The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

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 start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Page 2 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 11.11.11 8:22

@russiandoll wrote:So dreadful it sounds untrue, but why so much unnecessary detail? It is all selfish, from the adults viewpoint..was there a smell? Or are they so thick they think that unless there is a bad odour then it is not bad enough for a nappy to need changing? God help the poor little one's rear end if affected as badly as described, time for the sudocrem .... must have been red raw.
I find this jaw dropping if I am honest. A baby in this condition needs constant attention and nappy changes galore and fluids to make up for what she has lost....its a serious thing in a baby.
I dont know what else to say...whoever took these notes must have been gob-smacked.
russiandoll, I so agree with you. Disgusting, and yes that poor baby's bottom truly must've been a sight to behold - and you know what? I'm utterly convinced that if I were to give a signed statement of something similar, I'd end up arrested for child cruelty! Think of the Barnado's ads - you could insert the RO scenario seamlessly into one. It really truly beggars belief that any of these people are walking free. If they behaved in the way they have 'admitted' then it is sheer, outright inarguable neglect and child cruelty OTOH, if these stories were concocted to cover-up the truth - well, you know where I'm going with this!
Just by way of possibly explaining the above IF ITS TRUE - do you think its a sign of their medical training mixed with narcissism and ego? What I mean is, its truly possible that the baby HAD been given electrolytes to counteract the dehydration and from a MEDICAL perspective, they had 'done right' by the child? Same with the above statement regards Maddie and how there were plenty of adults who could revive a child in medical distress? Sadly though it seems no adults thought to 'be there' and comfort a child who could be in emotional distress... IMO, if they did have this attitude it could explain their apparent 'superiority' as in 'don't question us' KMcC saying 'I know what happened, I was there' blah de blah?
Though, I'm not sure, is Rachel a medical woman? I thought not, but the 'attitude' could've rubbed off on her...
Nastier bunch of so called 'decent people' would be hard to find. Again, IMHO, of course Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 11.11.11 8:37

1. Replying to Bebootje, I understand the basis for your suggested sequence of events on 3 May, but there are so many indications that something had already happened to Madeleine before that evening that I think we can discard that. It would for example amount to a claim that Madeleine died between 8.30pm and around 9.00pm and that Jane Tanner immediately went to her apartment and concocted her story about 'bundleman'

2. Looking at Rachael Oldfield's statements, while it is possible that her daughter was suffering from diarrhoea as she claims, I am inclined to look on all the Tapas 9's statements about the claimed checking as lies. I think there is evidence - as discussed on the recent 'Sunday 29th' thread for example - that the children were all looked after by one of the group each night, and there was no checking in place at all.

I now reproduce three statements by Rachael Oldfield, the first two in her rogatory interviews, the third in a BBC TV programme sometime during 2007 - I've highlighted a few passages in blue:

ROGATORY - 1st extract

1578 “Okay. Did you want to mention something about Doctors in the group”?

Reply “Yeah I was just going to say that, you know Kate and Gerry are both Doctors and you know there were three other medics in the group, erm four others actually sorry, four others, erm you know so if by any chance they’d accidentally done anything to Madeleine or she was ill or erm you know something wasn’t quite right, I mean they wouldn’t have just left her and sort of tried to cover it up as an accident or you know, they would of sort of you know, come and got Matt and Russell and Dave and Fi, erm I mean you know, not just because they are Doctors, because you know they’re parents and you’d kind of go to anyone to see who could help but if you’ve got, you know Doctors as friends who were there as well, erm you know there were kind of six people there who if Madeleine had accidentally been bumped on the head or you know whatever the theories are supposed to be, erm you know, there were plenty of people there who could of you know, tried to revive a child, erm”.


ROGATORY - 2nd extract

"Yeah I was just going to say that, you know Kate and Gerry are both Doctors and you know there were three other medics in the group erm four others actually sorry, four others, erm you know so if by any chance they'd accidentally done anything to Madeleine or she was ill or erm you know something wasn't quite right, I mean they wouldn't have just left her and sort of tried to cover it up as an accident or you know, they would or sort of you know, come and got Matt and Russell and Dave and Fi, erm I mean you know, not just because they are Doctors, because you know they're parents and you'd kind of go to anyone to see who could help but if you got, you know Doctors as friends who were there as well, erm you know there were kind of six people there who if Madeleine had accidentally been bumped on the head or you know whatever the theories are supposed to be, erm you know, there were plenty of people there who could of you know tried to revive a child, erm".

