Re: Crèche signatures revisited

by skyrocket 05.03.16 19:04

Continued from post above:

Resort Map 1 below (captured 11 October 2007 and not on website pre-July 2007):

Baby Club - 4 to 11 months (Scarlet Payne)

Toddler 1 - one year olds (Grace Oldfield; Evie O'Brien)
Toddler 2 - two year olds (Amelie; Sean; Lily Payne)
Minis - three to five year olds (Madeleine; Ella O'Brien)
Juniors - six to nine

Kidz - ten to thirteen
Indy - fourteen to seventeen

It appears that the Kidz and Indy Clubs only operated in school holiday periods.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Who states that the Mini Club (and Baby Club) is/are in the main reception building?

The Mc's
The Tapas 7
Nanny Cat Baker (including police re-enactment of walk to beach with the mini club from the main reception building)

Nanny Charlotte Pennington
Nanny Jaqueline Williams
Nanny Stacy Portz
Anyone else?

Why would they state this if it wasn't the case?

Another point that intrigues me is Amy Tierney's statement regarding being 'at her desk at the Tapas Bar' when ROB approached her to ask for help to print photos. In Tierney's first police statement it says this: 'She confirms that she works as head of the Baby Club and Mini Club, the former being for children aged up to eleven months and the latter for children aged between three and five'. Why then would her desk be located at the Tapas Bar if both of the clubs she oversaw were based in the reception building? She managed Cat Baker and Emma Wilding (Minis) and Charlotte Pennington, Lynne Fretter and Pauline McCann (Babies). All five nannies would theoretically have been based in the main reception building during the day, according to statements (not according to Mark Warner's website). It would seem more likely that Tierney's desk would have been based at the site of the clubs she managed rather than anywhere else (wouldn't it?).

Any thoughts or info out there to definitively confirm one way or the other?

Thanks

by Verdi 05.03.16 21:03

I'm interested to learn..
a) Why on Sunday 29th April, Madeleine was signed in and out in the morning and afternoon, yet Cationa Baker said when interviewed that she couldn't remember whether Madeleine was in attendance at the creche on that day.

b) Why on Tuesday 1st May, Madeleine was signed in for the afternoon session but not signed out.

c) Why on Tuesday lst May, Madeleine was signed in the creche at 2:30 pm by her father when they claim to have taken a trip to the beach and took Madeleine back to the creche for the last one and half hours - 4:00 pm'ish.

d) Why on Wednesday 2nd May, Gerry McCann signed Madeleine in the creche at 9:20 am but she was signed out at 12:30 by Catriona Baker.

e) Why on Wednesday 2nd May, Kate McCann signed Madeleine in the creche at 2:45 pm in the name of Kate McCann but signed Madeleine out of the creche at 5:30 pm in the name of Kate Healy.

f) According to Gerry McCann, when the family left the apartment every day, Kate and children would exit through the patio door. Gerry McCann would lock the patio door from the inside and exit the apartment through the front door. Presumably they joined company outside somewhere - why didn't they both, together, drop the children off at their respective care rooms.

g) Why the emphasis on the short cut. Is this, combined with the patio/front door exit and the seperate signing in procedure an elaborate way of disguising the fact that the family weren't all seen together at any stage of the week after Sunday 29th April?

h) Why did they decide to take the twins to the creche facilities on Friday 4th May, when they claim that a lurking predator had stolen their little daughter only hours before.

by whodunit 05.03.16 21:39

BlueBag wrote:
I don't know about anybody else--well, except for DL---but there isn't much doubt in my mind that EN and MM were signed in by the same person.
Well I have big doubt.

The "A" is similar but the "N" is different.

And as I said... 20 minutes apart, two children in between and Naylor left a phone number which I'm sure has been checked out.

The 'N's' in Naylor and Madeleine are identical with their slightly exaggerated upper 'swoop'. The 'N's' in 'Madeleine' and 'McCann' are at variance, and the 'E's' in 'Elizabeth' are at variance, with the second E being more or less identical to the E's in Madeleine. So even if there are slight variations in letters between the names it's hardly conclusive of two different signatories. There are little 'hooks' on the left arms of the 'A's' in 'Naylor' and the second 'McCann' but no hooks on the 'A's' in 'ElizAbeth' or 'MAdeleine' . [whoever was writing these names formed very few letters the same each time] Look how the 'L's' in 'Naylor' and 'Madeleine' sort of curve and are slightly connected to or proceed from the previous letter, as if the 'yl' and 'el' were formed with a single stroke. And, as I pointed out before, the habitual capitalization of letters within the bodies of the names is a dead giveaway. The slant of the writing is identical.

