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

Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by canada12 on 19.11.14 20:52

@j.rob wrote:I that a massive bruise along Kate's left arm - from shoulder to just below elbow?? If it is a bruise and not just a trick of the light it is an absolute corker. But why wouldn't she at least wear a long-sleeved top?

Strange.

I

I think that may be a trick of light, but in the photo below, there's a definite bruise on Kate's exposed upper arm, thanks to Gerry raising her sleeve. Also what looks like a bruise in the shape of fingermarks, further down her arm. As if she was restrained. IMO.


canada12

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by PeterMac on 19.11.14 23:01

@Doug D wrote:
And from outside the room, in the dark, you could barely see the cots, let alone their contents!
This is more like his view as ‘he did not enter the bedroom where Madeleine and the twins were sleeping’ (10th May 2007 statement) and this is with the light on.

Exactly. And only Flat-Man could have hidden behind the door, as per GM's Version Mk viii, months later, . . .

Surely the Lies, prevarications, falsehoods, fibs, fabrications, deceptions, inventions, fictions,falsifications; should one day give a prosecution lawyer enough to recommend . . .

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 151
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by jeanmonroe on 20.11.14 0:08

@PeterMac wrote:

Surely the Lies, prevarications, falsehoods, fibs, fabrications, deceptions, inventions, fictions,falsifications;  should one day give a prosecution lawyer enough to recommend . . .

OK. That's the MET/OG 'side of things' dealt with!

McCanns and T7/JW next?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5345
Reputation : 1202
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by jeanmonroe on 20.11.14 0:52

Bridget O'Donnell

Three days after Madeleine's disappearance, the couple left the resort.

British police later took a statement from Mr Wilkins, but she said Portuguese police never bothered.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-502095/Sweaty-Murat-breathless-excited-Maddie-police-quiz.html#ixzz3JZ48j9Vq
================================================
Hmmmm thinking

Didn't it 'occur' to JW for HIM to 'approach/BOTHER' the Portuguese Police, during the two days after the 'event' whilst he was still in PDL and tell them 'I was chatting to the missing girl's father, right there, outside that little gateway to their apartment, at the exact time, his daughter was being carried off, by the 'abductor' as witnessed by his holidaying friend, Jane'?

Bridgette dosen't tell us how long, and hard, she and JW actually 'searched' for the 'missing' child in the two days after the 'event' does she?

She and JW DID actually join the 'search' for Madeleine, didn't they?

Surely they didn't just sit by the pool, chatting, and not 'searching' for JW's tennis buddy, GM's 'abducted' daughter, did they?

Did any of the T9 actually 'search' for Madeleine, in the few days after the 'event'?

Silly me!...................... Of COURSE they did!

Er, right?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5345
Reputation : 1202
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Okeydokey on 20.11.14 1:10

@jeanmonroe wrote:Bridget O'Donnell

Three days after Madeleine's disappearance, the couple left the resort.

British police later took a statement from Mr Wilkins, but she said Portuguese police never bothered.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-502095/Sweaty-Murat-breathless-excited-Maddie-police-quiz.html#ixzz3JZ48j9Vq
================================================
Hmmmm thinking

Didn't it 'occur' to JW for HIM to 'approach' the Portuguese Police, during the two days after the 'event' whilst he was still in PDL and tell them 'I was chatting to the missing girl's father, right there, outside that little gateway to their apartment, at the exact time, his daughter was being carried off, by the 'abductor' as witnessed by his holidaying friend, Jane'?

Bridgette dosen't tell us how long, and hard, she and JW actually 'searched' for the 'missing' child in the two days after the 'event' does she?

She and JW DID actually join the 'search' for Madeleine, didn't they?

Surely they didn't just sit by the pool, chatting, and not 'searching' for JW's tennis buddy, GM's 'abducted' daughter, did they?

Did any of the T9 actually 'search' for Madeleine, in the few days after the 'event'?

Silly me!...................... Of COURSE they did!

Er, right?

As I recall, BO'D claims she actually prevented her husband from searching for a missing 3 yr old. Why? What did she think would happen? That the abductor would return and abduct her children with all the Police around? Or is she just confessing to being a complete hysteric?

As with all aspects of the McCann case, none of it makes any sense.

I can't imagine how in those circumstances any self respecting man wouldn't overrule his partner and go search.

