Charlotte pennington

"Pnly" is a mis-type of "only". What a toe-curling article in The Times. I like the bit about Gerry not working late so he could spend time with his family!!!

"We get missing children all the time, and I have seen plenty of hysterical mothers. But none of them were like Kate."

not a very good advertisement for MW is it? adds to the lack of security in an apparent safe setting for little ones. All those hysterical mothers , what on earth could have happened to their children, just how far away were they from a supervising adult when they were found?
How long had she had the MW experience to be able to talk about all the time, missing kids and their hysterical mums.
What a crock of merde.

This young woman arrived to work 28th April and there is no mention of any training prior to her arrival or afterwards. She was not at OC for any length of time was she, to be able to make a statement that kids went missing all the time, hysterical mothers, you would need months there surely to make a shocking statement like this, implying it was usual for toddlers to wander out of sight arousing panic in the mothers......surely after May 3rd, when CP had been there less than one week, everyone and everything went through a rigorous check re childcare and child safety at and around the creche activities, indoors and outdoors? Her comment astounds me. Her witness statements and comments will surely interest those conducting the review.

Does anyone know why JT and ROB both insisted in their rogs that CP was on their Gatwick flight as opposed to the EMA? To me it seems a trivial thing to be hung up on when you consider the issues they'd have.

jd wrote:After finding out about Howick New Zealand it is even more all too suspicious. For somebody to be key witnesses like she is in 3 separate situations, they had to have known her well and be on the level of a close trusted friend.

Just a small point. I think the earlier description of Howick was somewhat misleading. It is not a small isolated town, it is part of Aucklands suburban sprawl. The idea that everybody knows everybody would not be true. It is quite a large residential area.

I hasten to add, this Pennington connection is another coincidence that warrants further scrutiny. Maybe Charlotte was asked to bring her theatrical talents to bear in a real life situation.

One wrote:Does anyone know why JT and ROB both insisted in their rogs that CP was on their Gatwick flight as opposed to the EMA? To me it seems a trivial thing to be hung up on when you consider the issues they'd have.

Might that too have been arranged at the Rothley meeting? Because if CP came on the EMA flight, which I would think to be likely if she was in fact their nanny - that would draw attention to the early closeness of CP to the family.

I read about Kate having a nanny before and I would think that the picture of Kate having to cope on her own with the twins and Maddie is pure fantasy. She isn't that kind of woman at the best of times and almost any woman in that situation would have help of some sort, certainly well-paid doctors.

The Rothley pub landlady said 'their nanny'. CP states in her CV that she was in the UK : quote from Daisy's (much missed!!! ) post here:

The link to her new CV is rather interesting too. In the link that Jean gives (nannyagency.com) she claims: "when i was 18 months old my father got a job in new zealand- which is where i remained for the next 17 years". Which would mean she was 18yr 6 mths when she left NZ. Yet in her new CV she claims she was working as a Live in Nanny in the UK in 2004 looking after 3 young children. Then another live-in job 2004/5 with sole charge of a newborn & 3 yr old. Phew! that's a lot of responsibility for a 17 yr old coming from the other side of the world. unquote

tigger wrote:

One wrote:Does anyone know why JT and ROB both insisted in their rogs that CP was on their Gatwick flight as opposed to the EMA? To me it seems a trivial thing to be hung up on when you consider the issues they'd have.

At the time when CP was a nanny at Mark Warner, its says on her linkedin profile that she lived in Kingston-Upon-Thames (S/W London). It would make sense to fly from Gatwick if you lived in Kingston being a 20min or so drive away. Interesting that Matt Oldfield was working at Kingston hospital at the time. He and Rachael Oldfield moved to Kingston-Upon-Thames in 2003/2004

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

For one person, Charlotte does have remarkable coincidences:

Charlotte (according to herself) was first on the scene after kate mccann raised the alarm at 10pm

kate mccann worked in Howick, New Zealand....the same town as where the Penningtons lived (Charlotte at the time)

Charlotte the Fairy did much fund-raising for the Starship, a children's hospital in Grafton, Auckland that specializes in neonatal services - Neonatal services is the unit kate mccann worked at the time