THE TV INTERVIEW WITH RACHAEL OLDFIELD

(Note this is my own rough transcription, there may be a few words wrong...there may be a better version on mccannfiles for example) Rachel Oldfield)

I was there on the night

I spent time with Kate and Gerry during the week

You know, both before the (debate ?) and afterwards

You know, their relations and reactions which were just agonising

There was just no way they were involved in anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance

Now, if you take the commons sense approach as well and just look, you know, at the timings of how things happened and the fact that they’re both medics

There were four other medics in the group - they would know what to do to resuscitate a child (….?)

Anyone with an ounce of commons sense would be able to say that they couldn’t have done it

I was there and I know they didn’t do it

QUESTION You know there a lot of people, possibly including the police, certainly including a lot of bloggers, who have suspicions about your group and have written all sort of things about potential conspiracy theories and so on, what do you say to them?

Yeah, you know, it’s outrageous

We’ve all felt very angry about it

We were asked to comply with the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws

Which we given to understand that means years in prison for speaking out

There have been all these rumours flying around

So as a group we’ve not been able to speak out from day one

There were all these leaks from the PJ

And we haven’t been able to refute them

It’s their legal system

We would have loved to have really spoken out and put the record straight – but we were asked not to

But it’s their legal process, their legal system…we thought that was the best way of finding Madeleine

If we co-operated with the police and complied with their rules and regulations

COMMENTS:

A. A question arises as to why Rachael Oldfield mentions (a) a possible bump on the head and (b) te need for resuscitation. She does this twice in the two interviews

B. I think the reference to 'it' may be significant. RO says "They couldn’t have done it" and "I know they didn’t do it". Why does she not say for example: "I know they weren't involved in Madeleine's abduction", or "There was no reason for them to think that Madeleine was i nany danger of being abducted". Why does she refer - twice - to 'it'?

C. Compare RO's statement with a curiously similar statement from Dr Kate McCann. I think it went: "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances...".

D. What is the 'it' they are referring to? It is suggestive of a sudden, unforeseen event. These possibilities spring to mind: (i) losing consciousness or dying through over-sedation (ii) an accident, perhaps a fall in which she banged her head, or (iii) a violent event in which someone assaulted Madeleine.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 11.11.11 9:24

Tony, thank you for providing these interviews - I totally agree with your conclusions.
Most regular posters will be aware of my love of and interest in forensic linguistics! This certainly suggests Ms Oldfield's brain is desperately trying to 'leak' the truth (like Kate).

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Let's have more info on the science of forensic linguistics

Post by Tony Bennett on 11.11.11 10:15

@rainbow-fairy wrote:Tony, thank you for providing these interviews - I totally agree with your conclusions.
Most regular posters will be aware of my love of and interest in forensic linguistics! This certainly suggests Ms Oldfield's brain is desperately trying to 'leak' the truth (like Kate).
Yes, this is a very interesting suggestion - that despite a prodigious effort to cover up the truth, the brain somehow 'leaks' the truth, via the sub-conscious, either as you say through the words actually used, or of course by body language and gestures, like shaking of the head whilst asserting something, like avoiding eye contact, like nervous twitching, like scratching one's ear, etc.

Other clues include rapid speech when facing a difficult question, or unusually long-winded answers to simple questions.

And one of my personal favourites, as it crops up so often, saying "I would have done x' instead of 'I did x'.

rainbow-fairy, are you able perhaps to post up some links to some good quality articles on forensic linguistics?

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by jd on 11.11.11 10:51

I have to say that this does come across quite clearly that Ms Oldfield's brain is desperately trying to 'leak' the truth. Its like she is saying what happened reading what you've just posted up

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Daisy on 11.11.11 12:41

Loose lips sink ships - let's hope so hey.

I don't believe the children were ever left alone either. Like others, I think this was a lie to support the abduction hoax.

This quote, taken from RO's statement stood out to me. It sounds strange; She makes it sound like they were both checking the same place. Why would she say - "Russell had stayed in the bedroom" Wouldn't you just say: stayed behind, stayed in the apartment? How did Matthew know Russell had stayed in the bedroom, did he go and check, did he ring him?

"RUSSEL and MATHEW left at the same time. About five minutes later, MATHEW returned saying that the children were all well, and that RUSSEL had stayed in the bedroom as one of his daughters was crying."

Maybe nothing, but it doesn't read right to me.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by HiDeHo on 11.11.11 12:56

I believe the neglect issue to be contrived to allow credibility for an 'abduction' to take place.

However, according to their statements, their children went to the Millenium with them on Saturday, Matthew stayed with them on Sunday (supposedly sick) Rachael stayed in the apartment on Wednesday (possibly Tuesday). ROB was one apartment away on Tuesday.