Okeydokey

Posts : 920
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Doug D on 20.11.14 8:34

PeterMac:
 
‘Exactly. And only Flat-Man could have hidden behind the door, as per GM's Version Mk viii, months later, . . .’
 
So he must have hidden in the wardrobe then.
 
Oh, shit, that doesn’t work ‘coz the cots in front of the wardrobe door.
 
How about ‘Moved the cot away, climbed into the wardrobe, pulled the cot back in front of the wardrobe door’, (that's a good'un isn't it?), all in the blink of an eye, and without waking the baby?
 
It’s all such bollocks!

Doug D

Posts : 2227
Reputation : 728
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by worriedmum on 20.11.14 11:50

I'm trying to get my head around this seeing the twins in the bedroom,so I looked up Matthew Oldfield's Rogatory Interview


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id219.html

snipped
''
 
4078 "So you didn't cross the threshold?"
 
Reply "No".
 
4078 "And you say the cots were in the middle of the room?"
 
Reply "Yeah".
 
4078 "What angles were they at?"
 
Reply "Erm, you could definitely see, see the sides, so they're either along, I think because of the angle that you approach it, I think they were just, you know, in the line with the long axis of the room, but there was a gap between the two and the sides are mesh, erm".
 
4078 (inaudible)
 
Reply "Yeah (inaudible)".
 
4078 "So you saw the sides. Do you remember which way the children were facing in the cots?"
 
Reply "No, it was just, you could just see the shape and bits of breathing".
 
4078 "Okay".
 
Reply "I mean, I, for some reason I imagine that the children's heads were towards the, towards the window, but I don't know whether that's just because I assume that's the way I would put them down".
 
4078 "Yeah".( snip)


So I am right in surmising that he IS saying that the opaque ends were facing the door? And that although he couldn't tell which way they were facing, he thinks the twins' feet were closest to the door and their heads facing the window? And despite the fact that their faces were towards the window he could see 'bits of breathing' (sic).          Without crossing the threshold?



Is there any significance in 'seeing '(!)' bits  of breathing'? Why not just say they were asleep? Why specify breathing? Hobs, are you there, Hobs?



)

worriedmum

Posts : 1711
Reputation : 321
Join date : 2012-01-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by BlueBag on 20.11.14 12:02

To use an old english expression.. MO is talking complete bollocks.

It makes ZERO sense and SY should pull him in and press him on it.

BlueBag

Posts : 3754
Reputation : 1628
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Doug D on 21.11.14 12:17

Lazzeri's still going at Oldfield, with another blog today.

http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Oldfield_Again.html

She's (?) even getting ahead of herself as it's dated tomorrow!

Doug D

Posts : 2227
Reputation : 728
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Hobs on 22.11.14 0:46

4078 "So you saw the sides. Do you remember which way the children were facing in the cots?"

Reply "No, it was just, you could just see the shape and bits of breathing".


No, would be a strong answer but he then goes on to answer outside the boundaries of the question, making it sensitive.
He was asked if he remembered which way the children were facing.
He then tells us what YOU could see ( not what he actually saw)
Note the pronoun he uses.
He doesn't tell us what he could see, he tells us what you (we) could see.
He distances himself from what he could see ( as an aside kate uses the distancing pronoun you a lot rather than the expected I)

Just is used to minimise downwards.

Next he tells us the shape (singular) not the shapes (plural) which you would expect if he was referring to the twins.

Notice the article he uses.
He talks about THE SHAPE and not THEIR SHAPES.

He is talking about something he saw in the singular

He then talks about BITS OF BREATHING

This is unexpected and concerning.

Bits of breathing would imply perhaps breathing problems, struggling to breathe or perhaps the last few breathes of a dying child.

The expected would be i saw them breathing, or i saw the twins breathing since he was allegedly doing the check on the mccanns children, except this isn't what he is actually telling us.

Instead he tells us he saw a shape with bits of breathing.
This man is a doctor, surely even he must have realised something was wrong if he was presented with a patient who was a shape (under a blanket) and presenting with bits of breathing?

4078 "Okay".
 
Reply "I mean, I, for some reason I imagine that the children's heads were towards the, towards the window, but I don't know whether that's just because I assume that's the way I would put them down
Note here the pronoun he uses, he has changed from YOU to I,taking ownership of the statement.

Note 
he doesn't tell us what he saw, only what he assumed he saw.

Note the qualifiers he uses ( qualifiers are words that when removed, do not change the meaning of the sentence.

