit 24.07.14 12:55

Carrry On Doctor wrote:
View-from-Ireland wrote:
Claire25 wrote:

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

This is what I have always believed is the most likely answer.

An interesting thought and quite plausible. IMO there are many things that point to an event happening much earlier in the holiday and a staged abduction on the 3rd.

However, surely Mrs Fenn could tell the difference between the cry of an adult and that of a child ? How specific was Mrs Fenn about this ?

I'm pretty sure when I read the pjfiles, that she said she could tell it was not a baby and sounded like a child older than 2. I can't imagine this elderly woman being 'in on it', because she did also say that she offered to phone the police for them at 10.30 and they said they had already called the police (which was untrue). She also said she thought it was odd that they said 'a little girl had been abducted' and not 'our daughter has gone missing'. So she doesn't sound as if she was in on it.

by Guest 24.07.14 13:00

I don't see Kate crying and saying "Maddie" for an hour and 15 minutes.

Mrs Fenn said it was child and I believe her.

by whoknows 24.07.14 13:57

BlueBag wrote:I don't see Kate crying and saying "Maddie" for an hour and 15 minutes.

Mrs Fenn said it was child and I believe her.

I have heard various theories out forward including that it may have been a child from the Oldfield apartment which was adjacent to the McCanns and that was a recording to reinforce the belief that Maddie was alive on that day. .I tend to see that as overly complicated so y feeling is that Mrs Fenn is a trustworthy witness . That would account for Kate's hostility towards Kate in her book.

by inspirespirit 24.07.14 14:52

I'm back to square one now. I don't believe Mrs Fenn was in on it, so if she heard a child crying Daddy for over an hour, how could they have had anyone looking after them, which brings the neglect issue back to mind. Also of course means the sods didn't check on them for over an hour at a time. Reminds me of the NSPCC advert, when the little boy stops crying because nobody comes. It is heartbreaking.

by Five Star 24.07.14 15:04

Maybe someone was with her after an accident but could not stop her crying until another person/doctor got back with some medicine/first aid box e.t.c?

...They are doctors so it does not sound likely imo but who knows with this case....

by Guest 24.07.14 15:07

Maybe someone was with her that made her cry for 75 minutes.

by kimHager 24.07.14 16:57

Well IF sedation wad a regular factor maybe TM DIDNT have their children with the others and i believe this due to:
A. In all of the statements it struck me odd that the mccanns was the ONLY family( in that circle) that didnt share meals or such or do the get togethers
B. I believe they didnt because of the bruises.Maddy and Kate had bruising of the arms.Kate tried to call it sunburn but how? No sunny days in PDL and why only one arm? Nope i stand firm in my belief of bruises.
C.That may be the whole coverup.If tapas saw bruises their would go their image and secret? Down the proverbial toilet.
C. I saw Gerrys reaction in the bus...he was mad. WHY?? Maybe HE was the one with temper..too much was mentioned on Kate being the one frazzled or short with the kids..maybe that was put to the public by good ole mr.confusion himself.
D. Ms.fenn may have heard daddy or maddy...we will never know sadly.
All my opinion. I may have it wrong...but till somebody cracks who knows? All opinion only

by **sharonl** 24.07.14 17:26

Carrry On Doctor wrote:
View-from-Ireland wrote:
Claire25 wrote:

Or there's the theory that it was actually KM crying 'maddie' not MM crying 'daddy' and that's why they don't like us knowing they ever called her maddie.

This is what I have always believed is the most likely answer.

An interesting thought and quite plausible. IMO there are many things that point to an event happening much earlier in the holiday and a staged abduction on the 3rd.

However, surely Mrs Fenn could tell the difference between the cry of an adult and that of a child ? How specific was Mrs Fenn about this ?

Mrs Fenn emphasised that it was not a young child of Two or under, it was an older child. But then later, she told the press that it was all rubbish, she didn't say anything.

All about Mrs Fenn here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 24.07.14 17:28

How could she claim she didn't say it when it's in her police statement?

by **PeterMac** 24.07.14 17:48

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:How could she claim she didn't say it when it's in her police statement?