No mention about Monday.

No proof whatsoever that they left the children alone....but it's always alluded to.

If they claim they were responsible then the abduction couldn't have happened.

Neglect is a trade off for the truth imo

Rachael tried to help (imo) by claiming the last time she saw Madeleine was at mini tennis on THURSDAY.

Madeleine's group played on Tuesday, so does that mean she last saw Madeleine on TUESDAY?

Rachael was apparently playing tennis with Jane at the time the 'last picture' was taken. Jane claims that Madeleine shouted at them...was Rachael oblivious to the family, including Madeleine, being around the pool or was Jane claiming they were there to 'confirm' the 'last picture'?

Why would that discrepancy exist if Madeleine did not disappear until later that day?

HiDeHo
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 2310
Reputation : 502
Join date : 2010-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 11.11.11 13:46

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@rainbow-fairy wrote:Tony, thank you for providing these interviews - I totally agree with your conclusions.
Most regular posters will be aware of my love of and interest in forensic linguistics! This certainly suggests Ms Oldfield's brain is desperately trying to 'leak' the truth (like Kate).
Yes, this is a very interesting suggestion - that despite a prodigious effort to cover up the truth, the brain somehow 'leaks' the truth, via the sub-conscious, either as you say through the words actually used, or of course by body language and gestures, like shaking of the head whilst asserting something, like avoiding eye contact, like nervous twitching, like scratching one's ear, etc.

Other clues include rapid speech when facing a difficult question, or unusually long-winded answers to simple questions.

And one of my personal favourites, as it crops up so often, saying "I would have done x' instead of 'I did x'.

rainbow-fairy, are you able perhaps to post up some links to some good quality articles on forensic linguistics?

Hi Tony, yes here are a couple:
This first is quite a comprehensive site;
http://deceptionanalysis.com/statement_analysis_content.html
A smaller post on Joana Morais;
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2011/01/truth-of-lie-is-always-revealed-by-face.html
And of course, Dr Martin Roberts at mccannfiles is always good -
Happy reading! Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 11.11.11 13:48

@Daisy wrote:Loose lips sink ships - let's hope so hey.

I don't believe the children were ever left alone either. Like others, I think this was a lie to support the abduction hoax.

This quote, taken from RO's statement stood out to me. It sounds strange; She makes it sound like they were both checking the same place. Why would she say - "Russell had stayed in the bedroom" Wouldn't you just say: stayed behind, stayed in the apartment? How did Matthew know Russell had stayed in the bedroom, did he go and check, did he ring him?

"RUSSEL and MATHEW left at the same time. About five minutes later, MATHEW returned saying that the children were all well, and that RUSSEL had stayed in the bedroom as one of his daughters was crying."

Maybe nothing, but it doesn't read right to me.

The statements of Dr Matthew and Rachael Oldfield come under still more suspicion when you consider these two points, extracted durectly from the Madeleine McCann Research Group's '50 FACTS' leaflet:

5. Dr Matthew Oldfield claimed he and his wife arrived at the Tapas bar at 8.55pm, but then went back to the Paynes’ apartment to chase them up as they were late. Dr Russell O’Brien confirmed that: “Matt, around 9pm, got up and said ‘I’ll go and drag them out’.” The Paynes flatly contradicted this.

6. Dr Matthew Oldfield changed his story several times. He said he did one ‘check’ on the children, then said he’d done two. He changed his story about the 2nd check, first saying that he walked by the McCanns’ apartment, later saying he’d entered it. Dr Kate McCann claimed Dr Oldfield said, at 9.30pm: “I’ll check on Maddie for you”. Why didn’t he say: “I’ll check on the children?”

I think it is possible from this to infer that Madeleine was of course already missing/dead, otherwise why didn't Dr Kate McCann recall Matthew Oldfield saying: "I'll check on the children for you"?

When you add these into the mix (again from the '50 FACTS' leaflet):

1. The McCanns originally claimed they found the shutters and window of the children’s room open. They ’phoned relatives that night saying: ‘An abductor broke in and took Madeleine’. But when police and the managers of the complex declared there was no sign of forced entry, they soon changed their story, saying they must have left the patio doors open. The window had been cleaned the day before. Only Kate McCann’s fingerprints were found on the window.

2. The McCanns gave different accounts of whether they were both with Madeleine at tea-time on the day Madeleine was reported missing - and gave three different versions of who read the children bedtime stories the night Madeleine was reported missing: (a) Kate (b) Gerry or (c) they both did.

