The McCanns family trip to Sagres 30th April

russiandoll wrote: quote from Tigger I think..
So Sagres is spot on - 9th June, 3rd/4th May is spot on for 3 days , Huelva is spot on. 3 months. That is if we take the 1st of May.
As I said in another post (where would a body be hidden) the family and friends were largely complicit, but the excuse (overdose - resultant loss of job, house etc.) would be convincing enough for them to go along with the storyline.
But - and I think this is really important - the rites and obligations to the dead were meticulously observed and the family was present. If not justice, respectful remembrance was seen to be done.

I believe in a demise prior to 3rd May....but what about the creche attendance on 2nd and 3rd? If a sub was used then the different child surely would have been noticed? A sub used from the outset woud not present this problem, but that would mean death almost at the start and the deceit starting 29th.... could the creche have been so sloppily run that a child who was not there could be signed in and out at busy times when there was a small group of parents congregated ? So no sub child used? Or was a live Maddie not at OC at all but elsewhere?
btw did any nanny mention Maddies coloboma or comment about the iconic photo when released that they did not see that eye defect on the Maddie who was signed in ? Or could it be that if a sub was used, it was the sub who had a coloboma, hence one was photoshopped on the photo of Maddie? Just throwing out some thoughts....because not once in her book does Kate mention Maddies right eye....her most distinguishing physical feature, allegedly.

I have always wondered about the signing in process at these so called creches.

Here in UK I am sure you know our nurseries are run under very very strict guidelines. Everyone has to be CRB checked, doors are alarmed, and each room would have a register of who is there at any specific time, checks have to be made regularly on sleeping children to make sure they are still breathing etc etc. BUT as I am sure you all know even then we still hear of horrific things happening, CRB checks are useless if someone is that way inclined, alarmed doors mean nothing if they are not shut properly or someone else is given the code and as for registers I'll bet you there isn't a day goes by somewhere at some nursery where the register is not 100% - everyone can make mistakes.

So back to these holiday creches - whilst I am not saying that they are not run well and not run under guidelines I am not sure they are as strict as a nursery where you depend on your children for your livelyhood. These children and families come and go on a weekly basis, no one before this MM event would ever dream that a situation like this would occur, the staff are generally temporary and they can come and go as regularly as the guests.

Have you ever left you children (or stayed with them) at these indoor soft play centres? You have to sign them in but I don't remember a time when anyone has ever made sure I am who I say I am or that the child I drop off is mine and most of the time they don't take a second look at the child.

When you sign them in you could put that you were Humpty Dumpty and they wouldn't notice! You can go away without signing them out, and I have often wondered why I had to bother signing them in in the first place!!

What I am getting at is I think it would have been very easy to sign someone in to the creche at the OC and for them to not even notice they were there or not. Question is when they go to the beach or the playground is the headcount done from the sign in book or from the children they have with them at the time?

Hummingbird wrote:
[...]

What I am getting at is I think it would have been very easy to sign someone in to the creche at the OC and for them to not even notice they were there or not. Question is when they go to the beach or the playground is the headcount done from the sign in book or from the children they have with them at the time?

****
Whichever, Nanny Cat Baker doesn't seem to be able to be precise about the number of children she took to the beach for the sailing trip:

Processo Volume IV, pages 870 to 872

REPORT OF
EXTERNAL DILIGENCE

Date: 2007.05.10
Place: Praia da Luz, Lagos
Officer responsible: Manuel Pinho, Inspector


[...]


The
path taken was as follows:

1. The parents leave the children in the Mark Warner "BABY CLUB",
which is situated next to the principal reception of the resort, and which is
open 24 hours;
2. Next, Catriona, with MADELEINE and 4 or 5 other children, headed in the
direction of the beach on foot. The walk was about 100 metres, even though not
in a straight line;


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id351.html

Châtelaine wrote:

Hummingbird wrote:
[...]

What I am getting at is I think it would have been very easy to sign someone in to the creche at the OC and for them to not even notice they were there or not. Question is when they go to the beach or the playground is the headcount done from the sign in book or from the children they have with them at the time?

****
Whichever, Nanny Cat Baker doesn't seem to be able to be precise about the number of children she took to the beach for the sailing trip:

Processo Volume IV, pages 870 to 872

REPORT OF
EXTERNAL DILIGENCE

Date: 2007.05.10
Place: Praia da Luz, Lagos
Officer responsible: Manuel Pinho, Inspector


[...]