 Here we have REASON, IMAGINED and ASSUMED.
Why does he feel the need to tell us that for some reason he imagined their heads were towards the window?
Surely if he checked as claimed then the would have been able to see if the blankets were at the top or the bottom of the cots  covering presumably their feet and bodies.
If he wasn't sure of the bedding was messed, then why not  rearrange the bedding to cover the children appropriately?

As written in his statement we have 3 qualifiers and the pronoun I repeated four times, thrice out of the first 7 words making it sensitive.

We also have TOWARDS THE  repeated twice again making it sensitive.

The alleged check of the children immediately prior to kate and her 'finding Maddie missing' is sensitive to oldfield.
Did the check even take place?
If it did was it in apartment 5a?
If it wasn't 5a which apartment was it (remember he described a different apartment)

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

Hobs

Posts : 750
Reputation : 366
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 53
Location : uk

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by palm tree on 22.11.14 10:09

What's strange is that every parent knows that a child's face should never be covered with blankets. Every parent knows that when putting a small baby down to sleep, their feet need to be at the bottom of the cot or crib, to prevent them from wriggling down under the blankets. This check, well, for me, hell no that's not the way to check on children. Any parent knows to at least check their face is not covered. Yet, all he sees is the blankets and bits of breathing, and then, he doesn't even check on Madeleine at all! Man, what would've happened if one of the twins was found suffocated? I bet then his story would've been they were fine, giggling about a dream. IMO this man did not check on these children, but that leaves me confused now as to why he's agreed that he did check in the first place.
IMO

____________________
Fight for Madeleine

palm tree

Posts : 365
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-08-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by aquila on 22.11.14 10:31

L-azz does get down to the nitty gritty.

I remember spending a weekend reading all the rogatory interviews. At first glance the interviews seemed quite clever but on re-reading them I couldn't understand why areas weren't probed. It made me want to give up if that's the standard of interviewing.


But then there is the ILOR issue. Only questions asked in the ILOR could be asked (that's if I have things right). At the time of the rogatory interviews there was no active investigation being conducted by UK police and these questions were in the jurisdiction of the PJ.

As if that wasn't confusing enough (for me anyway), the McCanns themselves were allowed to pose questions in the rogatory interviews.

Then, and oh dear, there was the failure of a tape-recording machine - in the most high profile case of a missing child.

Then, and oh dear, there was the unfortunate remark by David Payne 'not the right forum'.

Then, and oh dear, there were all the other unfortunate things such as Dianne Webster and David Payne not having her mobile phones with them.

The standard of the rogatory interviews was poor and it makes me wonder why?

Add to that the fact these interviews would then be translated and it makes the mind boggle.

L-azz has it right imo. Matt Oldfield's part in this farce is very questionable.

aquila

Posts : 7988
Reputation : 1227
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by j.rob on 22.11.14 14:27

@jeanmonroe wrote:Bridget O'Donnell

Three days after Madeleine's disappearance, the couple left the resort.

British police later took a statement from Mr Wilkins, but she said Portuguese police never bothered.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-502095/Sweaty-Murat-breathless-excited-Maddie-police-quiz.html#ixzz3JZ48j9Vq
================================================
Hmmmm thinking

Didn't it 'occur' to JW for HIM to 'approach/BOTHER' the Portuguese Police, during the two days after the 'event' whilst he was still in PDL and tell them 'I was chatting to the missing girl's father, right there, outside that little gateway to their apartment, at the exact time, his daughter was being carried off, by the 'abductor' as witnessed by his holidaying friend, Jane'?

Bridgette dosen't tell us how long, and hard, she and JW actually 'searched' for the 'missing' child in the two days after the 'event' does she?

She and JW DID actually join the 'search' for Madeleine, didn't they?

Surely they didn't just sit by the pool, chatting, and not 'searching' for JW's tennis buddy, GM's 'abducted' daughter, did they?

Did any of the T9 actually 'search' for Madeleine, in the few days after the 'event'?

Silly me!...................... Of COURSE they did!

Er, right?

British police later took a statement from Mr Wilkins, but she said Portuguese police never bothered. 

That is a blatant falsehood. Easily verified by looking at the PJ files.

Jez Wilkins spoke to the Portuguese police on Friday 4th May and told them that he had seen a suspicious looking 'blonde rasta-man' in the Tapas restaurant on Thursday evening between 7.30pm and 8pm. 