Charlotte was on the same flight as Matt Oldfield, Rachael Oldfield, Jane Tanner, Russell O'Brien on the way to PDL on April 28th

Charlotte lived in the same place as Matt Oldfield, Rachael Oldfield in Kingston-Upon-Thames at the time

Charlotte was the one who was able to see the 'British' tourist out at sea in the middle of the dark dark night kicking an object small enough to be a child from the beach (interesting that both Charlotte and Cat mention yellow jackets)

jd wrote:

tigger wrote:

One wrote:Does anyone know why JT and ROB both insisted in their rogs that CP was on their Gatwick flight as opposed to the EMA? To me it seems a trivial thing to be hung up on when you consider the issues they'd have.

At the time when CP was a nanny at Mark Warner, its says on her linkedin profile that she lived in Kingston-Upon-Thames (S/W London). It would make sense to fly from Gatwick if you lived in Kingston being a 20min or so drive away. Interesting that Matt Oldfield was working at Kingston hospital at the time. He and Rachael Oldfield moved to Kingston-Upon-Thames in 2003/2004

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

Sorry, I didn't explain myself well.
The insistence of JT and ROB that she came on the Gatwick flight may well be that she did have a connection with the mcCanns and may even have been their nanny.
It would fit nicely with the fact/likelyhood that they did have a nanny whilst in Rothley, that they ordered an extra bed which might mean an extra adult, which was cancelled and I read a short while ago that CP did slip up in the RI by appearing to know Maddie before she met her. May have been a tweet - I'll start looking.
She too, was sent to Greece not long afterwards, I'm trying to find the date. Meanwhile she did sterling work - spotting Murat, fishermen and being everywhere at once.

The Gatwick/not EMA reminds me of JT not having jeans and no fleece, mr policeman, none at all.

Comparing statements on seeing robert murat. Charlotte is saying she saw murat on the road and he didn't take part in the searches. Fiona Payne says he was outside the apartment introduced himself and seemed to be part of the GNR leading the process!


Charlotte Pennington, 20, is one of three witnesses who could blow apart the oddball's alibi that he was home with his mum.

They have told private detectives hired by Maddie's parents they saw a man just like Murat walking on the road outside the McCann apartment on the night she disappeared.

Charlotte — a childminder at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz, Portugal — challenged expat Murat, 34, the next day. He denied being near the scene. Charlotte said he clammed up when she tried to grill him further.'

and

Miss Pennington's Daily Mail interview confirms reports from the McCanns' friends that Murat was at the scene. "He was outside the lobby just before we started on our big search," she said.

"He was adamant that he wasn't there. But he was. He was there in the road, he was just looking. It was about 10.30. He was just watching.
"I didn't know his name then. But the next day he was our interpreter and I met him then. He didn't take part in the searches, but he was there."

Fiona Payne 16th May 2007

- That she never saw this individual before, and saw him for the first time, as stated, on the night of May 3rd, around 22H39, outside, and next to the door of the McCANN apartment in the company of GNR elements, who had arrived.

- That at a certain time, he said that he was there to help the police but his behaviour was not compatible with this role, in that he looked to be leading the process, stating that he was offering his help in all that was necessary

- That during this night, she saw him walking to and fro, the majority of the time accompanied by the police, and always with an air of authority, offering suggestions and trying to lead the situation.

tigger wrote:

Sorry, I didn't explain myself well.
The insistence of JT and ROB that she came on the Gatwick flight may well be that she did have a connection with the mcCanns and may even have been their nanny.
It would fit nicely with the fact/likelyhood that they did have a nanny whilst in Rothley, that they ordered an extra bed which might mean an extra adult, which was cancelled and I read a short while ago that CP did slip up in the RI by appearing to know Maddie before she met her. May have been a tweet - I'll start looking.
She too, was sent to Greece not long afterwards, I'm trying to find the date. Meanwhile she did sterling work - spotting Murat, fishermen and being everywhere at once.

The Gatwick/not EMA reminds me of JT not having jeans and no fleece, mr policeman, none at all.