The
path taken was as follows:

1. The parents leave the children in the Mark Warner "BABY CLUB",
which is situated next to the principal reception of the resort, and which is
open 24 hours;
2. Next, Catriona, with MADELEINE and 4 or 5 other children, headed in the
direction of the beach on foot. The walk was about 100 metres, even though not
in a straight line;


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id351.html

Yes you are right was it 4 or was it 5?

There is a massive discrepancy when you read through CB statement for the day of 3 May.

On 3 May 2007 I remember GM having accompanied MM to the club between 9.15 and 9.20 in the morning I do not remember who came to pick her up for lunch but, after she returned in the afternoon for a dive and a swim.
These activiites were realised with the other children. On this day I remember that we sailed and I saw friends of the McCanns on the beach D & J (not D&F?)
Around 14.45 M returned to the minis club on top of the reception but I do not remember who accompanied her. This afternoon we went swimming. Kate went (should it say came to get) to get M from the tapas bar area and according to what I remember she was wearing sporting clothes and I assumed she was practising some form of athletics. It was around 15.25 / 18.00. I think G was playing tennis

So who took M back to the club if they were at the beach in the afternoon as this would suggest? And why was she taken back? It is very odd because CB goes onto say this.

'there was one occasion on Thurs 3 May around 10.30 in the morning where M cried at the launch of the yellow safety boat in the ocean

Now the schedule for the minis club states that Thurs am is beach and sailing but CB is clearly suggesting here that they sailed pm.

Who did M return to minis club with, from where and why?

As according to schedule they were already in minis club doing space chalk paintings and swimming starts at 3.30.

Kate went to get M between 15.25 and 18.00!!!!!!!!?????????

She can't remember who picks her up but can clearly remember what KM was wearing on that particular day but doesn't know whether it was anytime between 15.25 and 18.00

Engage brain before opening mouth I think!!

Something else that struck me whilst looking at these creche sheets - that amount of errors people seem to make when signing in their own children - especially ROB/JT who on the first few days are making a lot of errors in names and apartment numbers!

Russian Doll wrote: (I think)
I believe in a demise prior to 3rd May....but what about the creche attendance on 2nd and 3rd? If a sub was used then the different child surely would have been noticed? A sub used from the outset woud not present this problem, but that would mean death almost at the start and the deceit starting 29th.... could the creche have been so sloppily run that a child who was not there could be signed in and out at busy times when there was a small group of parents congregated ? So no sub child used? Or was a live Maddie not at OC at all but elsewhere?
btw did any nanny mention Maddies coloboma or comment about the iconic photo when released that they did not see that eye defect on the Maddie who was signed in ? Or could it be that if a sub was used, it was the sub who had a coloboma, hence one was photoshopped on the photo of Maddie? Just throwing out some thoughts....because not once in her book does Kate mention Maddies right eye....her most distinguishing physical feature, allegedly.
unquote

Early on - it may still be traceable - one of the nannies said she'd never noticed Maddie's eye.
As for the rest - I don't think the creche sheets were checked at all. Where were they? If it was the case that the nanny would come forward and take the child, see the parent sign and the same when she was collected - then it's more difficult.
But if one would know where the sheets were located and how far away from the actual signing in the nanny usually was - it will be clear I expect.
On neither of the photographs of Maddie is she wearing a rubber bracelet - wasn't that something that was done? I'm thinking that she never was in the creche at all.

The twins were put back in the creche almost immediately after Madeleine disappeared. They had almost the same routine as before Madeleine disappeared. There a loads of photos out there of them, I don't think they are wearing the id bracelets on any of them are they?

Presumably they only wore bracelets when they were actually in the creche? In which case, unless we have photos taken inside the creche, the children won't be wearing bracelets.

Miraflores wrote:Presumably they only wore bracelets when they were actually in the creche? In which case, unless we have photos taken inside the creche, the children won't be wearing bracelets.

Perhaps it wasn't done at all then, it's unlikely that you'd take the bracelet off for lunch and then back on again. I'd certainly have expected bracelets on the boat trip though. But I agree with the previous posters, it seems it was a very informal affair. Take the children in and out when you like, forget to sign them out (or in). Corrections later?

tigger wrote:

Miraflores wrote:Presumably they only wore bracelets when they were actually in the creche? In which case, unless we have photos taken inside the creche, the children won't be wearing bracelets.

Perhaps it wasn't done at all then, it's unlikely that you'd take the bracelet off for lunch and then back on again. I'd certainly have expected bracelets on the boat trip though. But I agree with the previous posters, it seems it was a very informal affair. Take the children in and out when you like, forget to sign them out (or in). Corrections later?