This man was, apparently, later identified as a fellow guest at the hotel, Mike Sperrey, who was a surfing friend of Gerry's. Perhaps of interest Mike Sperrey's police statement and that of his wife is missing from the PJ files.

Very shortly after Jez Wilkins and Bridget O'Donnell returned to the UK, Portuguese Police Detective Amaral sent an urgent fax to police in the UK with a list of probing questions for Jez to answer with urgency. And a request to sketch out exactly where Jez had allegedly bumped into Gerry on Thursday evening.

Jez, when he spoke to Portuguese police on Friday 4th May, did not mention any kind of encounter with Gerry on Thursday evening. He did not state that he had been wandering around the resort with his pram and bumped into Gerry.

Why not? Surely this would have been critically important? But no mention of it whatsoever. Only the sighting of 'blonde rasta-man' looking suspicious in the tapas restaurant. With the definite implication that Jez Wilkins had been in the Tapas restaurant that evening for a minimum of half an hour and - if he had been dining there which is what would be assumed - probably considerably longer.

In his response to Portuguese Detective Amaral's urgent request for information on his return to the UK, Jez completely changes his account of what he was doing that evening. There is no mention of having been in the Tapas restaurant for a minimum of half an hour where he spots suspicious 'blonde rasta-man'. None whatsoever.

Instead Jez gives an account of Thursday evening that has both him and his wife Bridget dining in their apartment. Jez claims he left the apartment for a period of time to push his baby around to sleep in his pram. During which he bumped into Gerry outside apartment 5A at around 9pm. He claims that Gerry was completely relaxed and normal and they had a chat.

These are two conflicting versions of events. They cannot both be true. One might be. Or neither might be.

But what is even more intriguing is that in Jez' later police statements (but not his first statement to Portuguese police on Friday 4th May 2007) he claims that the first he knew about 'the abduction' was when Matt and the OC resort manager woke him and Bridget up at around 1pm in the early hours of Friday morning and told them the news. Neither Jez or Bridget joined in the searches for Madeleine, according to him, because at that stage 'there was nothing that they could do' or words to that effect.

If it is true that the first Jez heard of 'the abduction' was when Matt and OC resort manager woke them up in the early hours of Friday morning (which I am sure it is not) then why did Jez not mention either his sighting of 'suspicious looking blonde rasta-man' in the tapas bar (police statement of Friday 4th) or his bumping into Gerry outside apartment 5A at around 9pm on Thursday evening (later statements.)

Either of these alleged 'sightings' - assuming either is true - would have provided the Portuguese police with vital information. As the director of TV documentaries whose wife had worked on Crimewatch, both Jez and Bridget would - if they had genuinely wanted to help 'find Madeleine' - have immediately gone to the police when they were woken up at 1pm to provide as much information as possible. But, imo, they were anything but impartial eye-witnesses. They were a part of the script. But then the script went wrong and they tried to bail out.

IMO there is no way that either Jez or Bridge were asleep at 1pm. Nor would they have happily gone back to sleep after Matt and OC resort manager left.

They are up to their necks in this, imo. 

In the context of a pre-planned staged abduction 'hoax'. 

When Matt arrives at their apartment at 1pm with the resort manager (who is an independent witness, if any such thing exists in this strange case of course) I think Jez is being 'landed in it'. This is a warning shot to Jez, imo. TM have planted him squarely outside apartment 5A at a crucial time which makes him a vital witness and potential suspect.

Far from 'going back to sleep' after this episode, I suspect that Jez was in something of a panic (as no doubt was Gerry and the Tapas) and retaliates by pointing the finger of suspicion on  'blonde rasta-man' and surfing friend of Gerry's - Mike Sperrey. Jez has fired his own warning shot to TM and their friends.

"You land me in it and I will hand you in it." Both sides have much at stake in this, imo.

By the time Jez had returned to the UK I think he had been further lent on by TM to the extent that he  completely changed his version of events for that fateful Thursday evening. He has now effectively provided  Gerry with an alibi but in so doing he has effectively discredited 'Tanner-man'. Jez will not go as far as endorsing Tanner-man, imo.

Why? Because I suspect that Tanner-man was a last-minute concoction by TM to cover their backs when 'the disaster' happened that week. Jez knows he does not exist and will not stand up to scrutiny.

A very uneasy truce was established. And it is on record that Jez found the approaches of the private detectives hired by the McCanns heavy handed.

The McCanns and the Tapas messed up their lines big time that week. The script fell apart. 