3. Kate McCann said that their friend Dr David Payne knocked on the front door of their apartment at about 6.30pm on 3 May, but was immediately sent away without ever entering. Dr Payne, however, said he came in, saw all three children dressed ready for bed, and stayed for at least several minutes.

4. The McCanns said the children were in their pyjamas by 6.30pm the night Madeleine disappeared, were bathed at 7.00pm and asleep by 7.30pm. But just a few weeks later, in his blog, Gerry McCann wrote: “The twins must like their new cots as they were asleep by 7.30pm which was most unusual”.

10. Gerry McCann on 4 May (the day after Madeleine went missing) said: “Yesterday, Madeleine and and the twins were put to bed in their respective beds at 7.30pm”. Yet when the police arrived at about 11.00pm, they found a bed where Madeleine was supposed to have slept and two cots. Moreover, in a magazine interview in January 2008, Gerry McCann said: “On one bed the twins lay sleeping”.


...the possibility that the crime scene in Apartment G5A was arranged during the evening of 3 May (as dealt with in one chapter from Dr Goncalo Amaral's 'Truth About A Lie') becomes ever stronger.

A probable scenario is:

a) all children being cared for by one or other member of 'Tapas 9' that evening

b) the twins moved in to Apartment G5A shortly before the alarm is raised

c) no 'checking' was being done at all - but the visits to the apartments by Dr Oldfield (twice), Jane Tanner, Dr O'Brien and Dr McCann were (i) to arrange the crime scene and (ii) to move the twins into G5A.

d) Russell O'Brien's convoluted account of his child being sick and him switching the washing machine on is fabricated, being used to cover other things he was doing whilst he was away from the table that evening; similarly Dr. Gerald McCann's account of his viist to the apartment may be fabricated in that he may have left the table for 15 minutes or more for an altogether different purpose.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 11.11.11 14:08

@HiDeHo wrote:I believe the neglect issue to be contrived to allow credibility for an 'abduction' to take place.

However, according to their statements, their children went to the Millenium with them on Saturday, Matthew stayed with them on Sunday (supposedly sick) Rachael stayed in the apartment on Wednesday (possibly Tuesday). ROB was one apartment away on Tuesday.

No mention about Monday.

No proof whatsoever that they left the children alone....but it's always alluded to.

If they claim they were responsible then the abduction couldn't have happened.

Neglect is a trade off for the truth imo

Rachael tried to help (imo) by claiming the last time she saw Madeleine was at mini tennis on THURSDAY.

Madeleine's group played on Tuesday, so does that mean she last saw Madeleine on TUESDAY?

Rachael was apparently playing tennis with Jane at the time the 'last picture' was taken. Jane claims that Madeleine shouted at them...was Rachael oblivious to the family, including Madeleine, being around the pool or was Jane claiming they were there to 'confirm' the 'last picture'?

Why would that discrepancy exist if Madeleine did not disappear until later that day?
HiDeHo, agree totally. IMO, the children were all looked after in one apartment, whilst the stay-at-home adult was 'sick' Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Daisy on 11.11.11 14:20

@Tony Bennett wrote:

...the possibility that the crime scene in Apartment G5A was arranged during the evening of 3 May (as dealt with in one chapter from Dr Goncalo Amaral's 'Truth About A Lie') becomes ever stronger.

A probable scenario is:

a) all children being cared for by one or other member of 'Tapas 9' that evening

b) the twins moved in to Apartment G5A shortly before the alarm is raised

c) no 'checking' was being done at all - but the visits to the apartments by Dr Oldfield (twice), Jane Tanner, Dr O'Brien and Dr McCann were (i) to arrange the crime scene and (ii) to move the twins into G5A.

d) Russell O'Brien's convoluted account of his child being sick and him switching the washing machine on is fabricated, being used to cover other things he was doing whilst he was away from the table that evening; similarly Dr. Gerald McCann's account of his viist to the apartment may be fabricated in that he may have left the table for 15 minutes or more for an altogether different purpose.

I have no problem believing any of this. And point b), this would coincide with the Smith sighting?

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche

Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 11.11.11 21:58

Tony, Daisy, I agree, both answers make absolute sense to me.

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Bebootje on 12.11.11 8:48

Seems that the whole evening was fabricated.

I am still puzzled by the fact that there are so many statements pointing out the "disappearence" of Madeleine happened around 21.30. Were al those people mistaken about the time?

21.15 a passer by the McCann appartment overheard someone calling "Madeleine Madeleine"


21.20 At 21H20, Executive Chef A. E. G. F. P. heard some clamour, which made him leave toward the restaurant, a few metres away, and was then informed that a child had disappeared. 21.40 passing through the restaurant he sees tapas table empty.