Because she didn't know that her statement would one day become public property
Because perhaps someone had already 'leaned' on her
Because she was bright enough to realise that the whole thing was turning very nasty, and that she was outnumbered
Because as a Brit she knows the huge coercive power of libel lawyers
Because she wanted absolutely NOTHING to do with the McCanns
Because she did not want to be quotes in all the Red Tops in Britain
and probably several other good reasons as well

by whoknows 24.07.14 19:19

PeterMac wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:How could she claim she didn't say it when it's in her police statement?

Because she didn't know that her statement would one day become public property
Because perhaps someone had already 'leaned' on her
Because she was bright enough to realise that the whole thing was turning very nasty, and that she was outnumbered
Because as a Brit she knows the huge coercive power of libel lawyers
Because she wanted absolutely NOTHING to do with the McCanns
Because she did not want to be quotes in all the Red Tops in Britain
and probably several other good reasons as well

Am sorry but I cannot see how that could be true. Kate showed such animousity in her book towards Mrs Fenn that it shows they feared what she knew.

Also the alleged ''crying incident'' on the next eveing imo tried to cover up for the events of the previous evening. I guess they hoped that the evidence of an old lady ,like Mrs Fenn was ,could be discredited

by MRNOODLES 24.07.14 19:43

FWIW There's also a reason why the McCanns made out they all had dinner at break neck speed.

1. It counters Ms Fenn by making out the children weren't left for that long.

2. It helps (in their mind anyway) to discredit the dogs. Because whatever death theory is thrown at them, they can say, we were never away long enough for the death scent to permeate

by Guest 24.07.14 20:34

PeterMac wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:How could she claim she didn't say it when it's in her police statement?

Because she didn't know that her statement would one day become public property
Because perhaps someone had already 'leaned' on her
Because she was bright enough to realise that the whole thing was turning very nasty, and that she was outnumbered
Because as a Brit she knows the huge coercive power of libel lawyers
Because she wanted absolutely NOTHING to do with the McCanns
Because she did not want to be quotes in all the Red Tops in Britain
and probably several other good reasons as well

Aye.

by **PeterMac** 24.07.14 23:18

MRNOODLES wrote:FWIW There's also a reason why the McCanns made out they all had dinner at break neck speed.

1. It counters Ms Fenn by making out the children weren't left for that long. Dr Amaral saw through that one in the first 24 hours. As did the guy who took over from him. See their official reports. They knew knew it was a load of cobblers. Kate even admits in her Confession Statement ("madeleine' Exhibit KH 1) that the half hour checks were an enhancement to the normal routine - whatever that might have been - and were triggered by the crying reported by Madeleine. So if every half hour was an enhancement, what was "normal", Kate - over to you.

2. It helps (in their mind anyway) to discredit the dogs. Because whatever death theory is thrown at them, they can say, we were never away long enough for the death scent to permeate. And therefore they have to rely on the Last Photo to prove Madeleine was alive on 3rd. And as we know know know that the photo is a forgery this bit of their 'defence' falls.

by AskTheDogsSandra 25.07.14 6:42

Could you be called as a witness when Dr Amaral sues the McCanns, Peter?

by **sharonl** 25.07.14 7:11

PeterMac wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:FWIW There's also a reason why the McCanns made out they all had dinner at break neck speed.

1. It counters Ms Fenn by making out the children weren't left for that long. Dr Amaral saw through that one in the first 24 hours. As did the guy who took over from him. See their official reports. They knew knew it was a load of cobblers. Kate even admits in her Confession Statement ("madeleine' Exhibit KH 1) that the half hour checks were an enhancement to the normal routine - whatever that might have been - and were triggered by the crying reported by Madeleine. So if every half hour was an enhancement, what was "normal", Kate - over to you.

2. It helps (in their mind anyway) to discredit the dogs. Because whatever death theory is thrown at them, they can say, we were never away long enough for the death scent to permeate. And therefore they have to rely on the Last Photo to prove Madeleine was alive on 3rd. And as we know know know that the photo is a forgery this bit of their 'defence' falls.