Obviously nobody was paying attention to the sign in sheets. A person, any person, could sign a kid in at 9:10, skip a few lines and sign another kid in at '9:30' when it was actually 9:10:20. There's even an 'oops' on one of the lines to provide a space. Anybody looking to make it seem like a kid who wasn't there was really 'there' would do the same thing.

by Guest 06.03.16 7:47

So even if there are slight variations in letters between the names it's hardly conclusive of two different signatories.

There are variations.

There is also a Naylor phone number.

I would say it's highly unlikely they are the same signatories.

Obviously nobody was paying attention to the sign in sheets. A person, any person, could sign a kid in at 9:10, skip a few lines and sign another kid in at '9:30' when it was actually 9:10:20. There's even an 'oops' on one of the lines to provide a space. Anybody looking to make it seem like a kid who wasn't there was really 'there' would do the same thing.

This is just a massive stretch and illogical.
What if three kids were signed in before 9.30... oh dear.

by Carrry On Doctor 06.03.16 8:54

When were the creche sheets provided to the PJ ? Was there an opportunity for them to be amended or made up afresh and retro fitted (badly) ?

Dewi Lennard (Kikaratton) suggests that creche discrepancies start on the morning of Sunday 29th, and promotes an even earlier demise than the evening of Sunday 29th, but perhaps this is simply due to post 'abduction' interference of the creche sheets.

As with all things in this case, nothing is straightforward or as it seems.

by Doug D 06.03.16 10:39

Without seeing the original crèche sheets (not the copies from the files), I find it difficult to draw any real conclusions.

There is a degree of staining evident on some of the copies, which together with the apparent ‘tippexing’ out of lines and entries makes it virtually impossible to be certain what has actually happened, what the photocopied templates (if they were photocopies, but see below) looked like, who entered what and why.

There is also the mystery of the ‘type face’ letters appearing on some of the sheets, which make no sense whatsoever (e.g. Starfish, 30/4 PM – first two letters of Sean and time in reads 15a5) together with the changes in typeface and random mis-spellings on the templates. If the templates were printed off a computer or photocopied from a master copy, these should not occur.

I find the Textusa look at some of these discrepancies in:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

very relevant, but I can’t recall that the ‘what has been tippexed out & what hasn’t’ has ever been looked at anywhere.

Although these questions should surely have been asked of the crèche staff, I don’t believe there is a report of the answers and explanations anywhere and the staff had probably been shipped out of the OC by the time it was realized that it was relevant, thereby avoiding proper scrutiny.

by whodunit 06.03.16 20:56

BlueBag wrote:
So even if there are slight variations in letters between the names it's hardly conclusive of two different signatories.

There are variations.

There is also a Naylor phone number.

I would say it's highly unlikely they are the same signatories.

Obviously nobody was paying attention to the sign in sheets. A person, any person, could sign a kid in at 9:10, skip a few lines and sign another kid in at '9:30' when it was actually 9:10:20. There's even an 'oops' on one of the lines to provide a space. Anybody looking to make it seem like a kid who wasn't there was really 'there' would do the same thing.
This is just a massive stretch and illogical.
What if three kids were signed in before 9.30... oh dear.

1. I'll see if I can put this as simply as possible: Discrepancies between the two different names are rendered irrelevant because of the discrepancies within each of the names.

The writing of each signatory is so erratic that their letter formations are inconsistent from one word to the next, so sweeping away the similarities based upon discrepancies between the names is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, particularly as there is a discernible pattern to the inconsistencies that are present in each signatory:

--do you not see how there is no hook in the left arm of the 'A' in ElizAbeth and yet there is a hook in the left arm of the [capital] 'A' in NAyor? Tellingly, fascinatingly, completely relevantly, there is no hook in the A in MAdeleine [there's that completely out of place capital A again, present in both names on the sheet] while there IS A HOOK in the A in the second McCAnn.

2. Gee, Gerry couldn't possibly have known Naylor's number and provided it on the creche sheet..

3. You say it's 'highly unlikely' but you're not really giving us any back up your opinion. You can't just render something 'unlikely' with a wave of your hand and expect it to be enough for most people.