Property manager B. J. J. W. heard about the news being investigated on the evening of 3rd May at about 21.30 - 21.40

Dinner finished at around 21H45 and some minutes passed where waiter R. A.E D. L. O. looked towards the table but saw no one.

Between 21.30 and 22: Diane Webster was back at the table. Fitness instructor/Waiter J. R. S. went
over to the table and joked with
her.

Between 21.30-22.00 Gerry runs around the pool. He is seen by the fitness instructor.

Approx. 21.55 pm The Smith Family, (4 adults and 5 children) are returning from 'Kelly's Bar', heading north, have an encounter with Gerry (IMO)

Then, between 22H00 and 22H30, waiter J. J. M. B. was in the kitchen, and was alerted, by a colleague, to the fact that a guest entered the restaurant screaming.

Around 22.30 Mrs Fenn overhears the rumour in the appartment below.

22.50 GNR registered call.

McCann official timeline, kicks off by Kate making noise in the restaurant.


Was it meant for people to remember this time as the official time of Madeleines disappearence? To provide an alibi for Gerry who was seen searching around the pool (but at a different time). To distract from the real transport of the body? If so, clever but very very risky.

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

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 12.11.11 9:23

@Bebootje wrote:Seems that the whole evening was fabricated.

I am still puzzled by the fact that there are so many statements pointing out the "disappearence" of Madeleine happened around 21.30. Were al those people mistaken about the time?

21.15 a passer by the McCann appartment overheard someone calling "Madeleine Madeleine"

21.20 At 21H20, Executive Chef A. E. G. F. P. heard some clamour, which made him leave toward the restaurant, a few metres away, and was then informed that a child had disappeared. 21.40 passing through the restaurant he sees tapas table empty.

Property manager B. J. J. W. heard about the news being investigated on the evening of 3rd May at about 21.30 - 21.40

Dinner finished at around 21H45 and some minutes passed where waiter R. A.E D. L. O. looked towards the table but saw no one.

Between 21.30 and 22: Diane Webster was back at the table. Fitness instructor/Waiter J. R. S. went
over to the table and joked with
her.

Between 21.30-22.00 Gerry runs around the pool. He is seen by the fitness instructor.

Approx. 21.55 pm The Smith Family, (4 adults and 5 children) are returning from 'Kelly's Bar', heading north, have an encounter with Gerry (IMO)

Then, between 22H00 and 22H30, waiter J. J. M. B. was in the kitchen, and was alerted, by a colleague, to the fact that a guest entered the restaurant screaming.

Around 22.30 Mrs Fenn overhears the rumour in the appartment below.

22.50 GNR registered call.

McCann official timeline, kicks off by Kate making noise in the restaurant.


Was it meant for people to remember this time as the official time of Madeleines disappearence? To provide an alibi for Gerry who was seen searching around the pool (but at a different time). To distract from the real transport of the body? If so, clever but very very risky.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_INFORMATION.htm
Bebootje, it is well known that some of the most successful cover-ups of crimes are based on similar skills to those of the magician/illusionist. His skill is to get people looking in the wrong place, so that he performs his tricks in a place where you are not looking. You don't notice his sleight of hand.

Classic crime cover-ups get you looking both in the wrong place and at the wrong time.

In this case I think the place is correct because of the cadaver dogs' findings.

I think the time of Madeleine's disappearance has been changed, in that she 'disappeared' earlier in the week.

If I'm right about that, the whole sequence of events on the evening of 3 May is a charade, a hoax, a deception.

I don't think for a moment that Gerry McCann or anyone else was openly carrying Madeleine's body through the streets of Praia da Luz around 9.30pm to 10.00pm and I think the Smiths saw another child, not Madeleine.

Incidentally, exactly how the alarm was raised remains a complete mystery. I can't find anyone outside the Tapas 9 group who corroborates Kate McCann running into the Tapas restaurant shouting 'They've taken her', 'They've taken her'. Two women were seen on a balcony around the McCanns' apartment just before the alarm was raised - Jane Tanner and Kate McCann. Then there was a scream. Then the Tapas 9 leave the Tapas restaurant, leaving Dianne Webster behind. Then Gerry McCann is seen roaring like a bull around the pool. The precise sequence of these events is very hard to disentangle.

I suggest this. At a prearranged time, probably shortly after 9.45pm...

* There is a scream

* The Tapas 9 leave the table (this event by the way does not seem to have been noted by the Tapas restaurant waiter)

* Gerry McCann starts roaring like a bull around the pool shouting 'Madeleine', 'Madeleine'.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 12.11.11 9:43

@Bebootje wrote:Seems that the whole evening was fabricated.

