The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

Regards,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

What do we KNOW?

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re; What do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:47 pm

In Kate McCann's first statement she says that the patio door was unlocked and she, Gerry and Matthew all used it when checking on the children. She also says that the children's bedroom window was open and the shutters raised, and she refuses to abandon this story even though it obviously doesn't make sense. 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Consequently I decided to explore the idea that Gerry and Kate did lock the apartment as he first said, and did believe that the open window meant there had been a break-in. This explains why they were adamant that Madeleine had been taken or abducted. In that scenario I would have been sure too.

Why did they lie about the patio door being unlocked then? 

We know that at 9.30pm two members of the group were at the apartments; Matthew Oldfield and Russell O'Brien. If the McCanns apartment was locked, they had possession of their key also. Innocent or guilty, Matthew Oldfield would have been reluctant to be the last person in a locked apartment with three children, one of whom was missing at the next check. His check could have been left out, but what if someone saw him going in?  This is perhaps why the timeline was important on the night; there was a dilemma. 
 
What was needed was something to take attention away from Russell and Matthew. After all, they were friends and doctors and above suspicion. So we have Jane Tanner's sighting at 9.15pm of someone carrying a child. He is coming from the direction of the open window (perhaps because that was indeed a fact, so had to be included?). But how did he get into a locked apartment? Hence the apartment had to be left unlocked.


All my own opinion, of course, and other opinions are welcome to clarify my aching brain.

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by Guest on Sun Jan 04, 2015 12:08 am

@G-Unit wrote:In Kate McCann's first statement she says that the patio door was unlocked and she, Gerry and Matthew all used it when checking on the children. She also says that the children's bedroom window was open and the shutters raised, and she refuses to abandon this story even though it obviously doesn't make sense. 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Consequently I decided to explore the idea that Gerry and Kate did lock the apartment as he first said, and did believe that the open window meant there had been a break-in. This explains why they were adamant that Madeleine had been taken or abducted. In that scenario I would have been sure too.

Why did they lie about the patio door being unlocked then? 

We know that at 9.30pm two members of the group were at the apartments; Matthew Oldfield and Russell O'Brien. If the McCanns apartment was locked, they had possession of their key also. Innocent or guilty, Matthew Oldfield would have been reluctant to be the last person in a locked apartment with three children, one of whom was missing at the next check. His check could have been left out, but what if someone saw him going in?  This is perhaps why the timeline was important on the night; there was a dilemma. 
 
What was needed was something to take attention away from Russell and Matthew. After all, they were friends and doctors and above suspicion. So we have Jane Tanner's sighting at 9.15pm of someone carrying a child. He is coming from the direction of the open window (perhaps because that was indeed a fact, so had to be included?). But how did he get into a locked apartment? Hence the apartment had to be left unlocked.


All my own opinion, of course, and other opinions are welcome to clarify my aching brain.
The apartment had to be unlocked because of the shutter's being jemmied which weren't.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re; What do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sun Jan 04, 2015 1:03 am

Exactly, we know that now. If they knew, why bother mentioning the window at all then?

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by PeterMac on Sun Jan 04, 2015 2:15 am

First statement
"At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before.
She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open,
the window was also open,
the shutters raised and
the curtains open,
while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did. "


She clearly told Gerry this as his first statement says
“At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment
through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom
door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and
the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as
said earlier, was never locked, was closed.”


In Gerry’s statement of 10th May 2007 the story is still the same. Open window and OPEN curtains

“The deponent ran into the apartment accompanied by the rest of the group who, at
the time, were seated at the table. When he arrived at the bedroom he first noticed
that the door was completely open, the window was also open to one side, the
shutters almost fully raised, the curtains drawn back, MADELEINE’s bed was
empty but the twins continued sleeping in their cots. He clarifies that according to
what KATE told him, that was the scenario that she found when she entered the
apartment."



So it is now confirmed that this is what HE saw, as well as what Kate found.