Reminds me of when was the tennis girl photo taken?...1st May...2nd May...3rd May!!! (depends which statement you read)

I understood what you meant, am trying to piece together the information in conjunction with the mccanns. There is the extra bed mystery and to me would likely be for a nanny, especially as they never intended to spend hardly any time with the kids it seems, so a nanny would be needed. Maybe because they knew they would be out involved in a series of business meetings which I believe is what took them there on that holiday

Will be very interesting to find the slip up that CP knew Maddie before, very interesting, looks very likely to me that the families knew each other for many years since the late 1990's at least. I wonder if there is a Reading connection, Charlotte was born there, Rachael Oldfield went to college there. Am wondering if there are family roots from Reading or something, Reading is not that far from Kingston-Upon-Thames either

I thought this article by Textusa is very interesting. ... it looks at the inconsistencies in her statements and comments to the press, and how when gaps appear or stories change, then someone else comes in to fill in the gap... I suppose the changes could be put down to innocence or something else entirely...

Sections in bold particularly interesting.. hadn't seen these events put into this kind of timeline before.

Witness Statement of Miss Pennington on May 7th 2007. Translator Robert Murat. Nothing unusual in Charlottes statement , a couple of things of interest Madeleine was known as Maddy , which we know and she mentions at no time did she enter the Apartment..... Daily Mail 25th Sept. 2007. It is time for Charlottes 15 minutes of fame. Charlotte tells the Mail the McCanns are innocent and the distress she witnessed when Kate Mccann screamed 'They've taken her', later denied by friends as the first words Kate used, friends say Kate said 'Madeleines gone' The article goes on to say Miss Pennington,however ONE OF THE FIRST people to set foot in the couples apartment said she heard Kate use both phrases. Charlotte confirms McCanns friends are correct Robert Murat WAS in the Ocean Club 'He was standing outside just looking'. The Daily Mail and their love affair with the McCanns will stop at nothing to give them a helping hand. Charlotte's interview three days after newspaper headlines scream 'The Missing 7 Hours'. Charlotte, ever helpful also wanted to help the Mccanns and explained 'late tea' was indeed a little late on the 3rd,not over until 6p.m.when she saw the Mccanns who collectedMadeleine. With many thanks to Charlotte the missing hours were now filled in. When one lies, for whatever reason, a good memory is essential. 'Dispatches' aired on Channel 4 Oct. 18th 2007. Charlotte confessed the last time she had seen the Mccanns as a family was lunchtime, May 3rd and not in the evening when interviewed for the Mail. Damage control needed here and needed fast. The very same day as this programme aired the 'Daily Mail' had an EXCLUSIVE. David Payne saw Madeleine at 6.30 p.m. the 7 missing hours once again explained. Back to the Daily Mail 25th interview...Charlotte, although young and naive has a great quality, she is a very observant young woman who stood and observed Kate while everyone else was rushing around.' I could'nt believe what I was seeing, she was so distraught' Charlotte also observed on entering the apartment 'THERE WERE NO CHILDREN IN THE ROOM' 'The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCann friends' she happily explained. WHAT, this is impossible, as GNR had yet to be called and we know the twins were in their cots when they arrived. How to explain this . I can only think the McCanns, one or both gently explained to Charlotte the police were annoyed so many people had been in the apartment, they did not want her to get into trouble so best not mention it. Charlotte only wanting to help, agreed this would be best and thanked the Mccanns I would imagine for their kindness at such a terrible time. How amazing they must have semed to such an impressionable young girl wanting to protect her in such a selfless way. Charlotte went as far to mention in her statement, although not asked,the fact she did not enter Ap.5A. Charlotte Pennington had she been older and wiser would have questioned why the Mccanns did not want her to mention such an innocent act. If only Charlotte had told PJ the truth she may have been questioned more on her observations, but she placed herself outside and to Police was of little interest. Silly young foolish Charlotte. Charlotte who in her innocence thought the Mccanns were being kind. The Mccanns, who had yet to return two heavily sedated children back to their cots. The Mccanns, masters at manipulation. Cots GNR noticed contained babies that did not stir, without bedding on such a cool,cool night. Note: Many thanks to McCannfiles, who without, this kind of research would not be possible.