I am still puzzled by the fact that there are so many statements pointing out the "disappearence" of Madeleine happened around 21.30. Were al those people mistaken about the time?

21.15 a passer by the McCann appartment overheard someone calling "Madeleine Madeleine"


21.20 At 21H20, Executive Chef A. E. G. F. P. heard some clamour, which made him leave toward the restaurant, a few metres away, and was then informed that a child had disappeared. 21.40 passing through the restaurant he sees tapas table empty.

Property manager B. J. J. W. heard about the news being investigated on the evening of 3rd May at about 21.30 - 21.40

Dinner finished at around 21H45 and some minutes passed where waiter R. A.E D. L. O. looked towards the table but saw no one.

Between 21.30 and 22: Diane Webster was back at the table. Fitness instructor/Waiter J. R. S. went
over to the table and joked with
her.

Between 21.30-22.00 Gerry runs around the pool. He is seen by the fitness instructor.

Approx. 21.55 pm The Smith Family, (4 adults and 5 children) are returning from 'Kelly's Bar', heading north, have an encounter with Gerry (IMO)

Then, between 22H00 and 22H30, waiter J. J. M. B. was in the kitchen, and was alerted, by a colleague, to the fact that a guest entered the restaurant screaming.

Around 22.30 Mrs Fenn overhears the rumour in the appartment below.

22.50 GNR registered call.

McCann official timeline, kicks off by Kate making noise in the restaurant.


Was it meant for people to remember this time as the official time of Madeleines disappearence? To provide an alibi for Gerry who was seen searching around the pool (but at a different time). To distract from the real transport of the body? If so, clever but very very risky.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_INFORMATION.htm
Bebootje, forgive me as I'm thinking out loud here - could it be that the 'abduction' WAS planned to start at the earlier time, hence people hearing 'too early that a child had disappeared BUT THEN 'GMcC' was spotted by the Smith's, throwing everything into disarray? This would explain, I think, Kates late entrance to Tapas screaming - to prove Gerry was there when she found Madeleine - gone Wink.
It would also explain why Dianne Webster didn't bother to leave the restaurant a second time - she already had her alibi?
Its amazing how in chaos times can be skewed and fudged...
If anyone can see a problem with what I've said, feel free to say - I've not been up that long! Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 12.11.11 9:54

@rainbow-fairy wrote:Bebootje, forgive me as I'm thinking out loud here - could it be that the 'abduction' WAS planned to start at the earlier time, hence people hearing 'too early that a child had disappeared BUT THEN 'GMcC' was spotted by the Smiths, throwing everything into disarray? REST SNIPPED
No, that can't be right.

If it really was Gerry McCann carrying a dead Madeleine through the streets, he would have been seen by dozens of people, not just the Smiths.

The Smiths' evidence was not made public until weeks or even months later.

I have always considered that the Smiths saw another child. To believe that this could possibly have been Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine through the streets of Praia da Luz leads us, I believe, up entirely the wrong path.

It also keeps the focus on Madeleine dying that evening - when there are so many indications that she 'disappeared' earlier in the week.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 12.11.11 10:01

Ah - Tony, interesting. I hadn't seen your post til after I put mine up. It seems we agree on the point of times being fudged to create illusion, ie 'look at me not over there'.
You say you don't think G was walking about PdL that night or any night - but do you think it could be another child? To promote the 'abduction' angle in case he was spotted by anyone yet the alley where he met the Smiths was usually deserted that time of night and year - and despite his denials G knew this. He would not have been expecting anyone at all...
Not saying in any way this is right, just throwing it out there...

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Something's not right

Post by Guest on 12.11.11 10:29

I always get the feeling that something went wrong on the night. If it was pre planned (as I believe it was) why did they delay phoning the police? I think Bebootje has a point, there were a lot of witnesses who pointed to an earlier time. If the original plan was for Kate to run to the Tapas to raise the alarm why did they wait until only T7 were left?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by jd on 12.11.11 10:39

I still believe the Smith sighting was set up by Murat after he was made suspect. Smith didn't say anything to anyone for 2 whole weeks later and only when Murat was made suspect, he made sure he said in his statement that it definitely was 'not' Murat he saw but was vague about all other information....mmmmmm Then reappeared again in September to point the finger at gerry, when he suddenly realised seeing him on the steps of easyjet was him he saw back in May...this despite the mccanns being in the frontline media spotlight for nearly 6 months by then! mmmmmmmm

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Drogheda family hit out over Madeleine case clue coverage

Post by Guest on 12.11.11 11:12

JD, found this:

http://www.drogheda-independent.ie/frontpage/drogheda-family-hit-out-over-madeleine-case-clue-coverage-1060695.html

Wednesday August 08 2007
A DROGHEDA family who may hold vital clues as to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have hit out at media distortion of evidence that they have given to Portuguese police.
Maple Drive man Martin Smith, his wife and his children had just left the Kelly bar, which is located approximately 400 metres from the McCanns? apartment at the Ocean Club between 9.50-10pm on the night Madeleine disappeared.