Robert Murat I suspect was drafted at the last minute to salvage 'a disaster' and take the heat off the Mcs and their friends. As a police translator for Norfolk police, being bilingual, he would be able to get hold of absolutely vital information from eye-witnesses that week. Information that might be very incriminating for not just TM but other interested parties. He was handsomely rewarded for being 'the patsy' and, into the bargain, he had become privy to vital information from key witnesses, imo. Exactly which side of the fence this information ended up - who knows?

TM wanted all the information, evidence and eye-witness reports so they could cover their back-sides, imo. It was never about 'finding Madeleine' but doing everything in their power to cover up what had really happened.

A theory only.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Jogging dog bites and trainers

Post by Miss Pandora on 22.11.14 18:49


Never been able to make sense of the dog story. If I was bitten by a dog in Europe I would certainly get myself checked out and maybe inoculated. Did the dog owner surface and pull the dog off Kate's calf? The book is very vague in this. Maybe Matt comforted Kate after her ordeal with a hug or embrace which someone may have seen and misinterpreted. Did the dog bite penetrate skin and draw blood? Drip onto new trainers perhaps! Why even mention it in the book if it has no relevance? Kate and Matt jogging together. Mmm!

Miss Pandora

Posts : 15
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2014-06-02
Location : Uk

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Guest on 22.11.14 21:06

We are offered several examples of blood-spilling during the holiday.

- Madeleine's leg on the plane steps

- Her nosebleeds

- Kate's dog bite

There had to he examples of bleeding on the holiday as blood was also found in the apartment.

- The blood detected by Keela, with DNA indicating it could be Madeleine's

- The bloody footprint allegedly found on the apartment floor that night, with it's sister print found later on the Scenic. The provenence of this footprint has only ever been dismissed by a McCann source, as far as I know. There is no record of it in the released files, certainly.

If the presence of something unexpected and probably unwelcome is found in any walk of life, it is always best to have an innocent explanation to hand... Just talking generally, of course!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Okeydokey on 24.11.14 0:00

@worriedmum wrote:I'm trying to get my head around this seeing the twins in the bedroom,so I looked up Matthew Oldfield's Rogatory Interview


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id219.html

snipped
''
 
4078 "So you didn't cross the threshold?"
 
Reply "No".
 
4078 "And you say the cots were in the middle of the room?"
 
Reply "Yeah".
 
4078 "What angles were they at?"
 
Reply "Erm, you could definitely see, see the sides, so they're either along, I think because of the angle that you approach it, I think they were just, you know, in the line with the long axis of the room, but there was a gap between the two and the sides are mesh, erm".
 
4078 (inaudible)
 
Reply "Yeah (inaudible)".
 
4078 "So you saw the sides. Do you remember which way the children were facing in the cots?"
 
Reply "No, it was just, you could just see the shape and bits of breathing".
 
4078 "Okay".
 
Reply "I mean, I, for some reason I imagine that the children's heads were towards the, towards the window, but I don't know whether that's just because I assume that's the way I would put them down".
 
4078 "Yeah".( snip)


So I am right in surmising that he IS saying that the opaque ends were facing the door? And that although he couldn't tell which way they were facing, he thinks the twins' feet were closest to the door and their heads facing the window? And despite the fact that their faces were towards the window he could see 'bits of breathing' (sic).          Without crossing the threshold?



Is there any significance in 'seeing '(!)' bits  of breathing'? Why not just say they were asleep? Why specify breathing? Hobs, are you there, Hobs?



)

Yes, you're right Worriedmum - that's exactly what he's saying. That in semi-darkness who could make out their breathing through the basically opaque mesh sides! I recall checking on my children when they were tiny and looking for those reassuring signs of breathing. You would really have to get very close to be able to tell in semi darkness. Take into account this was supposed to be a cold evening. The twins would presumably be clothed and probably under a little blanket.

This is absolutely the weakest link in the evidence and the fact that the Redwood team appear to be completely unconcerned about it, despite MO being the last to be on the scene before the "alleged abduction" completely discredits the current investigation as far as I am concerned.

Okeydokey

Posts : 920
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by sar on 24.11.14 11:18

@canada12 wrote:
@j.rob wrote:I that a massive bruise along Kate's left arm - from shoulder to just below elbow?? If it is a bruise and not just a trick of the light it is an absolute corker. But why wouldn't she at least wear a long-sleeved top?

Strange.