No bracelet on the tennis picture when MM was supposed to be in the minis club soft tennis!!

Perhaps the OC only started using bracelets after 4th May when they realised that they needed to clean up their act?

Miraflores wrote:Perhaps the OC only started using bracelets after 4th May when they realised that they needed to clean up their act?

From Cat Baker's Rogatory interview:

“I got to know Gerry and Kate McCann on the Sunday morning, 29.04.2007, in the Minis Club. They brought the children and as it was their first day of holidays the normal procedure was that they were allocated a childcare worker. I had previously written the children’s bracelets which included their name, allergies and relevant information. I stayed with Madeleine, 3 years old, in my group (Minis Club that week) together with E***, daughter of Jane Tanner”.

so where is the id bracelet on the tennis court photo?

russiandoll wrote:

Miraflores wrote:Perhaps the OC only started using bracelets after 4th May when they realised that they needed to clean up their act?

From Cat Baker's Rogatory interview:

“I got to know Gerry and Kate McCann on the Sunday morning, 29.04.2007, in the Minis Club. They brought the children and as it was their first day of holidays the normal procedure was that they were allocated a childcare worker. I had previously written the children’s bracelets which included their name, allergies and relevant information. I stayed with Madeleine, 3 years old, in my group (Minis Club that week) together with E***, daughter of Jane Tanner”.

so where is the id bracelet on the tennis court photo?

exactly! according to FP she was actually on the tennis courts as an activity with the mini club!! Very odd!

[quoteEarly on - it may still be traceable - one of the nannies said she'd never noticed Maddie's eye.
As for the rest - I don't think the creche sheets were checked at all. Where were they? If it was the case that the nanny would come forward and take the child, see the parent sign and the same when she was collected - then it's more difficult.
But if one would know where the sheets were located and how far away from the actual signing in the nanny usually was - it will be clear I expect.
On neither of the photographs of Maddie is she wearing a rubber bracelet - wasn't that something that was done? I'm thinking that she never was in the creche at all.
[/quote]

Anyone involved with Quality Assurance knows all about procedures in an organisation. To be Quality Assured the onus is on the organisation to demonstrate that the procedures exist, are understood and adhered to. Whether or not Mark Warner were Quality Assured the principle still holds. Could MW demonstrate this if asked? If not then the records are not to be relied upon as anything could have been going on.

russiandoll wrote:Kate gives a reasonably full run down of activities from arrival 28th April until evening May 2nd [ she then devotes an entire chapter to May 3rd].

If the routine of their days in PDL had been disturbed by a trip out of the resort, why on earth does she not record this trip in her book? I have just posted in the tapas phone autopsy section a comment on the lack of info about 30 April as a memeber asked what Kate had said in her book about the activities on this particular date.
She says nothing at all about anything until evening when she briefly describes a trip to the supermarket for essentials then mentions tapas evening meal.
NO RECORD AT ALL OF WHAT SHE HER HUSBAND COMPANIONS OR CHILDREN DID DAYTIME 30 APRIL.

That's more or less two 'dead' days. The 2nd is skipped over very lightly (Dr. Roberts - thirty days). If it wasn't Sagres, was it Zaival Beach where a waiter insisted he'd seen the whole family at Easter?
Or was it mysterious Burgau.
I haven't paid much attention to the Gorrods, but does the 30th coincide with their two unaccounted days?

At a later date Amaral said that according to the phone pings of MO and I think ROB, they must have had a car - this was post 3/5/07.

tigger wrote:

russiandoll wrote:Kate gives a reasonably full run down of activities from arrival 28th April until evening May 2nd [ she then devotes an entire chapter to May 3rd].

If the routine of their days in PDL had been disturbed by a trip out of the resort, why on earth does she not record this trip in her book? I have just posted in the tapas phone autopsy section a comment on the lack of info about 30 April as a memeber asked what Kate had said in her book about the activities on this particular date.
She says nothing at all about anything until evening when she briefly describes a trip to the supermarket for essentials then mentions tapas evening meal.
NO RECORD AT ALL OF WHAT SHE HER HUSBAND COMPANIONS OR CHILDREN DID DAYTIME 30 APRIL.

That's more or less two 'dead' days. The 2nd is skipped over very lightly (Dr. Roberts - thirty days). If it wasn't Sagres, was it Zaival Beach where a waiter insisted he'd seen the whole family at Easter?
Or was it mysterious Burgau.
I haven't paid much attention to the Gorrods, but does the 30th coincide with their two unaccounted days?

At a later date Amaral said that according to the phone pings of MO and I think ROB, they must have had a car - this was post 3/5/07.

It seems that perhaps a lot of 'sharing' went on on this holiday, buggies and pushchairs for one thing but it may be that the Gorrods car was hired and used by certain members of the group and they all 'pooled' the cost of petrol etc or sported them a dinner and drinks on evening?
Sorry but where can I find this supposed waiter statement about seeing them at easter?
And why is Burgau so mysterious?
It would appear that with the creche record and tapas sheets now being looked closely at, the 30th and possibly the 29th are two days very much in question.
Hope someone can enlighten me on the above - although not sure the brain can take much more!

Also slightly off the creche topic - this is one that will take you back 4 years or more. I remember seeing a photo of GM pushing a double buggy and it was covered in a dark type of netting - someone had enlarged it and there were questions as to what was inside the buggy - can anyone remember it and can you point me in the right direction for it - it was very interesting and I will keep searching!

There you go! https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3470-zaival-beach?highlight=zaival+beach

Hummingbird, here's a link to images of two separate buggies.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/KM_GM%20(4).jpg

Jean wrote:Hummingbird, here's a link to images of two separate buggies.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/KM_GM%20(4).jpg

Now if he could only get Kate to wear a burka....

I find this part of the McCann story very confusing indeed. Can someone please clarify exactly what time the McCanns allegedly went to Sagres on the 30th April? For how long? With or without their three children? And how they went there?

What I surmise is that they were in the beach idea and someone unconnected to the McCanns, Nuno Lorennco, happened to take a photo of suspicious goings on involving the children (or Madeline in particular) and a blonde woman with a Renault Clio (who may or may not have been Michaela).

Let us not forget that Robert Murat arrived suddenly back to Portugal on Monday 30th April and Tuesday 1st May was a public holiday. Robert Murat, having accounted many times for his movements since leaving the UK on the morning of 30th April, could he have possibly been involved in events as early as 30th April?

There are three points that I wish to pick up on here concerning two photographs and Robert Murats use of a mobile phone. There are two photos which seems to me to be of particular relevance - the once taken by Nuno Lorenco and a second by the McCanns of Madeleine apparently beside the swimming pool area on the afternoon of Thursday 3rd May. Either these two photos exist or they do not. Both photos will have a digital number and any tampering with the photos can be established from photos taken before and afterwards.

Has anyone ever seen the photo allegedly taken by Nuno Lorenco? Have the Police ever seen it? If not, then question marks must hang over the credibility of what Nuno Lorenzo saw (or did not see) on 30th April.

Furthermore, it should be possible to analyze the swimming pool photo of Madeline to establish whether it was indeed taken on the afternoon of Thursday 3rd May or taken two days before, as has been hinted at by the Statement of Rachel Oldfield.

As regards the mobile phone of Robert Murat, this was switched off and on numerous times between the time of his arrival on the morning of 30th April and upto around 11.15pm on the night of Thursday 3rd May and his movements during this time period have never been fully explained. We can perhaps excuse Kate and Gerry McCann for switching off their phones while on vacation and not expecting any significant calls (assuming they are innocent in all of this) but Robert Murat was a 'man with a mission' and had a lot of urgent business to attend to even on a Public Holiday, something he knew of course and could not overlook, because he lived in Portugal most of the time!

I suggest therefore that not only the actual calls and SMS made from his phone but use of the tracking signals from phone calls would help to establish where he was at key times. I have faith in both the British and Portugese Police and I suspect that they have already followed this line of enquiry but not all evidence has been put in the public domain.

It is also critical to understand whether Gerry McCann had ever visited Portugal previously and how he could have developed such a network of contacts on whom to call for such mountainous assistance. Much more than a phone call made to old buddy now in civil service at Whitehall.

I am at a loss to understand what could have happened to Madeline other than an accidental death at the Apartment which the Tapas 9 plus Creche and Ocean Club staff plus other Guests would conspire to make one of the biggest cover ups in legal history. In other words, how could so many people cover up something which happened to her before the night of 3rd May?

I find this part of the McCann story very confusing indeed. Can someone please clarify exactly what time the McCanns allegedly went to Sagres on the 30th April? For how long? With or without their three children? And how they went there?

What I surmise is that they were in the beach idea and someone unconnected to the McCanns, Nuno Lorennco, happened to take a photo of suspicious goings on involving the children (or Madeline in particular) and a blonde woman with a Renault Clio (who may or may not have been Michaela).

Let us not forget that Robert Murat arrived suddenly back to Portugal on Monday 30th April and Tuesday 1st May was a public holiday. Robert Murat, having accounted many times for his movements since leaving the UK on the morning of 30th April, could he have possibly been involved in events as early as 30th April?

It is confusing and Ive tried putting it together:

On April 30th Madeleine was signed into creche by kate mccann at 1515, she dropped the twins off at 1525 then went back and got Madeleine out of the creche at 1530….just 15 mins later

The twins were later signed out at 17.20, Ella O'Brien was signed in at 1600 but never signed out…nor were any of the other kids in Madeleine's creche signed out that afternoon, just Madeleine…did something happen?

A week later on 12th May 2007, reports in all the newspaper media 'claim' that the mccanns went to Sagres beach that afternoon which is 20 miles from PDL. This gives the mccanns a window of 100 mins to get to Sagres, go to the beach and get back to PDL, totally unlikely. And they never had a car. That very same day Nuno Lourenco de Jesus claimed of a man photographing his daughter on the beach and trying to snatch her later in a cafe in Sagres. The newspaper media 'claim' goes on to link Nuno Lourenco de Jesus child snatchers to the same ones caught on CCTV at a petrol station on the 4th May 2007, further claiming Nuno Lourenco de Jesus identified 2 of the 3 suspects at the petrol station as the same ones who were photographing his daughter in Sagres 4 days earlier

The newspaper media 'claim' goes on even further to link the same Nuno Lourenco de Jesus "child snatchers" as matching a description of the woman given by a witness who spotted someone acting suspiciously outside Madeleine’s bedroom on the night of her disappearance

Now for the facts:
Nuno Lourenco de Jesus statement of the "child snatchers" photographing & snatching attempt of his daughter is true. However there is no record of him identifying them as the same ones spotted in the petrol station. He identified his child snatchers from CCTV images taken in a FNAC shop in Chiado, Lisbon. Robert Murat's Uncle Ralph Eveleigh also provided CCTV footage of the couple visiting in his Beach Bar in Burgau. Coincidence?

There is no record or proof of the mccanns being in Sagres that afternoon. All there appears to be is a 'shopkeeper' (which could be anyone) in the newspaper articles claiming to have seen the mccanns in Sagres that afternoon, with a buggy when they didn't have one nor were the twins with them either as they were in creche. In the bewk, kate mccann makes NO REFERENCE to what they did during the daytime on 30th April, no mention of Sagres no mention about anything this day. This day seems to have been totally erased from memory. She only briefly describes a trip to the supermarket for essentials then mentions tapas evening meal. As do all the other tapes members evade this day and mention only about the tapas meal "they think"

Who were the Nuno Lourenco de Jesus child snatchers?
A Polish couple who were staying in an apartment in Burgau. The apartment block in Burgau have links to Robert Murat - his father's company built the block and are rumoured to manage the block. Yet another coincidence

From Interpol:
Using the "PAX-LIST" (passenger list), persons in seats around the KROKOWSKI couple were shown pictures of Madeleine and all stated that that couple was not accompanied by any child.

From IP Warsaw:
- At 07h10 this morning (6 May) the couple were interviewed in their home apartment, which was searched and the missing child was not found. After arriving in Berlin they left by train at 21h22 arriving home this morning at 06h45.

Summary:
Nuno Lourenco de Jesus seems to be genuine with his statement, however he was simply mistaken who the Polish couple were or trying to do imo. This is about the only element of truth. The rest seems to have been made up, linked up, connected up, to add weight to the mccanns abduction theory. As the Sagres claims are in all the newspapers then it would appear to have been fed to them by the mccann machine. What so stands out is on the 30th April there are very strange entries on the creche sheets for that afternoon and the tapas members erased memory of this very same afternoon….what was going on 30th April that needed to be whooshed from the chapter in kate mccanns bewk which every day of the holiday was described to some extent? Why did robert murat suddenly book a flight back to PDL that same day at midnight for a flight a few hours later? Anyone would think that something important happened….something that could be the truth of the lie?

Polish Couple from CCTV FNAC shop in Chiado, Lisbon


Petrol Station CCTV


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NUNO_LOURENCO.htm

petrol station child looks like a 2 year old to me ,not one that could be maddie ,joyce1938

The Sagres article that was in the Express on 11th May 2007 says "Kate and Gerry McCann were driven at speed from their holiday apartment to a police station in Portimao to help officers examine the tapes after Mrs McCann again went to the local church to pray for her daughter."

Was this the car ride kate mccann complains about later in her bewk that the PJ were driving too fast?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id30.html

In the Sun article by John Askill, they appear to be the only ones who add to the story "The dad, Numo Lourenco, says Maddie was one of the tots snapped."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/32419/Maddie-was-snapped-by-perv.html#ixzz26bApopWF

On Pamalam's Guest Book page 10:

Date: 3/9/2009, 9:49 am, GMT +1
Name: Nuno De Jesus
Email: dej*s*s@********.de
Location: gremani
Number: 124
Thanks for your good work

Nuno Lourenco


Reply written by Pamalam at 3/9/2009, 9:52 am, GMT

Hi Nuno
Many thanks for your message


http://users4.smartgb.com/g/g.php?a=s&i=g43-12642-66&m=10&p=10

Thanks for those who responded to my earlier posting. Forgive me if I am still confused.

Nuno Lorenco comes across as credible and I would tend to think he might be mistaken but he was clearly in Sagres on the afternoon of 30th April and saw people taking photos of young children (including his own?) which obviously aroused his suspicions. I am not sure that I have understood this part.

Who took photos of who? Lorenco of what we now understand to be the Polish couple taking photos themselves of children who were not their own? or just a photo of the blonde woman? Details of the Vehicle Renault Clio led Police to an Apartment in Burgau. The fact that the Building might have been owned by Robert Murats UNCLE is surely irrelevant - isnt it?

As for the McCanns, surely it is just a simple case of a child throwing a tantrum or something like that and a parent collecting the child 15 minutes after signing in and taking the child (Madeleine) back to the Apartment. The Twins were in the Creche. Why on earth would the McCanns have gone to Sagres on that day and at that time without all their children? Kate McCann makes no reference to Sagres in her book and I can only conclude, subject to what will obviously be gone into at a later date on Inquiry or Case re-opening, that the McCanns never left Praia de la Luz between 3.30pm and 5.20pm on that afternoon of 30th April.

is there any reference to the children having their 'high tea' on that afternoon?

There has been reference in the 'reporting' to a shopkeeper but this is totally unsubstantiated for want of a witness statement.

I think the Post response is correct that the events as we might understand them on 30th April at Sagres have been used to 'beef up' the idea of suspicions for child abduction. Oddly, in my view, Kate McCann makes no reference to this whatsoever in her book (the Seventh Witness if we can be bold and say that) but she does credence to Carole Trammer Fenn, niece of Pamela, who sighted a man leaving the back entrance of 5B between 4pm and 5pm on the afternoon of 3rd May.

I have yet to understand Robert Murats haste in returning to Portugal but I can comprehend that Jennifer Murat may well have summoned her Son to return to Portugal late into the night of 30th April, that it was she who collected Robert on the morning of Tuesday 1st April (the public holiday) and that her movements between 7.30pm and 10pm in regard to buying a few groceries at the local supermarket, have not been fully explained. Furthermore, Luz is a small place, a thousand people live there if i read correctly. Is is not inconceivable that Jennifer Murat and Pamela Fenn could or would have known each other, if long term residents there. I am not suggesting that they actually did and that it has any relevance to the disappearance of Madeleine but is is a point to consider when the chips are down and the McCanns needed to contact someone urgently between 7.15pm and 8.30pm to act as a go between in the removal and concealment of the dead body of Madeleine.

Today, friday Nov 1st, travelling in Portugal, I chanced upon two Dutch senior citizen couples from the Algarve. Upper middle class.

After a while, I asked them for their opinion on the Maddie affair.

Without prompting they told me:

One of the Dutch couples had run into the McCann couple at a shopping centre or mall in Guia, while they were paying for their purchases at the Sara (?) shop. 
The McCs were in the company of a number of people, speaking with each other in English. 
They were pushing a twin buggy, with twin children, a boy and a girl inside.

This had happened days before Maddie was reported missing.
When they saw the english-speaking couple on TV, they immediately recognised them as the couple with the twins in the buggy from the shopping mall. 

They were surprised to learn the missing child was another child of theirs, as they had only seen the toddlers in the twin buggy, and no sign of a third child. 

This had happened in the afternoon in the town/village of Guia in the Algarve.

The Dutch who told me this had considered going to the police with this information, buth they had thought that it would not make a difference one way or the other. 

All of them figured the child would be long gone (dead) 

In fact, the other couple had heard so from someone who came to work at their place in the morning of the 4th of May, saying that the parents were involved. 

Pretty early, isn´t it?