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

@jd: it was a tweet from Kiko:

31 Jul

dewi lennard ‏@kikoratton
@kikoratton @StellabyLight How does Charlotte Pennington know by what name Madeleine #McCann was called? She wasn't in her group, surely?
unquote

I've not taken part in the creche records much, so am not up to speed with the respective nannies etc.
But if Maddie was always called Madeleine and introduced and registered at OC as Madeleine - it is strange.
So who was the nanny who prepared her bracelet? (somewhere else in the files!)

Were the bracelets only worn whilst a child was in the care of MW's facilities? Has anyone ever seen one of these bracelets? Where are the bracelets for all the other T7's children?...interesting. I don't think I've seen any mention of bracelets in the T9's statements or indeed any questions from PJ or LP regarding them. If the bracelets were handwritten (if so, waterproof ink I hope as there were water activities) then there would be a handwriting sample surely. It would be very interesting to find out from other holidaymakers who made use of the childcare facilities.

It seems Catriona Baker wrote out the bracelet, jd just posted that in CB's topic. in that case it is indeed strange that Pennington calls her Maddy.
In my experience these bracelets should be like the hospital bracelets which one wears day in day out. Writing out new bracelets each day for each child would take too long.
Children would love to keep wearing the exotic plastic in the bath and in fact all the time. I would think they'd be hard to detach? Otherwise parents would have to take the bracelets off and keep them safe for the following day. Which more than one child that would be difficult. Bracelets must have been needed for the twins too.

tigger wrote:It seems Catriona Baker wrote out the bracelet, jd just posted that in CB's topic. in that case it is indeed strange that Pennington calls her Maddy.
In my experience these bracelets should be like the hospital bracelets which one wears day in day out. Writing out new bracelets each day for each child would take too long.
Children would love to keep wearing the exotic plastic in the bath and in fact all the time. I would think they'd be hard to detach? Otherwise parents would have to take the bracelets off and keep them safe for the following day. Which more than one child that would be difficult. Bracelets must have been needed for the twins too.

I find it hard to believe they had them. Having said that, I suppose they could have put them on when first arriving, and taken them off when leaving ready for next day?

Candyfloss wrote:

I find it hard to believe they had them. Having said that, I suppose they could have put them on when first arriving, and taken them off when leaving ready for next day?
unquote

But then each child as they arrived would have to be matched with the requisite bracelet, what with signing in and out, putting bracelets on and off and the many gaps in the registers, mistakes will be made. It seems pretty sloppy to me from beginning to end. None of the nannies had particular qualifications for the job I take it, did all of them have a working knowledge of basic first aid?

tigger wrote:It seems Catriona Baker wrote out the bracelet, jd just posted that in CB's topic. in that case it is indeed strange that Pennington calls her Maddy.
In my experience these bracelets should be like the hospital bracelets which one wears day in day out. Writing out new bracelets each day for each child would take too long.
Children would love to keep wearing the exotic plastic in the bath and in fact all the time. I would think they'd be hard to detach? Otherwise parents would have to take the bracelets off and keep them safe for the following day. Which more than one child that would be difficult. Bracelets must have been needed for the twins too.

If the bracelet were like a hospital bracelet then the lily-white baby skin of the twins would have shown a 'tan mark' after removal - oops they were back in the creche within days of Madeleine's disappearance - wearing the same bracelets or new ones? The only people I've seen in this sad and sorry affair who are infatuated with bracelets are Dr's McCann. I'd still like to see a sample of the bracelets that MW doled out. I wouldn't like my child to have a plastic thing wrapped around his/her wrist for the duration of a holiday. As for CB writing out the children's bracelets with their names and taking details of any allergies prior to the McCann's arrival then there must be some on-line form prior to the holiday....interesting.

I correct myself. The twins iirc were taken to the creche the following morning according to FP's RI. Correct me if I'm wrong.

tigger wrote:Candyfloss wrote:

I find it hard to believe they had them. Having said that, I suppose they could have put them on when first arriving, and taken them off when leaving ready for next day?
unquote

But then each child as they arrived would have to be matched with the requisite bracelet, what with signing in and out, putting bracelets on and off and the many gaps in the registers, mistakes will be made. It seems pretty sloppy to me from beginning to end. None of the nannies had particular qualifications for the job I take it, did all of them have a working knowledge of basic first aid?