I

I think that may be a trick of light, but in the photo below, there's a definite bruise on Kate's exposed upper arm, thanks to Gerry raising her sleeve. Also what looks like a bruise in the shape of fingermarks, further down her arm. As if she was restrained. IMO.

maye she was angry at those "bastards" ad wanted to tell someone.  Maybe someone else knew but stopped her

sar

Posts : 473
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2013-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 13.10.15 10:25

http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/matt-oldfields-alleged-last-check.html?m=1




4078 "So you saw the sides. Do you remember which way the children were facing in the cots?"

Reply "No, it was just, you could just see the shape and bits of breathing".


No, would be a strong answer but he then goes on to answer outside the boundaries of the question, making it sensitive.
He was asked if he remembered which way the children were facing.
He then tells us what YOU could see ( not what he actually saw)
Note the pronoun he uses.
He doesn't tell us what he could see, he tells us what you (we) could see.
He distances himself from what he could see ( as an aside kate uses the distancing pronoun you a lot rather than the expected I)
Just is used to minimise downwards.

Next he tells us the shape (singular) not the shapes (plural) which you would expect if he was referring to the twins.

Notice the article he uses.
He talks about THE SHAPE and not THEIR SHAPES.

He is talking about something he saw in the singular

He then talks about BITS OF BREATHING

This is unexpected and concerning.

Bits of breathing would imply perhaps breathing problems, struggling to breathe or perhaps the last few breathes of a dying child.

The expected would be i saw them breathing, or i saw the twins breathing since he was allegedly doing the check on the mccanns children, except this isn't what he is actually telling us.

Instead he tells us he saw a shape with bits of breathing.


This man is a doctor, surely even he must have realised something was wrong if he was presented with a patient who was a shape (under a blanket) and presenting with bits of breathing?

4078 "Okay".

Reply "I mean, I, for some reason I imagine that the children's heads were towards the, towards the window, but I don't know whether that's just because I assume that's the way I would put them down
Note here the pronoun he uses, he has changed from YOU to I,taking ownership of the statement.

Note  he doesn't tell us what he saw, only what he assumed he saw.
Note the qualifiers he uses (qualifiers are words that when removed, do not change the meaning of the sentence.

 Here we have REASON, IMAGINE and ASSUME.
Why does he feel the need to tell us that for some reason he imagined their heads were towards the window?

Surely if he checked as claimed then the would have been able to see if the blankets were at the top or the bottom of the cots  covering presumably their feet and bodies.

If he wasn't sure of the bedding was messed, then why not  rearrange the bedding to cover the children appropriately?

As written in his statement we have 3 qualifiers and the pronoun I repeated four times, thrice out of the first 7 words making it sensitive.
We also have TOWARDS THE  repeated twice again making it sensitive.

The alleged check of the children immediately prior to kate and her 'finding Maddie missing' is sensitive to oldfield.
Did the check even take place?
If it did was it in apartment 5a?
If it wasn't 5a which apartment was it (remember he described a different apartment)

tania cadogan at 1/06/2015 06:40:00 PM

____________________
I'm not saying Gerry McCann is obsessed with what comes out in the media but Kim Jong-un thinks he needs to lighten up a bit.


Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 7718
Reputation : 3251
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

view into the childrens room

Post by batmann on 13.10.15 21:04

as always, great observations from Tania.
i always wonder how MO can claim to see a breathing toddler who is  in a cot which has block sides (not mesh) to the top and bottom, whilst still standing at the doorway.  i accept MO is tall, but could he really be tall enough to view over the top of the cot to view this breathing.




batmann

Posts : 7
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-05-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by BlueBag on 13.10.15 22:14

Oldfield's story is rubbish.

No way he saw breathing.

He needs questioning big time.

So, why haven't SY done that?

Ah.. remit...

Which means honest reasoned open investigation is on one side and SY is on the other.

I wonder if MO reads this forum and how he sleeps?

I wonder if his friends read it.

BlueBag

Posts : 3754
Reputation : 1628
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by jeanmonroe on 14.10.15 11:21

I wonder if MO reads this forum and how he sleeps?

I wonder if his friends read it.
---------------------------------

Don't know how good the T9 are at 'reading'!

They are certainly not um, er, very good at 'speaking' English, erm, y'know, to police 'interviewers'.
------------------
JT.

4078 “Your mind’s trying to make sense of what you even know.”

JT's INTELLIGENT reply ...........“Yeah, no, yeah so I don’t know.”