4. Perhaps somebody did try to sign their kid in before 9:30, apparently saw McCann down below had already signed in at '9:30' and wrote 'oops' on the line as if THEY were somehow in error.

by Guest 07.03.16 7:55

Point 1 is subjective and don't prove anything. I disagree with you. Did Gerry sign in Jessica Berry as well? Also has a hooked A.

Point 2. The Naylors are in on it now?

Point 3. It is highly unlikely considering what I said, I didn't just wave my hand.

Point 4. Is ridiculous. What if there was just one more child? What if there was four?

by Guest 07.03.16 7:59

Here's another question.

Who said that the parents always filled in those columns and not someone else like the people in charge of the group?

There was more than one?

by **Tony Bennett** 07.03.16 8:04

skyrocket wrote:Is there categoric evidence that MBM's mini club was being held at the location of the 24 hour reception building in April/May 2007?

From their start up date in Portugal in spring 2006 all the way through to July 2007 when the Praia da Luz web pages were taken down and re-vamped, Mark Warner were advertising the following:

Located in the Waterside Garden is our fully equipped childcare centre offering...

....More to follow in next post.

@ skyrocket You have gone to an enormous amount of trouble to query whether or not Madeleine's 'Mini Club' was located at the Ocean Club reception building (as per Richard Hall's film).

Such detailed research and evidence as you have published is always deeply appreciated on this forum, where evidenced analysis is always superior to unevidenced opinion.

However, you could have saved yourself a great deal of trouble on this occasion by simply looking at the full-page map, titled 'The Ocean Club', on page 50 of Dr Kate McCann's 'very truthful' book, 'madeleine'.

Her map confirms that the Mini Club was indeed at the Ocean Club reception, about 600 yards away from the Tapas bar restaurant.

And this does raise some questions about the times of the drop-off and collection - as per the chart I posted up the thread

by **Tony Bennett** 07.03.16 8:09

BlueBag wrote:Here's another question. Who said that the parents always filled in those columns and not someone else like the people in charge of the group? There was more than one?

I must admit I thought that Cat Baker was in sole charge of her group of 7 children, with no assistants.

Slightly off topic, can anyone tell me which club Lily Payne attended that week? I can't find her name on any of the crèche records.

by skyrocket 07.03.16 8:38

@TB

Lily was in one of the three 'Toddler 2' groups called 'jellyfish?' (although called 'starfish' on 2 of the creche sheets?) with both Amelie and Sean. This group seems to have been looked after by Shinead Vine although Sarah Williamson's statement is a bit confusing in that respect. The other two 'Toddler 2' groups were looked after by Williamson and Susan Owen and all three nanny's were supervised by Stacy Portz who oversaw 'Toddler 1' (1 year olds); 'Toddler 2' (2 year olds); and the Juniors (6-9 year olds).

Lily didn't seem to attend much.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Toddler clubs are stated as being in the creche next to the Tapas Bar. I think it is possible that the mini club was also sited here (see earlier post).

by **Tony Bennett** 07.03.16 8:49

skyrocket wrote:The Toddler clubs are stated as being in the creche next to the Tapas Bar. I think it is possible that the mini club was also sited here (see earlier post).

Are you kidding?

Even though Kate McCann says categorically in her book that Madeleine's mini-club was at the Ocean Club reception, and Gerry McCann confirmed it by claiming to have found a short-cut from the Tapas restaurant (twins' creche) to the Ocean Club???

dontgetit

by skyrocket 07.03.16 9:13

@TB

I kid not!!

I said only that I think it's a possibility based on evidence from the Mark Warner Ocean Club website from its inception in April 2006. The site states the following through to July 2007, when the description was replaced with a Resort Map.

'Located in the Waterside Garden is our fully equipped childcare centre offering our award winning childcare for children aged 4 months and upwards. There is a colourful crèche with an outdoor play area and the nannies organise regular beach trips and other supervised fun activities for the children. Hours are 9am till 12.30pm and 2.30pm to 5.30pm.

We offer a ‘dining out service’ (only available for parents using the Millenium and Tapas restaurants). in the crèche on a drop-in basis in the evenings for children aged 4 months to 9 years. For those parents wishing to dine at alternative restaurants in the village, babysitting is available on request at additional charge. Our Indy Club for 14-17 year olds is situated near the Ocean Club Gardens.'

And, the following was the intial description of the resort as opposed to the dedicated childcare description above.