Quite right Tigger, most of the paperwork is sloppy. MW did a short-sharp exit to protect themselves imo. There appears to be no real qualifications for anything on that particular resort in terms of care for children. MW have not made it clear that their childcare people are qualified, CRB cleared and there are specific and adhered-to procedures. From what I've seen of the creche records they are quite pathetic and shambolic. So come on MW, give us your statement on your childcare policy when you advertise in your brochure...interesting.

tigger wrote:None of the nannies had particular qualifications for the job I take it, did all of them have a working knowledge of basic first aid?

This gives a strong indication of how Mark Warner employed their nannies...

Ofsted Whistleblower reveals widespread failings in the care of the under-fives

Viewers will be shocked to see how Imogen Willcocks, a 21-year-old undercover BBC journalist with no experience of looking after children and no professional qualifications, is employed to look after young children under the age of five by two nurseries in Britain, and a leading British holiday company (Mark Warner). Furthermore, they will see her approved as a registered childminder by Ofsted.

Imogen's undercover filming takes place at Just Learning in Cambourne (near Cambridge) and Buttons nursery in west London, as well as a Mark Warner holiday resort in Dahab, Egypt – an upmarket company that markets itself as offering "award-winning childcare".

The undercover footage in the programme reveals:

•A failure to make criminal record and reference checks – The companies that featured in the programme all employed Imogen to look after young children without obtaining CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) checks, or speaking to any of her referees.

•Adult to child ratios are not met – The required adult to child ratios were not always met – At Mark Warner, an extra child arrives at the crèche but no one knows who she is

•Health & Safety compromised – The BBC reporter was given no practical training to ensure that she could deal with emergency situations whilst looking after the children. And the health and safety of the children was compromised on a number of occasions – At Mark Warner, the BBC reporter was asked to accompany and supervise young children on a sailing trip without enough safety helmets for all the children, and take young children into the water without any assessment of her swimming ability. Also, at the Mark Warner resort in Egypt, a room listening service designed to check on children every 30 minutes whilst their parents are out, was found to be inappropriate because the staff could only listen at the door – they couldn't see if the children were all right or go into the rooms. Indeed, a Mark Warner nanny told the BBC undercover journalist that before the journalist arrived in April 07, a girl under the age of five had escaped through the window of a room and was found wandering around the complex within metres of the pool.

•No training – No or negligible training was given to the undercover BBC reporter in any of her jobs. This is despite the fact that Mark Warner, for example, told her that she would receive training before starting the job.

•Illegal working on tourist visas – Mark Warner employees at the resort were found working illegally on tourist visas because, according to one member of staff, Mark Warner are "too cheap to cough up and pay for [work] visas".

From Imogen Willcocks:
Mark Warner operates at the top of the holiday market, charging up to £8,000 for two weeks abroad for a family of four. It makes a point of offering "award-winning" childcare. That award-winning care didn't extend to checking my CV, contacting my references, doing a criminal records check or even asking to see some basic ID. Again, I could have been anyone.

I worked at Mark Warner's swanky Hilton resort in Dahab, Egypt, where the luxurious hotel rooms are built to resemble a traditional whitewashed Arab village. Despite being promised two days' training at the interview, I was thrown straight in with a group of toddlers. Once, there were two of us looking after 13 children - when Mark Warner's own regulations state there should be no more than six per adult.

When I asked about my training, the manager just said: "You don't get official training as such. It's very relaxed, very laid-back here." This is unlikely to be the approach parents think they are paying for.

Next, I was asked to supervise the children on the beach. Again, no one had checked if I had any swimming or rescue qualifications. Even more worrying, I had to take children out on a boat without enough safety gear for all of them. When I raised the issue with my manager, he told me to go ahead with the boat trip anyway. Also, for such a prestigious company with an upmarket reputation, Mark Warner has a very cavalier attitude to the employment laws of the countries where it operates, and is not controlled by Ofsted.