It has been said three times, "and what I tell you three times, is true"

BUT THEN it all changed
in 2009 Kate gave an interview as part of a programme which was recorded and
can be seen on YouTube.
At 1:15 she says
“I did my check about ten o’clock and went in through the sliding patio doors, and I
just stood actually, and I thought, uh, all quiet. And to be honest, I might have been
tempted to turn round then, but I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door
where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we’d left it.
I went to close it to about here, and then as I got to here, it suddenly . . . slammed,
and as I opened it, it was then, that I just thought I’ll just look at the children.
I see Sean and Amelie in the cot . . . .
I was looking at Madeleine’s bed which is here, and it was dark and I was looking
and I was thinking is that, is that Madeleine or is that the bedding and I couldn't
quite make her out, and it sounds really stupid now, but at the time I was just
thinking I didn’t want to put the light on because I didn't want to wake them, and
literally as I went back in, the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn,
[demonstrates with both forearms together] that were closed, “wheesh’ like a
gust of wind kind of blew them open.
And cuddle cat was still there, and the pink blanket was still there. I knew straight
away that, err, she’d been . . . taken, yer know.”


So now we have CLOSED curtains, ' whooshing' in the approved manner, but nothing, absolutely NOTHING about the window or the shutters.
And of course if the curtains had been completely closed she couldn't have seen the window or the shutters anyway !

A third version appears in the book.
p. 71 “Then I noticed that the door to the children’s bedroom was open quite
wide, not how we had left it. At first I assumed that Matt must have moved it. I
walked over and gently began to pull it to. Suddenly it slammed shut, as if caught
by a draught. A little surprised, I turned to see if I’d left the patio doors open and let
in the breeze. Retracing my steps, I confirmed that I hadn’t. Returning to the
children’s room, I opened the door a little, and as I did so I glanced over at
Madeleine’s bed. I couldn’t quite make her out in the dark. I remember looking at it
and looking at it for what was probably only a few seconds, though it felt like much
longer. It seems so daft now, but I didn’t switch on the light straight away. Force of
habit, I suppose: taking care to avoid waking the children at all costs.
When I realised Madeleine wasn’t actually there, I went through to our
bedroom to see if she’d got into our bed. That would explain the open door. On the
discovery of another empty bed, the first wave of panic hit me. As I ran back into
the children’s room the closed curtains flew up in a gust of wind. My heart lurched
as I saw now that, behind them, the window was wide open and the shutters on
the outside raised all the way up. ”


which is a neat mixture of Version ONE and Version TWO

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 149
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re; What do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:27 am

Thank you for that comprehensive reply Peter. I am aware that the stories changed over time, which is why I went back to the first statements because the more information I have the more confused I get. I know that lies were told, and am trying to work out why. I can't work out why the open window was included in the story at all, as it was unnecessary in an unlocked apartment. The only reason I could see as to why it was there was if the apartment was actually locked up. I would be grateful for your thoughts as to why it was mentioned at all?

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

This was the original

Post by PeterMac on Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:15 am


Kate's claim that the door slammed, and when she went in the curtains “Whooshed” open.

p. 205 “We’d never lied about anything - not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else.” (madeleine, by Kate McCann)

“I did my check about ten o’clock and went in through the sliding patio doors, and I just stood actually, and I thought, uh, all quiet. And to be honest, I might have been tempted to turn round then, but I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we’d left it.
I went to close it to about here, and then as I got to here, it suddenly . . . slammed, and as I opened it, it was then, that I just thought I’ll just look at the children.
I see Sean and Amelie in the cot . . . .
I was looking at Madeleine’s bed which is here, and it was dark and I was looking and I was thinking is that, is that Madeleine or is that the bedding and I couldn't quite make her out, and it sounds really stupid now, but at the time I was just thinking I didn’t want to put the light on because I didn't want to wake them, and literally as I went back in, the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn, [demonstrates with both forearms together] that were closed, “wheesh’ like a gust of wind kind of blew them open.
And cuddle cat was still there, and the pink blanket was still there. I knew straight away that, err, she’d been . . . taken, yer know.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhACS6ck-Dw&feature=player_embedded
See 1:15 onwards

We notice a number of significant points in this interview.
We are told that the door was open “further than we had left it”, but on the video it is clear and demonstrated that this did not mean fully open.
We are told that the curtains were fully closed, and this is demonstrated on the video by the forearms being held vertically in front of the body and together
We are told that the curtains blew into the room.
* * *
There are problems with this version of events.
If the curtains had blown up in the manner described they would have fallen back onto the bed, and have been lying across the bedclothes and across the chair

The photos taken by the PJ show clearly that the curtains are hanging down, and held firmly, one trapped down the side of the bed against the wall, and the other behind the wicker chair. The folds in each curtain are clearly flattened against the wall by the furniture.
*see photo at http://mccannfiles.com/id155.html

The bed is also unmade. It is alleged that Kate had slept in this bed the night before.