What evidence is there that Madeleine was alive on May 3rd?

Friend of Jennifer Murat, Pamela heard (but not seen) a child crying - she claims that the child was not two or under and so that excludes the twins.

Martin Smith - Aquaintance of Murat (the knew each other from drinking in the same pub) saw a man carrying a child on May 3rd, this was nothing out of the ordinary according to him. This could have been any man with any child, goodness knows why he felt he needed to report this.

Margaret Hodges nephew, Phil Edmonds, claimed that he saw & photographed Madeleine, but he could not produce those photographs when asked.

The dodgy crèche records and a nanny who befriended the McCanns to the point that she visited them in Rothley.

Apart from that, is there any credible and verifiable evidence that Madeleine was alive on May 3rd?

If it were true that Madeleine had died before 3rd May, then in order to claim that she had been abducted on that night, they would need to create some evidence that she was alive before that.

Also, if Madeleine had died earlier, then there is no way that Mrs Fenn could have heard a child (not of two or younger) crying and the child that Smith claimed to have seen could not have been Madeleine.

by missbeetle 25.07.14 7:37

Bravo, Sharonl - beautifully said.

by inspirespirit 25.07.14 8:14

sharonl wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:FWIW There's also a reason why the McCanns made out they all had dinner at break neck speed.

1. It counters Ms Fenn by making out the children weren't left for that long. Dr Amaral saw through that one in the first 24 hours. As did the guy who took over from him. See their official reports. They knew knew it was a load of cobblers. Kate even admits in her Confession Statement ("madeleine' Exhibit KH 1) that the half hour checks were an enhancement to the normal routine - whatever that might have been - and were triggered by the crying reported by Madeleine. So if every half hour was an enhancement, what was "normal", Kate - over to you.

2. It helps (in their mind anyway) to discredit the dogs. Because whatever death theory is thrown at them, they can say, we were never away long enough for the death scent to permeate. And therefore they have to rely on the Last Photo to prove Madeleine was alive on 3rd. And as we know know know that the photo is a forgery this bit of their 'defence' falls.

What evidence is there that Madeleine was alive on May 3rd?

Friend of Jennifer Murat, Pamela heard (but not seen) a child crying - she claims that the child was not two or under and so that excludes the twins.

Martin Smith - Aquaintance of Murat (the knew each other from drinking in the same pub) saw a man carrying a child on May 3rd, this was nothing out of the ordinary according to him. This could have been any man with any child, goodness knows why he felt he needed to report this.

Margaret Hodges nephew, Phil Edmonds, claimed that he saw & photographed Madeleine, but he could not produce those photographs when asked.

The dodgy crèche records and a nanny who befriended the McCanns to the point that she visited them in Rothley.

Apart from that, is there any credible and verifiable evidence that Madeleine was alive on May 3rd?

If it were true that Madeleine had died before 3rd May, then in order to claim that she had been abducted on that night, they would need to create some evidence that she was alive before that.

Also, if Madeleine had died earlier, then there is no way that Mrs Fenn could have heard a child (not of two or younger) crying and the child that Smith claimed to have seen could not have been Madeleine.

I hadn't picked up on the fact that by saying it wasn't a child under 2 crying, that that was letting people know that Madeleine had to be alive on the Tuesday. Does seem an odd thing to say. However, why would she then go on to make the McCanns look bad about the police phone call and the comment about a child being abducted. She also tried to say she hadn't said any of it. She was in her 70's and I just can't see an elderly lady covering up for what could be a murder just because she knew Jennifer Murat. There's no way I would cover up for a friend if I thought a child had possibly been killed. It just seems too much to believe that sooooo many people are covering this up. Someone would have cracked by now.

by nomendelta 25.07.14 8:29

I thought that Mrs Fenn said she overheard the crying on May 1st and it was the McCanns who muddied the waters by claiming Maddie asked "why didn't you come when I cried?" on the morning of May 3rd. Indeed I've read threads where it was suggested this was a deliberate attempt to confuse things and take emphasis away from May 1st.