They returned to Ireland the next day, and because the reported abduction times didn?t originally match, they never had cause to examine their journey that night.

As it emerged that Madeleine was abducted around the same time, one of the family members had a flashback of the moment some time later and encouraged the others to jog their memory.

They remembered passing a man walking towards the beach with a child in his arms.

Other than his approximate height and the fact that he was wearing beige clothes they cannot be more specific than that.We are annoyed at how vague our description is,? said the family member.

The family contacted the Portuguese police and flew back over to give evidence.

However, contrary to media reports, Mr Smith had not seen chief suspect Robert Murat in a bar the evening that Madeleine was abducted.He definitely didn?t see him on the night in question,? said a family member.

The family are also mystified at reports that he knows Mr Murat.They met once in a bar about two years ago. My dad would only know Mr Murat by sight,? said the family member.However, from what he knows, he can say that the man who was carrying the child was not Robert Murat.?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by jd on 12.11.11 11:26

I don't think its anything sinister other than Murat just trying to protect himself from being stitched up...anyone would in the same situation. But this Smith statement is just so glaringly obvious there was only one motive for it

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by rainbow-fairy on 12.11.11 11:45

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@rainbow-fairy wrote:Bebootje, forgive me as I'm thinking out loud here - could it be that the 'abduction' WAS planned to start at the earlier time, hence people hearing 'too early that a child had disappeared BUT THEN 'GMcC' was spotted by the Smiths, throwing everything into disarray? REST SNIPPED
No, that can't be right.

If it really was Gerry McCann carrying a dead Madeleine through the streets, he would have been seen by dozens of people, not just the Smiths.[/b][/i]

The Smiths' evidence was not made public until weeks or even months later.

I have always considered that the Smiths saw another child. To believe that this could possibly have been Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine through the streets of Praia da Luz leads us, I believe, up entirely the wrong path.

It also keeps the focus on Madeleine dying that evening - when there are so many indications that she 'disappeared' earlier in the week.
Seems Tony may now be off line, but I'd like to respectfully point out that NOWHERE in my post did I mention Gerry carrying a dead Madeleine, or indeed Madeleine at all!
All I actually said was 'could Gerry have been spotted by the Smiths, throwing everything into disarray'. I believe, if the sighting is genuine, that it is more likely to be Gerry carrying a different child to add weight to the 'carried away by a paedophile' story. I don't for one minute believe that, although the best place to hide is in plain sight, they would dare carry her corpse through PdL at ANY time of the day and night. I firmly believe that Madeleine was long departed by the 3rd, already in 'storage'. The 3rd, IMO, was purely the 'staging' of the 'abduction'.
One thing (well, two or so actually) Do you believe the Smith sighting genuine, and why would they say it was GMcC? Are you meaning that they were trying to stress heavily that it WAS NOT MURAT they saw? I'll say one thing - my head hurts! They certainly, between them all, did a good job of creating the all-important 'confusion'! It's hard with so many unsure and conflicting witnesses to untangle truth, half-truths and plain fantasy...

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 12.11.11 11:45

@jd wrote:I still believe the Smith sighting was set up by Murat after he was made suspect. Smith didn't say anything to anyone for 2 whole weeks later and only when Murat was made suspect, he made sure he said in his statement that it definitely was 'not' Murat he saw but was vague about all other information....mmmmmm Then reappeared again in September to point the finger at gerry, when he suddenly realised seeing him on the steps of easyjet was him he saw back in May...this despite the mccanns being in the frontline media spotlight for nearly 6 months by then! mmmmmmmm
jd, I think this is more than a distinct possibility and as you rightly say there are indications which point in that very direction.

Whilst on the subject of the 'Smith sighting', the following is of more than a little interest.

The McCanns never seemed to comment on the 'Smith sighting'. Then, all of a sudden, we switch on our tellys in early May 2009 to watch the notorious Mentorn TV/Channel 4 'reconstruction'/mockumentary and - lo and behold! - the new version is that Jane Tanner saw 'bundleman' at around 9.15pm only for the Smiths to see 'bundelman' 40 minutes later outside Kelly's Bar! If there was any doubt that the McCanns are now using this to reinforce their abduction assumption, look no further than Dr Kate McCann's recent book, 'madeleine', where she drones on for three pages (pp. 370-2) about the 'similarities' between the two sightings. This is despite 'bundleman' having 'thick, dark, black, long hair' and 'Smithman' having 'short brown hair' (!!!).