Not Vicki Pollard, in disguise, is she?

"No, but, yeah, but, no, but... (and sometimes repeats this a few times)", "... or sumthin' or nuffin'"

Back to JT.

4078 “And what sort of length of time would it have taken you to get BACK after you’d done your check?”

JT Reply “Err about the same, you know I didn’t dawdle back or stop to talk to anyone.”

4078 “You didn’t skid DOWN the hill or anything?”

JT Reply “No I didn’t, so, no IT WAS UPHILL, so.”

Memo to Tanner: It IS DOWNHILL, not UPHILL, when you are GOING BACK, after your 'check' to the Tapas bar!

"Yeah but, no but, yeah but i dunno"!.




jeanmonroe

Posts : 5345
Reputation : 1202
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 14.10.15 11:46

laugh

____________________
I'm not saying Gerry McCann is obsessed with what comes out in the media but Kim Jong-un thinks he needs to lighten up a bit.


Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 7718
Reputation : 3251
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by j.rob on 18.10.15 19:14

@jeanmonroe wrote:I wonder if MO reads this forum and how he sleeps?

I wonder if his friends read it.
---------------------------------

Don't know how good the T9 are at 'reading'!

They are certainly not um, er, very good at 'speaking' English, erm, y'know, to police 'interviewers'.
------------------
JT.

4078 “Your mind’s trying to make sense of what you even know.”

JT's INTELLIGENT reply ...........“Yeah, no, yeah so I don’t know.”

Not Vicki Pollard, in disguise, is she?

"No, but, yeah, but, no, but... (and sometimes repeats this a few times)", "... or sumthin' or nuffin'"

Back to JT.

4078 “And what sort of length of time would it have taken you to get BACK after you’d done your check?”

JT Reply “Err about the same, you know I didn’t dawdle back or stop to talk to anyone.”

4078 “You didn’t skid DOWN the hill or anything?”

JT Reply “No I didn’t, so, no IT WAS UPHILL, so.”

Memo to Tanner: It IS DOWNHILL, not UPHILL, when you are GOING BACK, after your 'check' to the Tapas bar!

"Yeah but, no but, yeah but i dunno"!.




Ha! They do all come over as extraordinarily dim. Talking of Matt Oldfield. I've spent far longer than I should poring over those incredibly incriminating 'Madeleine was Here' programmes that I think were shown on C4. All available on line.

In one of the series Matt Oldfield - highly unwisely, imo - does a supposed 're-enactment' of the alleged final check. If you slow down the footage and watch his face (and Gerry's but that is another story) it is quite revealing. At one point when Gerry speaks Matt looks quite disgusted. And Gerry is being incredibly sycophantic. It is as if Matt is doing him a huge favour and getting him out of one hell of a mess.

But I digress. I know Matt works at Kingston Hospital (or used to). And I think I am right in saying that he lives in South West London? A few days ago I happened to be in a part of South West London not far at all far as the crow flies from Kingston. And who should jog by but a man who looked incredibly like Matt Oldfield? Same face, same type of build, similar deportment. 

I was intrigued and jumped into my car to try to pass him as he jogged by so I could establish if it was him. But he had disappeared. 

I have to say that given the massive amount of negative publicity about the McCanns and their friends on the internet I would think that they might want to change their appearances so they are not recognised. 

I wonder if the Tapas bitterly regret having helped out the McCanns? 

My own suspicion is that what binds them all together is something a lot worse than swinging (who cares?) I suspect sedation of the children took place. One night Madeleine woke up and was highly distressed. Following this the sedation was heavier and things went from bad to worse. 

I am intrigued by all the various theories though. I think something happened by Monday as this day is noticeably absent from Kate's diary. From Tuesday to Thursday there is over-embellishment, imo. Which is highly suggestive of a cover-up. 

I wonder if the Mcs and Tapas lot are still friends?

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 232
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by aquila on 18.10.15 20:10

@j.rob wrote:
@jeanmonroe wrote:I wonder if MO reads this forum and how he sleeps?

I wonder if his friends read it.
---------------------------------

Don't know how good the T9 are at 'reading'!

They are certainly not um, er, very good at 'speaking' English, erm, y'know, to police 'interviewers'.
------------------
JT.

4078 “Your mind’s trying to make sense of what you even know.”

JT's INTELLIGENT reply ...........“Yeah, no, yeah so I don’t know.”

Not Vicki Pollard, in disguise, is she?