The photos show the windows closed. They are of the type that lock together automatically when closed, and require a finger inserted into the black mechanism in the centre to release the catch.
They also show the shutters in the almost closed position
And the photos also show the curtains half closed, the left curtain slightly more closed than the right one.

However,
From Kate’s police statement, dated 4th May we learn,
“At around 10pm, the witness came to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed, but unlocked, as already said, and immediately noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.”

Gerry’s statement of 4th May does contain hearsay evidence, but as husband and wife they have obviously spoken between themselves, and the statement can be taken at face value.
“At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as said earlier, was never locked, was closed.”

In Gerry’s 10th May statement we find
“The deponent ran into the apartment accompanied by the rest of the group who, at the time, were seated at the table. When he arrived at the bedroom he first noticed that the door was completely open, the window was also open to one side, the shutters almost fully raised, the curtains drawn back, MADELEINE’s bed was empty but the twins continued sleeping in their cots. He clarifies that according to what KATE told him, that was the scenario that she found when she entered the apartment.
Then he closed the shutters, made his way to the outside and tried to open them, which he managed to do, much to his surprise given that he thought that that was only possible from the inside. “

Kate made the first half of a statement on 6th September, but it was adjourned late at night, to be resumed the following day. It was at this point that the events of late evening of 3rd May were about to to be discussed.

The following day Kate immediately exercised her right to remain silent as arguida and said nothing more of evidential interest. The more detailed analysis of her story was therefore never undertaken.

So in the original statements the curtains were drawn back, or fully open.
in the police photos they are half drawn.
In the subsequent explanation they are fully closed
In addition the windows are sliding, so only one half can be open, that pane moving in front of the other. A gust of wind would therefore disturb only one curtain.

But now let us examine the story around the children’s bedroom door.

In her police statement of 4th May, which was then confirmed, albeit in hearsay form in both of Gerry’s statements, she says, explicitly, “. . .the children’s bedroom door was completely open”. The same form of words is used by Gerry. “the door was completely open”. and he clarifies that this is what he was told by Kate.

But months later the story of the slamming door, and the door left open a bit more than we had left it, is told to journalists as in the video [q.v.], and it is this version which appears in the book.

p. 71 “Then I noticed that the door to the children’s bedroom was open quite wide, not how we had left it. At first I assumed that Matt must have moved it. I walked over and gently began to pull it to. Suddenly it slammed shut, as if caught by a draught.”

Leaving aside for a moment the clear indication in that passage, and in the video, [see transcript] that Kate had no intention of looking in at the children, this is clearly at odds with all the police statements so far given, which emphasise and repeat that the door was “completely open”

What are the possible ways of understanding this paradox ?

The first option is that Kate immediately started rearranging the room, but in this case did not make the bed, which was still unmade from the previous night.
It is of interest to note that she had not even pulled the bed straight when she got up, or when she made Madeleine's bed, which is neat and tidy in the photos, with the corner neatly turned down, giving at least the appearance that no one had slept in it.

(see photo at http://mccannfiles.com/id155.html)

But she must have tucked the curtains back down the crack between the bed and the wall, certainly having to move the bed out to do so, and made sure they were hanging properly, before pushing it back against the wall before the police arrived.

She must also have done this before returning to the Tapas bar to give the alert, as none of the friends mention any such activity.

Again she must also have partially closed the curtains, since both statements insist that the curtains were “open”, “drawn open” or “drawn back”. and in the photos they are not.

The second option is that the curtains did not "whoosh".
And if the curtains did not "Whoosh" then the door did not slam.

It is important to remember that it was not reported in either of Gerry’s statements, nor in Kate’s statement that the curtains blew open or that the door slammed. This detail was only reported by Kate to journalists several months later.

The weather that night was mild, with a light breeze,. In Faro it was recorded as reaching only Force 3. At 10pm only 14.4kph. This is the bottom end of Force 3.

Beaufort Force 3 Gentle breeze 12–19 km/h (3–5 m/s)
Leaves and small twigs constantly moving, light flags extended.

Might that be enough to slam a door ? Or to whoosh a curtain trapped behind a bed ?