'The Ocean Club is a ‘village-style’ resort made up of apartments situated in three different locations around the village of Praia da Luz.Ocean Club Gardens is set on the hillside in the north of the village, with apartments either overlooking one of the pools or set further south, close to the indoor pool and reception. The older Kids Club, MIllenium Restaurant and 3 of the tennis courts are located here, a 10-minute walk from the beach.
Waterside Gardens is located in the west of the village, beside a pool with a separate children’s paddling pool. There are 2 tennis courts, the younger children's club and the Tapas Restaurant and Bar also situated here.'

In July 2007 the address/site was removed and a new one set up by late October 2007 (latest). The new site now introduced a resort map, clearly showing the mini club in the Tapas site, and a photo of the 'tented' childcare centre, next to the Tapas Bar, showing a group of what looks like children between the ages of 3 and 5 years (which would be the mini club).

See my post with the map above.

Puzzling - Yes. Fact - Yes.

by Guest 07.03.16 9:34

Tony Bennett wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Here's another question. Who said that the parents always filled in those columns and not someone else like the people in charge of the group? There was more than one?
I must admit I thought that Cat Baker was in sole charge of her group of 7 children, with no assistants.

Slightly off topic, can anyone tell me which club Lily Payne attended that week? I can't find her name on any of the crèche records.

I would be surprised.

Was there some cross-over between the groups?

What if she needed a toilet break?

Anyway... she may have filled in the form sometimes and sometimes the parents if she was busy.

Who knows?

Anyway I think it's all a mountain out of a molehill.

by Doug D 07.03.16 10:02

Skyrockets post about ‘Jez Wilkins Dodgy Statement’ yesterday took me to the original handwritten copies of his statement, which showed some individual random printed letters, much the same as those on the crèche sheets.

These statements presumably have been passed through some sort of OCR program (a manual clerical correction would not have substituted an ‘a’ for a ‘2’ in the crèche time) which has added these letters and maybe suggests that the PJ were also working from copies rather than the original documents.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Whilst this offers an explanation to these amendments, if the PJ were indeed looking at copies rather than the original crèche sheets, they would have been shooting in the dark, much as we are, with regard to the tippexed corrections and amendments.

I am also at a loss to explain why any police force would use an OCR program with some type of autocorrect (autoerror?) facility prior to translation.

This also begs the question as to whether the translations into Portuguese have been accurately done or, once the statements have been OCR’d, just been subject to a type of ‘google translate’ program, which, from experience, gives us the gist of what is being said, but omits many of the niceties of a proper translation.

Are any of our Portuguese speakers able to confirm that these are good translations and not just word substitutions, that can affect the meaning?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Tony Bennett** 07.03.16 10:08

skyrocket wrote:@TB

I kid not!!

I said only that I think it's a possibility based on evidence from the Mark Warner Ocean Club website from its inception in April 2006. The site states the following through to July 2007, when the description was replaced with a Resort Map.

Therefore you are suggesting that all of (1) Kate McCann (2) Gerry McCann (3) Catriona Baker and (4) the proof-readers, advisers, lawyers and publishers of Kate McCann's book 'madeleine' are all either lying or mistaken in saying that the Lobsters crèche was based at the Ocean Club reception.

I am even more puzzled and astonished before at your reasoning

by Guest 07.03.16 10:14

So what's the theory when supposedly Kate signed Madeleine in (35 minutes later)?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It doesn't stack up.

The Naylors would have to be in on it - is anyone saying that?

by Guest 07.03.16 10:30

Did the Naylors ever make a statement?

I'm not implying their involvement (I think it highly unlikely) but it would be interesting to know what they have said.

by skyrocket 07.03.16 10:50

@TB

No - I'm not 'suggesting' anything, merely stating fact i.e. the Mark Warner website info from the start of the 2006 season to July 2007 when the web pages were taken down, state that the younger children's clubs were in Waterside Gardens (Tapas) and the older clubs were next to the Millenium Restaurant. The Resort Map produced mid-2007 re-iterates the same locations. No mention at all of the 24 hour reception building being used for anything. You can see that even the drop-in night childcare is described as being in 'the creche'.

I don't know what the childcare set up was and I doubt whether anyone beyond number 3 on your list do either.

I think it's important that all avenues and info are looked at and and taken into consideration.

The Tapas site would seem more practical - large childcare centre set up; grassy outdoor area and paddling pool; next to Tapas for high tea (I appreciate that you have doubts about this). If evening drop-in here also - seems more sensible location right next to one of the two restaurants parents would be eating in (only those guests eating at the Tapas or Millenium could use the free night drop-in creche).