"No, but, yeah, but, no, but... (and sometimes repeats this a few times)", "... or sumthin' or nuffin'"

Back to JT.

4078 “And what sort of length of time would it have taken you to get BACK after you’d done your check?”

JT Reply “Err about the same, you know I didn’t dawdle back or stop to talk to anyone.”

4078 “You didn’t skid DOWN the hill or anything?”

JT Reply “No I didn’t, so, no IT WAS UPHILL, so.”

Memo to Tanner: It IS DOWNHILL, not UPHILL, when you are GOING BACK, after your 'check' to the Tapas bar!

"Yeah but, no but, yeah but i dunno"!.






But I digress. I know Matt works at Kingston Hospital (or used to). And I think I am right in saying that he lives in South West London? A few days ago I happened to be in a part of South West London not far at all far as the crow flies from Kingston. And who should jog by but a man who looked incredibly like Matt Oldfield? Same face, same type of build, similar deportment. 

I was intrigued and jumped into my car to try to pass him as he jogged by so I could establish if it was him. But he had disappeared. 
What would make you want to jump in your car to establish whether it was Matt Oldfield jogging?

aquila

Posts : 7988
Reputation : 1227
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Matt Oldfield's Alleged Last Check

Post by Verdi on 18.10.15 22:39

@j.rob wrote:
@jeanmonroe wrote:I wonder if MO reads this forum and how he sleeps?

I wonder if his friends read it.
---------------------------------

Don't know how good the T9 are at 'reading'!

They are certainly not um, er, very good at 'speaking' English, erm, y'know, to police 'interviewers'.
------------------
JT.

4078 “Your mind’s trying to make sense of what you even know.”

JT's INTELLIGENT reply ...........“Yeah, no, yeah so I don’t know.”

Not Vicki Pollard, in disguise, is she?

"No, but, yeah, but, no, but... (and sometimes repeats this a few times)", "... or sumthin' or nuffin'"

Back to JT.

4078 “And what sort of length of time would it have taken you to get BACK after you’d done your check?”

JT Reply “Err about the same, you know I didn’t dawdle back or stop to talk to anyone.”

4078 “You didn’t skid DOWN the hill or anything?”

JT Reply “No I didn’t, so, no IT WAS UPHILL, so.”

Memo to Tanner: It IS DOWNHILL, not UPHILL, when you are GOING BACK, after your 'check' to the Tapas bar!

"Yeah but, no but, yeah but i dunno"!.




Ha! They do all come over as extraordinarily dim. Talking of Matt Oldfield. I've spent far longer than I should poring over those incredibly incriminating 'Madeleine was Here' programmes that I think were shown on C4. All available on line.

In one of the series Matt Oldfield - highly unwisely, imo - does a supposed 're-enactment' of the alleged final check. If you slow down the footage and watch his face (and Gerry's but that is another story) it is quite revealing. At one point when Gerry speaks Matt looks quite disgusted. And Gerry is being incredibly sycophantic. It is as if Matt is doing him a huge favour and getting him out of one hell of a mess.

But I digress. I know Matt works at Kingston Hospital (or used to). And I think I am right in saying that he lives in South West London? A few days ago I happened to be in a part of South West London not far at all far as the crow flies from Kingston. And who should jog by but a man who looked incredibly like Matt Oldfield? Same face, same type of build, similar deportment. 

I was intrigued and jumped into my car to try to pass him as he jogged by so I could establish if it was him. But he had disappeared. 

I have to say that given the massive amount of negative publicity about the McCanns and their friends on the internet I would think that they might want to change their appearances so they are not recognised. 

I wonder if the Tapas bitterly regret having helped out the McCanns? 

My own suspicion is that what binds them all together is something a lot worse than swinging (who cares?) I suspect sedation of the children took place. One night Madeleine woke up and was highly distressed. Following this the sedation was heavier and things went from bad to worse. 

I am intrigued by all the various theories though. I think something happened by Monday as this day is noticeably absent from Kate's diary. From Tuesday to Thursday there is over-embellishment, imo. Which is highly suggestive of a cover-up. 

I wonder if the Mcs and Tapas lot are still friends?
Must be the trilby and dirty raincoat, always a dead give away!  Next time try a feather boa and plume headress, makes for the perfect decoy duck.   No wonder he did a runner - or in this case a jogger.   dance

NB:  Was he wearing signature pink trainers and was there a dog attached to his ankle?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 4173
Reputation : 2555
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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