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Bebootje on 12.11.11 12:03

@rainbow-fairy wrote:
Bebootje, forgive me as I'm thinking out loud here - could it be that the 'abduction' WAS planned to start at the earlier time, hence people hearing 'too early that a child had disappeared BUT THEN 'GMcC' was spotted by the Smith's, throwing everything into disarray? This would explain, I think, Kates late entrance to Tapas screaming - to prove Gerry was there when she found Madeleine - gone Wink.
It would also explain why Dianne Webster didn't bother to leave the restaurant a second time - she already had her alibi?
Its amazing how in chaos times can be skewed and fudged...
If anyone can see a problem with what I've said, feel free to say - I've not been up that long! Wink

A theory could be: 21:30 was the real time (the body) of Madeleine was transported. 21:30 Gerry doing his round around te pool making sure he was seen. Then brought Madeleine to her first hidingplace which I believe was in the vincinity of the church. He was seen by Smith , who was 80% sure it was Gerry. (Off course it could be another man, with another child but then what a coincidence. Risky off course, but wouldn't it not be more curious if he was seen at that spot lugging a big heavy bag?) They didn't have a car at that time. And why would he be seen by dozens of people. In that case, wouldn't there be a lot more sightings like the Smits? The streets were quiet in PdL at that time and he could have taken the desolate route.
Gerry could be back slightly afer 22.00 when Kate raised the alarm making a big noise of it attending people at the (a different) time of disappearence. That would explain why it was nescessary for Kate to raise the alarm in the restaurant. To distract and reset the time of disappearence. Smoke and mirrors, they are very good at it.

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Rachael Oldfield's Rogatory Interview - Notes from a Potting Shedder

Post by Tony Bennett on 12.11.11 12:04

The formatting of this post has been changed somehow

@rainbow-fairy wrote:Seems Tony may now be off line, but I'd like to respectfully point out that NOWHERE in my post did I mention Gerry carrying a dead Madeleine, or indeed Madeleine at all! All I actually said was 'could Gerry have been spotted by the Smiths, throwing everything into disarray'.

REPLY: Your actual words were: "BUT THEN 'GMcC' was spotted by the Smith's..." Yes, I assumed you meant that he was carrying a 'dead' Madeleine. Those who say this was indeed Gerry McCann usually also suggest that he was carrying a dead Madeleine to a hiding place. For reasons I've explained here and elsewhere, I regard that as impossible.

I believe, if the sighting is genuine, that it is more likely to be Gerry carrying a different child to add weight to the 'carried away by a paedophile' story.

REPLY: So unlikely as to be wholly improbable. Why would he do this 40 minutes after Jane Tanner's claimed sighting of 'bundleman' at 9.15pm? How many abductors would wander around a small town for 40 minutes with a child they were abducting? How could Gerry McCann be seen roaring like a bull around the poolside at the very same time he was being seen by the Smiths?

I don't for one minute believe that, although the best place to hide is in plain sight, they would dare carry her corpse through PdL at ANY time of the day and night. I firmly believe that Madeleine was long departed by the 3rd, already in 'storage'. The 3rd, IMO, was purely the 'staging' of the 'abduction'.

One thing (well, two or so actually) Do you believe the Smith sighting genuine,

REPLY: Broadly, yes in the sense that it seems the Smiths saw someone carrying a child. Mind you, the Smiths' accounts (I think three of the family gave statements) contain some inconsistencies. 'jd's post is worth a read regarding the Robert Murat connection - and we must bear in mind that Brian Kennedy contacted Martin Smith - what was that conversation about, I wonder?

and why would they say it was GMcC? Are you meaning that they were trying to stress heavily that it WAS NOT MURAT they saw?

REPLY: I think this could be the case, yes.

I'll say one thing - my head hurts!

REPLY: The 'Smith sighting' has been a puzzle for all of us.

They certainly, between them all, did a good job of creating the all-important 'confusion'! It's hard with so many unsure and conflicting witnesses to untangle truth, half-truths and plain fantasy...

REPLY: "And, in fact, one of the slight positives in all of this is that there is so much rumour about what did and didn't happen, it's actually very difficult, if you're reading the newspapers, to know what is true and what's not" - Dr Gerald McCann, 24 August 2007, in an interview with BBC TV Scotland

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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