Neither Kate nor Gerry mentions closing the window.
In her statement Kate does not mention Gerry’s closing and opening the shutters.

In view of the evidence of the above, one is surely entitled to question the “official account” or indeed any of them, in that they are not supported by any evidence.

On the contrary, what scant evidence there is supports an entirely different theory.

“We’d never lied about anything - not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else.”

____________________

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 149
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re; What do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sun Jan 04, 2015 8:09 am

Thanks again Peter. I have just looked again in the files and found something that destroys my theory of a locked apartment. 

'During Gerry's first questioning he said that Kate, at 22.00, when she went to the apartment, entered by the locked front door . When she entered she noticed the door to the children's bedroom was opened inwards, the window was open and the shutter was raised. (if this had happened, she would not have noticed this scene after entering. She would have noticed this before entering the apartment, as she would have passed the window of the children's bedroom).'
- During his second questioning, Gerry said that Kate entered through the patio doors.
- During Kate's questioning she said that she entered through the patio doors.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm



it appears that they were stupid enough to lie about the window being open then, even though it made no sense if the patio door was open (as any abductor, burglar or whoever would have known if they 'cased' the joint at all). Back to the drawing board for me then.  dance

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by Guest on Sun Jan 04, 2015 8:30 am

@G-Unit wrote:Thanks again Peter. I have just looked again in the files and found something that destroys my theory of a locked apartment. 

'During Gerry's first questioning he said that Kate, at 22.00, when she went to the apartment, entered by the locked front door . When she entered she noticed the door to the children's bedroom was opened inwards, the window was open and the shutter was raised. (if this had happened, she would not have noticed this scene after entering. She would have noticed this before entering the apartment, as she would have passed the window of the children's bedroom).'
- During his second questioning, Gerry said that Kate entered through the patio doors.
- During Kate's questioning she said that she entered through the patio doors.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm



it appears that they were stupid enough to lie about the window being open then, even though it made no sense if the patio door was open (as any abductor, burglar or whoever would have known if they 'cased' the joint at all). Back to the drawing board for me then.  dance
Have a look at this.Scroll down to the piece.
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/By_Which_Exit..html

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re; what do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:03 am

Thanks for that, explains the problems I was wrestling with very well :)

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by canada12 on Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:13 am

It's pretty simple, really. Anyone going into 5A by way of the front door would have had to have passed or been in close proximity to the children's window. They should have noticed immediately if the shutter was broken or raised.

So the story had to be changed to say they entered by way of the patio door, thus avoiding seeing the supposedly raised shutter. If the patio door was locked, it couldn't be opened from the outside. So the patio door had to be left unlocked, for the story to make sense.

However, this complication renders the raised shutter theory ridiculous. Any burglar worth his or her salt would have cased the joint and noticed that the patio door was unlocked. A simple entry and exit. Why bother with raised shutters and the complexity of climbing out through the window? Raising the shutters would have made a noise. Breaking them to raise them would have made even more noise.

In and out through the patio door.

But then, that renders Kate's claim that she "knew" what happened ridiculous. If there's no raised shutter, there's no evidence of an abduction, since the patio door was already known to be unlocked.

And since it's all heresay anyway, based on Kate's claim alone, then the entire abduction scenario can be demolished with the absence of proof of a raised or broken shutter.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 198
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by PeterMac on Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:43 am

And later still, on their behalf, Mitchell said the whole window / shutter scenario thing was NOT the point of entry anyway.

"During the week following the Dispatches programme the McCanns’ official
spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, announced that the McCanns now reversed their
previous stance on the break-in story.
“THE spokesman for the family of Madeleine McCann has reversed a statement
made in the early days of the search for the missing child. . . However, in the early
part of the hunt, friends and family members told journalists that the shutter on the
apartment where the McCanns were staying had been broken. . . "There was no
evidence of a break-in," said Mr Mitchell."


____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 149
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re; What do we know

Post by G-Unit on Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:46 am

Thanks everyone for the info. Goodnight. I shall try not to have all this in my head overnight ha ha, or I'll be having some strange dreams.