I don't want to get into a protracted discussion - I just put the info out there for others to consider.

by whodunit 07.03.16 15:00

BlueBag wrote:So what's the theory when supposedly Kate signed Madeleine in (35 minutes later)?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It doesn't stack up.

The Naylors would have to be in on it - is anyone saying that?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by whodunit 07.03.16 15:12

BlueBag wrote:Point 1 is subjective and don't prove anything. I disagree with you. Did Gerry sign in Jessica Berry as well? Also has a hooked A.

Point 2. The Naylors are in on it now?

Point 3. It is highly unlikely considering what I said, I didn't just wave my hand.

Point 4. Is ridiculous. What if there was just one more child? What if there was four?

1. The 'hook' in the 'A' in Jessica is more like a third arm, as if the letter is formed by putting up a post and swinging the rest of the letter off it. The hooks in the A's in NAylor and McCAnn are tiny little flourishes found at the bottom of the left arms.

2. I don't know but the signatories are suggestive. People don't just sign your kid into a daycare without your permission. If they do, you raise a stink. No stinks were raised.

3. Again, you pointing out dissimilarities is hardly relevant if there is a reasonable explanation for them. You disagree, fine.

4. There were hardly ever a large crowd of kids in at one time. Six seems to be the average capacity in MBM's creche.

by Guest 07.03.16 16:32

whodunit wrote:

4. There were hardly ever a large crowd of kids in at one time. Six seems to be the average capacity in MBM's creche.

Why do you persist with this ridiculous line of reasoning?

Was Gerry psychic?

Why didn't he leave a gap on other days?

Also what about the session when Kate signed Madeleine in?

Are the Naylors in on it?

by **Tony Bennett** 07.03.16 18:06

skyrocket wrote:@TB

I don't know what the childcare set up was...I don't want to get into a protracted discussion - I just put the info out there for others to consider.

But with great respect, you have put out misinformation - when Gerry McCann, Kate McCann, Catriona Baker and others all give evidence that the Lobsters MiniClub was held at the Ocean Club Reception, it is useless to look at what brochures printed at one time or another have to say on the subject.

But, OK, no 'protracted discussion'. You have spoken. I have spoken. Our disagreement remains unresolved.

by skyrocket 08.03.16 9:33

Well, I'm actually (almost) dumbstruck that at least one other member agrees with @TB that the McCanns' and Cat Bakers words are to be taken as gospel on this point!!! affraid

Anyway - I do object to being accused of spreading 'misinformation' when the information I reproduced is fact and not in any way manipulated (by me). I have always been extremely careful to treble check any info I post on here, aware that any mistakes or omissions will be on view for evermore and may have a negative impact/skew on reality. I was specific about when the info was introduced; changed and removed. It's there for all to see and like all other info on here, or elsewhere, it is up to individuals to decide whether it has any merit.

Moving on:

Re: the Naylor/Rider theory. I don't have any views on this (i.e. Madelene Rider substitute) but the following factual info may be interesting:

1.The Naylors booked through Mark Warner for the week of 28 April to 5 May, but provided their own flights/transport to the resort, so may or may not have been in Portugal before the 28th.

2. The Naylors were booked into apartment BP01 (shown as T1 and T2?) as 2 adults; daughter Elizabeth (3) and C? (infant).

3. From the 26 April to 5 May, on the Ocean Club booking sheets, a second booking appears for 'Naylor' for 2 people under 'owner booked'.

4. These Naylors were booked into G4N, which is shown as a T2 (2 bedrooms), G4 is the block adjacent to the McCanns (Wilkins/O'Donnell are in G4O).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

5. As an aside, several months ago I posted on these booking sheets (at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

On the sheets (first 4 days until 5 May) there are 223 families/bookings. All are in alphabetical order except the McCanns (the O'Donnell booking is explained by the apostrophe confusing the programme). The McCann name has moved forward about 8 names alphabetically and appears just above the two Naylor bookings (coincidentally I think). The point being that of all the names on the sheets, produced on 4 separate days, the McCann name is the only one out of place; also, on the last sheet (5 May) both the McCann and Mark Warner Naylor entries are written as nARKWARNER.co.uk (I know this point has been raised elsewhere along with the strange small 'r' alongside the McCanns entry on an earlier sheet).

These sheets are Ocean Club records not Mark Warner.