Like many of its staff in Dahab, I was there on a tourist visa. Mark Warner should have paid for work permits but instead had us break Egyptian law on their behalf. We were told we should just lie and say we were there on holiday, but Egypt is not the kind of country-where you want to end up in prison. Three weeks after I returned from Egypt, the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a Mark Warner resort in Praia da Luz in Portugal made headlines around the world. No one blamed the company or its staff for the little girl's disappearance, but given the case, I assumed the company would toughen up its vetting of nannies."

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

-----------

Holiday ski resort nannies sacked for 'endangering toddlers' lives'

Mark Warner, the British holiday company which promotes itself as being familyfriendly, has been forced to launch an investigation into the standards of its childcare after two of its nannies were sacked for endangering the lives of a group of toddlers.
The incident earlier this month at the company's hotel in the French ski resort of Les Deux Alpes involved two British nannies failing to supervise a group of children on a busy main road. It was recorded on video by the parents of one of the children.

Peter and Linda Linnane, a British couple from Andalucia in southern Spain, were shocked when they saw their three-year-old son Noah and three other children trailing behind two nannies on a main road after leaving the hotel creche.
"My husband had decided that he wanted some video memories of our son on his first skiing holiday with us," said Mrs Linnane, a 45-year-old equine nutritionist.
"What we saw was horrifying. The nannies led the children on to the main road without looking back once. Noah was at the back of the group, totally unsupervised and out of their eyesight.

"The nannies were chatting away as cars and lorries passed by, totally oblivious to the children they were supposedly supervising. They could have been abducted or run over and the nannies wouldn't have noticed."

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

Thanks JD,

Why has this never been taken up by UK authorities? MW are still operating to my knowledge. Why are they allowed to continue to offer childcare facilities when BBC revealed such dreadful stuff? disgusting.

Charlotte also observed on entering the apartment 'THERE WERE NO CHILDREN IN THE ROOM' 'The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCann friends' she happily explained. WHAT, this is impossible, as GNR had yet to be called and we know the twins were in their cots when they arrived.

Fiona Payne RI 10th April 2008

"'It was after four o'clock, erm, tut, again, I don't know, that, that whole period, it's hard to sort of put a time to it. I remember it being after four o'clock, probably about half past four when we went to bed. But in that ensuing time the PJ had arrived, erm, the plain clothes detectives, I think there was a couple of them and they'd been in the apartment and obviously they, at that point, had said they needed to close off the apartment or move the twins. Erm, so I'd suggested putting the twins up in our apartment, erm, Emma, who was there, had arranged some of the MARK WARNER Nannies to get some extra cots and more bedding, erm, and we set up the cots in our living room and a bed for Kate and Gerry as well, not that they used it, but, erm, and then I think, I think they were Policemen, I can't remember who carried up Sean and Amelie. Erm, and we sat on the sofa, me and Kate with the twins asleep on us for a while, erm, and they didn't wake up and, again, that was quite strange, even in the transfer and, and being handled by people that weren't their parents, they didn't, they didn't wake up"

Wasn't Charlotte a nanny on the scene that night?

aquila wrote:Thanks JD,

Why has this never been taken up by UK authorities? MW are still operating to my knowledge. Why are they allowed to continue to offer childcare facilities when BBC revealed such dreadful stuff? disgusting.

Looking at the wider picture.. The Symingtons and their big powerful and governmental 'friends' who helped since day one, I know the answer myself.

A 3rd time Mark Warner 'nanny' fiasco would 99.9% certain mean they lose their ATOL license, their business as a whole, Ocean Club they had just a few weeks earlier bought 27 apartments into...The same Ocean Club owned by a Symington. The only way out = an abduction

It seems Catriona Baker wrote out the bracelet, jd just posted that in CB's topic. in that case it is indeed strange that Pennington calls her Maddy.
In my experience these bracelets should be like the hospital bracelets which one wears day in day out. Writing out new bracelets each day for each child would take too long.
Children would love to keep wearing the exotic plastic in the bath and in fact all the time. I would think they'd be hard to detach? Otherwise parents would have to take the bracelets off and keep them safe for the following day. Which more than one child that would be difficult. Bracelets must have been needed for the twins too.

What is the point of writing out bracelets with all the child information on it, if the child isn't going to be wearing them. Defeats the purpose