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

PORTUGESE MOBILE PHONES

Post by G-Unit on Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:31 am

@G-Unit wrote:The Mccanns had access to at least 2 PAYG mobiles on 4th May, probably without the knowledge of the Portugese police.
According to David Payne these were delivered by friends of Simon Oldridge's brother Nick's wife to the police station on the morning of May 4th.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

According to Fiona Payne she didn't think they had them by the evening of the 4th ; "Dave might recall when our mobile phones came out, but I'm sure it wasn't, it couldn't have been that quickly, erm'"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm



Simon Oldridge was most helpful. I thought he worked in Doncaster though (?) Fiona thought not;


"But we had a lot of calls from him. Plus he's, he was, erm, just wanting to be of help really, so he did phone a fair bit as well, just in terms of, he organised for, erm, mobile phones, erm, you know, Portuguese mobile phones to be sent out to use, he, you know, he runs a business in Leeds, erm, and financially as well, he was offering help if we needed, you know, money"

G-Unit

Posts : 312
Reputation : 54
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by Hobs on Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:32 pm

I wasn't in the area and i did not see anyone carrying anything that looked remotely like a cell phone or in fact any kind of gadget
However.....
I did see a swarthy tall man height about 4' 6 with pale skin with short crew cut hair tied into a long, frizzy ponytail.
He was walking slowly so i only caught a brief glimpse as he sprinted past me but i am postive he was carrying ... wait for it ... a cell phone!!!
I noticed him cos his clean shaven face looked straight at me as he looked away pretending to admire something in the trees and i also noticed his 1970's porn star moustache.
I will never forget his face, he had 2 eyes a nose and just one mouth and i am pretty sure he had 2 ears.
He was dressed in clothing possibly jeans and a tea shirt but i am sure i also spotted a dicky bow hidden beneath his dinner jacket.
It was late at night, just after breakfast i think, as i remember watching the sunset.

I am pretty sure he wore shoes as i could hear the clack of her stilettoes as he sidled past me trying not to be seen, but, he didn't fool me, i saw her, cross my heart.
It was the way the phone was being held, grabbed roughly by the strap, i could see it was switched on but he said it was in need of credit so he was using it as a torch as he couldn't make calls.
I will never forget the sight of those freshly added numbers
I didn't think anymore about it until i saw the big reward and all the press coverage so i thought i would get my 30 mins of fame and make a few bux out of what i saw.
I could possibly help with an e fit if you can guarantee it will make the front page of the papers and be breaking news on tv.
Just make sure there is plenty of free booze and not the cheap stuff mind you, to help me refresh my memory.
My mate says for £5000 she can also remember the sighting even though she was lying in bed fast asleep dreaming about being on a desert island with Sean Connery.



this is the man that took your cell phone...
however for £10,000 it could be the man below who also is the spitting image of the man i saw





Please make all checks payable to cash please and thank you and if paying cash please provide it in a large brown envelope.
Concerning all further interviews, For a fee i will spout my story and give you exact descriptions of the man i saw.
You can contact my spokesman clarence mitchell ( just look for the smarm with the dodgy hair and chipmunk cheeks and you will recognise him straight away)

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 745
Reputation : 359
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 53
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: What do we KNOW?

Post by Ayniia on Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:11 am

@Mo wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:Let us start 2015 with what we think we know - probably

The shutters were not broken
The door was not hanging off its hinges
The curtains did not ‘whoosh’
Madeleine’s bed had not been slept in
The twins were heavily sedated
There was no credible evidence of a point of entry
There was no credible evidence of a point of exit
There was no credible evidence of an intruder
Jane Tanner did not see an abductor
The parents did not search
The Tapas 7 did not search
The parents did not tell the truth
The parents both changed their stories

The “Last Photo” was not taken at lunchtime on 3/5/7
The door did not slam at 10 pm on 3/5/7
The curtains did not ”whoosh’ at 10 pm on 3/5/7
It was not a hot night on 3/5/7


It is also highly unlikely that . . .

Madeleine compained about having cried on 2/5/7
The parents planned to do half hourly checks on 3/5/7
Payne visited the apartment at 6 pm and saw all three children

The blue bag and blanket are missing
Phone calls were deleted off K & G's phones

Gerry managed to sleep a couple hours in the night his daughter was "abducted". It was too dark to search the streets... Evil or Very Mad

____________________
"My advice to any British tourist ,please come to Portugal,please come to the Algarve but if you're coming as a family holiday treat it as a family holiday and do things together, don't leave the kids"
Words from an ExPat Algarve resident

Ayniia

Posts : 546
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-03-21
Location : Portugal

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum