NO CHECKS ON THE TAPAS NINE CHILDREN ON TUESDAY 1ST MAY 2007

by **Jill Havern** 05.04.20 12:41

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

Posted on cmomm facebook group

NO CHECKS ON THE TAPAS NINE CHILDREN ON TUESDAY 1ST MAY 2007

An important component of the tapas nine narrative is that they were doing regular checks on their children that they had left unsupervised in their apartments while they dined in the Tapas Restaurant at night.

Apartment 5a has three windows facing the road. The tapas nine had to pass these windows en route to checking on the children in the apartments. (See Diagram attached to post)

Pamela Fenn's statement means that none of the tapas nine passed the windows of the McCann's apartment between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007 and that there were no adults present in the McCann's apartment between 10.30m ad 11.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007.

Pamela Fenn's statement:

"She also refers to the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22.30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger. Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted ?Daddy, Daddy?, the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23.45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse."

It is important to note that independent eye witness statements in the PJ files are not notes taken by the Portuguese police, they are statements given in a police station in the presence of a police officer which are then ratified and signed by the witnesses as being true. There is no reason not to believe the independent eye witness statements. They had nothing to gain by lying to the police and would have been aware that to do so is a crime. They were ordinary people helping police with their investigation.

LINK TO PAMELA FENN'S STATEMENT

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

by ROSA 05.04.20 13:08

I was always curious about Mrs Fenn and her statements did she ever walk down to 5a that crying night and knock on the door ?

by **sharonl** 05.04.20 14:37

I too am very curious about Mrs Fenn's statements, especially the one she claims to have caught a burglar. Given the way her niece describes access to her apartment, the fact that if he did gain access, he wouldn't have been seen and her age, I very much doubt that she chased him off, he dived through the window and she caught his ankles. Sounds totally ludicrous to me but it does back up the McCanns claim of burglars in the area.

Then we have her niece who worked for the royal family telling us that she had seen someone acting suspiciously near the gate of 5A. She couldn't even get the day right and her statements were incorrect in that although she claimed to have been in Portugal in April, her initial statement actually says that it was late May.

I have just realised that there may be one way of checking this. Do we know Mrs Fenns' date of birth?

Is a man, who is planning on abducting a child a night, really going to test the gate in broad daylight just hours before, just to see if it squeaks? laugh

And, if there was a man at the gate, how could Tramner be sure that it wasn't one Gerry or of the McCann friends? It could have been a man waiting outside for his wife, or a child. How did she know it wasn't one of the tapas gang or an employee? Did she know them at the time?

by crusader 05.04.20 16:32

Probably been said before but here goes. Pamela Fenn said she heard crying on Tuesday 1st May, that was, according to Najoha Chekaya quiz night.

I have no reason to not believe her.

Kate Mc said she slept in kids room on 2nd May, I don't believe her.

I think she slept in kids room on 1st May because Gerry was flirting with the quiz woman.

The tapas lot were involved in the quiz, and indeed did win the quiz, there wouldn't be much time for checking on the kids.

by crusader 05.04.20 17:19

After reading again, Carol Tranmer's very confusing statement, I think she was referring to the Oldfield's gate.

DC Ivor Messiah referred to an earlier statement on 8th May 2007 ie" I have read your statement of the 8th May 2007". Some of the information in this earlier statement was corrected by Carol Tranmer.

by **sharonl** 05.04.20 21:29

I will check Carole Tranmers rogatorty interview. There was some confusion over when she was actually in Portugal. Iirc, the first statement put her there after May 3rd.

by **sharonl** 05.04.20 22:50

To avoid taking this thread off topic, I have posted 2 extracts from Carole Tranmers Statements here:

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

by **Tony Bennett** 06.04.20 10:31

Jill Havern wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Posted on cmomm facebook group

NO CHECKS ON THE TAPAS NINE CHILDREN ON TUESDAY 1ST MAY 2007

An important component of the tapas nine narrative is that they were doing regular checks on their children that they had left unsupervised in their apartments while they dined in the Tapas Restaurant at night.

Apartment 5a has three windows facing the road. The tapas nine had to pass these windows en route to checking on the children in the apartments. (See Diagram attached to post)

Pamela Fenn's statement means that none of the tapas nine passed the windows of the McCann's apartment between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007 and that there were no adults present in the McCann's apartment between 10.30m ad 11.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007.

Pamela Fenn's statement:

"She also refers to the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22.30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger. Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted ?Daddy, Daddy?, the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23.45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse."

It is important to note that independent eye witness statements in the PJ files are not notes taken by the Portuguese police, they are statements given in a police station in the presence of a police officer which are then ratified and signed by the witnesses as being true. There is no reason not to believe the independent eye witness statements. They had nothing to gain by lying to the police and would have been aware that to do so is a crime. They were ordinary people helping police with their investigation.

LINK TO PAMELA FENN'S STATEMENT

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

I'm afraid this article is based 100% on believing that Mrs Fenn's statement made on 20 August 2007, a whole 111 days after she claimed to have heard a child crying, is true.

Let's not forget two things (among many others):

1. What she was going to say in her statement was widely trailed in the British press on Saturday 18th and Sunday 19th August. The most likely source for these stories was Clarence Mitchell, which would mean that he and the McCann Team would have advance notice of what she was going to say

2. When stories about Mrs Fenn's evidence appeared in the media, she emphatically denied them in a live media interview, saying "It's all rubbish".

This article goes right against the evidence compiled by MMRG and sent to the Portuguese Attorney-General, which set out the case that Madeleine suffered a serious (possibly fatal) event during Sunday.

I was very sad (sorry Jill but I must say it) to see this article given the light of day here

by **Jill Havern** 06.04.20 12:04

Tony Bennett wrote:
This article goes right against the evidence compiled by MMRG and sent to the Portuguese Attorney-General, which set out the case that Madeleine suffered a serious (possibly fatal) event during Sunday.

I was very sad (sorry Jill but I must say it) to see this article given the light of day here

The same could be said of most things that are posted on this forum in McCann Latest News, especially from so-called journalists like Tracey Kandohla - we know it's nonsense or factually incorrect, but it's a good opportuntiy to debunk them or merely save our energy and just laugh at it.

This article is posted in the Debate Section - a section for 'purporting' theories - and debunking them or laughing at them.

That's why all MMRG articles, and other important items of 'finished' research, are posted in a separate sub-forum at the top and everything is locked. It's become 'read-only reference' for people who want to read without trawling through reams of debate, some of which can get heated at times.

We have many thousands of members on the cmomm facebook group where this was posted, and many of those members read this forum where they can see things debunked.

We also have many new members here who may have seen this article posted elsewhere on facebook and believe it, but come here and see that old threads, like the one Sharon bumped, contains information they haven't seen before which may make them reach a different point of view.

Our excellent moderator Verdi was also very quick off the mark to create this retro-fitting thread because Mrs Fenn was back on topic:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Verdi loves to take members on a journey around the rest of the forum to read things they might not otherwise find.

Whilst established members might yawn at the prospect of an old thread being bumped, I don't think it ever hurts to go over old ground for the sake of our new members.

So shut it! biggergrin

by **Hobs** 07.04.20 22:29

Maddie died sometime before the Thursday night the mccanns claim she was allegedly abducted.
Even taking into accounts other so called witness statements and photos showing Maddie was alive up to that date.
We have one photo, the last photo by the pool which could only have been taken on the Sunday. No photos after that date can be confirmed as being taken of Maddie after that date. Changes by the mccanns to dining habits from the Tuesday, a day they tend to ignore or brush over.
Given the cleanliness of the apartment, the lack of Maddie's DNA, the one toothbrush between the bunch of them (maybe used to clean incriminating evidence from the tiles?) There had to be enough time for them to but the cleaning materials and clean the apartment of blood and body fluids ( not enough not to be noticed by eye, especially in panic mode but often seen at a later time) and of course the blood and body fluids detected by the blood and cadaver dogs in the apartment and on certain items of clothing such as the red t shirt(perhaps worn by Maddie especially since kate told us it "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances.) The children were awake and probably wearing day attire.

If we go with the theory that what Mrs Fenn said is true, that she heard a child crying, what if the child she heard crying was NOT Maddie but perhaps one of the other children not the twins?
Remember all the children were being babysat by the missing adult from the group in one apartment and it is thought they were all in apt 5a at some point. Is it possible that one child was left in 5a for a reason and it is that scared child that is heard crying daddy?
Why is it assumed that the crying stopped when someone entered the apartment when it could also have been someone leaving the apartment?

Just something to ponder on.

Have a great corona virus free day xx

by **Tony Bennett** 07.04.20 23:04

Hobs wrote:If we go with the theory that what Mrs Fenn said is true, that she heard a child crying, what if the child she heard crying was NOT Maddie but perhaps one of the other children not the twins?

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

Look at this short part of her statement:

"she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger..."

She says she hears a young child crying ever more loudly for 75 minutes and does NOTHING about it. (Except 111 days later, on 20 August 2007)

But having listened to this for 75 minutes, she is able to pronounce: "Not the crying of a child aged two or younger'.

How many people do you know, or does anyone else know, who can distinguish between the crying of a 2-year-old and a 3-year-old? She claims in her statement that she has this ability! And many people blindly accept this without giving it a moment's thought!

Am I alone on this forum in thinking that someone fabricated this statement for her, in order to 'prove' that Madeleine (aged three) was alive on the Tuesday night?

Does that explain why, when asked about it, she replied:

"Ignore it, it's all rubbish".

At that point I am sure she was speaking the truth

by Guest 08.04.20 8:00

Hearing a child crying for 75 seconds would stir me to find out what was wrong. Hearing a child crying for 75 minutes and doing nothing is beyond belief. But Fenn later describes this as rubbish.Whichever is the case, she doesn't come across as a pleasant person. Even the people on the periphery of this case are not to be trusted.

by **Jill Havern** 08.04.20 8:33

Hobs wrote:Why is it assumed that the crying stopped when someone entered the apartment when it could also have been someone leaving the apartment?

Just something to ponder on.

I would have thought the crying would have intensified with someone leaving the apartment, especially if she was then left alone, albeit with the twins who were allegedly asleep. And, obviously, it very much depends on why she was crying in the first place.

Would an adult even leave a child in a distressed state?

Possibly...

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

by Guest 08.04.20 11:52

Would an adult even cause the distress? Maybe....

by **Hobs** 08.04.20 17:28

Jill Havern wrote:
Hobs wrote:Why is it assumed that the crying stopped when someone entered the apartment when it could also have been someone leaving the apartment?

Just something to ponder on.
I would have thought the crying would have intensified with someone leaving the apartment, especially if she was then left alone, albeit with the twins who were allegedly asleep. And, obviously, it very much depends on why she was crying in the first place.

Would an adult even leave a child in a distressed state?

Possibly...

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

Assuming of course that the twins were even there in the first place.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.04.20 17:40

Hobs wrote:

Assuming of course that the twins were even there in the first place.

I think Paulo Rebelo was right.

He said that all week, from Monday night onwards, the eight children were together, being looked after by one of the adults, in turn, in one of the apartments.

That agrees with the surely spurious claim that one of the adults - a different one each time - was allegedly so ill that they could not possibly come down to dinner.

If that is correct:

(a) the claim of 'checking every night' was a lie (except for the Thursday night when a charade of checking was conducted)

(b) it supports that claim that something very serious happened to Madeleine on Sunday

(c) Pamela Fenn's claim about the alleged 'crying incident' is wholly falsified (never mind her ridiculous 'attempted burglary' story).

.

by crusader 08.04.20 20:25

I don't think they checked on the children at all, two of the couples even took monitors. They had every intention of leaving the children and babies on their own at night.
What is slightly puzzling to me is, did they think the restaurant was near enough to the apartments to hear the children crying with the monitors.
I don't think any one of this selfish lot would give up valuable supping time to look after the children,they couldn't be bothered to be with them during the day.

by Verdi 08.04.20 21:32

crusader wrote:I don't think any one of this selfish lot would give up valuable supping time to look after the children,they couldn't be bothered to be with them during the day.

I don't wholly agree with that, maybe the odd parent is irresponsible enough to bugger off for dinner leaving young children alone for a while but not a collective eight.

Besides, they had the grandmother with them who wasn't on their level of socialising. I don't believe a grandmother would condone such behaviour.

by **sharonl** 08.04.20 21:58

Verdi wrote:
crusader wrote:I don't think any one of this selfish lot would give up valuable supping time to look after the children,they couldn't be bothered to be with them during the day.

I don't wholly agree with that, maybe the odd parent is irresponsible enough to bugger off for dinner leaving young children alone for a while but not a collective eight.

Besides, they had the grandmother with them who wasn't on their level of socialising. I don't believe a grandmother would condone such behaviour.

We also have the fact that each night, one person was absent from the Tapas party. They seem to have taken this in turns.

I very much doubt that practice was pre-planed. I also doubt that only 1 person per night, fell suck.

by Verdi 08.04.20 22:09

sharonl wrote:
Verdi wrote:
crusader wrote:I don't think any one of this selfish lot would give up valuable supping time to look after the children,they couldn't be bothered to be with them during the day.

I don't wholly agree with that, maybe the odd parent is irresponsible enough to bugger off for dinner leaving young children alone for a while but not a collective eight.

Besides, they had the grandmother with them who wasn't on their level of socialising. I don't believe a grandmother would condone such behaviour.

We also have the fact that each night, one person was absent from the Tapas party. They seem to have taken this in turns.

I very much doubt that practice was pre-planed. I also doubt that only 1 person per night, fell suck.

Fell suck? Put your specs on Sharon specs

.

Nah, it wasn't pre-planned. David Payne, he who organized the holiday, knew the Ocean Club night time childcare facilities beforehand. He packed a 'state of the art' baby monitor and Tanner packed a baby monitor that didn't work effectively.

The story was concocted after the event.

by crusader 08.04.20 22:19

Well it was Russell O'Brien's night to be suck on the Tuesday, looking after Evie, who was also suck.

by sandancer 08.04.20 23:54

Nine apparently educated intelligent adults ( I say apparently , you have to question that after reading their rambling incoherent statements !) Six of them doctors , one grandmother and all happily agree to leave their children all under the age 4 alone to sleep in their apartments not just on The night but for five nights !!!

Said apartments not close enough to see or hear anything , accessed by walking up the road through the car park ( it was dark said Rachel Oldfield ) leaving the meal every 30 minutes ( or so !) to check on the respective children !

Believable ?? Not a chance .

We know lies were told from the beginning , jemmied shutters etc Gerry couldn't even get right which door he went in through .

So why should we believe them when they tell us they deliberately , intentionally " neglected " their children ?

Because without the story of neglect there could be no abduction .
If they are happy to be condemned as " neglectful parents " how bad must the truth really be ?

Many people still ask " why haven't they been charged with neglect ?" by focusing on that only they miss the bigger picture ( something the McCanns and their team are happy about )

They've lost sight of the squirrel !

by Verdi 09.04.20 0:30

Diane Webster rogatory interview - 11th April 2008

Err on the Saturday night we went, we ate at the Millennium restaurant which was the main one which was further away from where we were staying, err so we all ate there, the children as well, everybody, and err and then that, that night I think we all just went back to our apartments err I think we were all pretty tired.”

4078 ”A long day.”

Reply ”Yeah, yeah err and then Sunday I mean everyday is so much the same I just find it very difficult to recollect.”

4078 ”Yeah, I mean if there’s nothing specific about a particular day and you can’t bring it to mind, you know, then that’s…”

Reply ”No, no I know that from the, the sun, the Sunday night was the first night we ate at the Tapas restaurant.”

4078 ”Yeah.”

Reply ”And err they only ever took so many bookings you know, although there were quite a lot of tables in the restaurant it was never ever full, in fact it was generally I would say quite empty err but this was because I think the staff were limited you know they had limited staff at the restaurant so they could only cope with so many people and originally err I think you had to get there early in the morning to book, you could book at the entrance to the Ocean Club err and Rachael somehow managed to get a block booking every night for eight thirty. Err so that was why we ended up going there every night because it was near the apartments.”

4078 ”Was there anywhere else that you could have gone nearby?”

Reply ”Well only the Millennium restaurant which was quite a trek away and to be honest I wasn’t impressed with the food anyway there.”

4078 ”Yeah.”

Reply ”It was self service and I don’t really err didn’t think much to the food.

Okay, so the night of arrival at the Ocean Club, Saturday 28th April 2007, the group ate at the Millennium restaurant, some distance from the apartment block.

The very next day they dined at the Tapas restaurant without the children, for whatever reason you care to believe.

Was this arrangement made because they were minus a child? Is this the true reason they chose to shift restaurants and concoct some story about dining close to the apartment block so they could leave all their children unattended but check at regular intervals? So they didn't need to use the night time babysitting service or the creche - at no cost?

The story is peppered with holes, can you imagine how this would stand in a court of law?

by ROSA 09.04.20 1:18

CaKeLoveR wrote:Hearing a child crying for 75 seconds would stir me to find out what was wrong. Hearing a child crying for 75 minutes and doing nothing is beyond belief. But Fenn later describes this as rubbish.Whichever is the case, she doesn't come across as a pleasant person. Even the people on the periphery of this case are not to be trusted.

I could not listen to a child crying for that length of time and not go and check door knock and as for the parents and the tapa's group they have changed their statements many times so I cannot believe a word they say I do believe MM died early probably Sunday and that they concocted a story to fit that week and since watching the cadaver and blood dogs at work that MM died in the apartment which means they removed her body just waiting for justice for MM