Re: What was 5A really used for?

by Guest 21.01.12 1:11

Yes, I'm sure it would have been one of their first ports of call to the lady that lived directly above, to see if she had seen or heard anything.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 1:16

Daisy wrote:
jd wrote:Having been in this discussion all day, with at times querying the legitimacy of the statements which I guess is because of being caught up in the discussion....On reflection, I don't feel Mrs Fenn was involved in any sort of cover up or collisions with the mccanns. I think she was an 80 year old lady that only wanted to live her retirement in paradise and peace....she unfortunately due to the location of her flat got involved in the worlds media & police investigation because of the nasty selfish animals downstairs who came for a week

That's my conclusion too jd. I don't think the McCann's were in any hurry for the police to interview Mrs Fenn, the longer it took the better, old lady 80+ yr old, she's going to be very forgetful after 3 months isn't she? Then again, doesn't look like the Moyes (that were out searching til 4am) were interviewed at all!

You only have to read Kate's bitter portayal of Mrs Fenn in her book to know that the old lady was defintely not onside.

You only have to read Kate's bitter portayal of Mrs Fenn in her book to know that the old lady was defintely not onside.

Or is that a bouble-bluff.

These people are Machiavellian. I dont think anyone really realises what they are up against. Why on earth would Kate admit swearing with tanner at mrs fenn?

When in various other statements

Including Gerrys

And mrs fenn hersel - she says she spoke to gerry only

Even offered him the use of her phone to make calks

So why should kate in her bewk say such an apalling lie?

Answer = we are all being played like fish.

But not me, not anymore.

CRuck have the finest minds

If very immoral

In the business

And kates bewk was gone over and even dictated

Like a fine toothcomb

Anything in that bewk

Any obvious LIEAS

ARE THERE FOR A

REASON!!

The reason is

MISDIRECTION

and certain folks are falling for it hook line and sinker lol4

by Advocatus 21.01.12 1:18

candyfloss wrote:Yes, I'm sure it would have been one of their first ports of call to the lady that lived directly above, to see if she had seen or heard anything.

Then why the 109 day wait?

Nobody yet has given a logical coherent argument.

by jd 21.01.12 1:28

Advocatus wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Yes, I'm sure it would have been one of their first ports of call to the lady that lived directly above, to see if she had seen or heard anything.

Then why the 109 day wait?

Nobody yet has given a logical coherent argument.

There was no wait. They have them probably since day 3 when they got CT's one, which we know only because they mentioned it in the April 2008 statements. The police would not get CT's statement but ignore Mrs Fenn especially as she lived on the floor above. Logically the only reason there 'appears' to be a 109 day wait is because the May ones have not been released

I would love to read the Irwin ones, these have never been released either nor have any of the guests at the Tapas that night. I do not believe for one single second the police did not interview these guests that were all right in the centre of it that night. Impossible to believe they didn't

by Advocatus 21.01.12 1:44

jd wrote:
Advocatus wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Yes, I'm sure it would have been one of their first ports of call to the lady that lived directly above, to see if she had seen or heard anything.

Then why the 109 day wait?

Nobody yet has given a logical coherent argument.

There was no wait. They have them probably since day 3 when they got CT's one, which we know only because they mentioned it in the April 2008 statements. Logically the only reason there 'appears' to be a 109 day wait is because the May ones have not been released

I would love to read the Irwin ones, these have never been released either nor have any of the guests at the Tapas that night. I do not believe for one single second the police did not interview these guests that were all right in the centre of it that night. Impossible to believe they didn't

But jd you dont KNOW THAT DO YOU?

Sorry caps off

You say 'probably'

These are not facts these are suppositions

If weSTICK TO THE FACTS

Mrs fenn waited 109 days to do the biz

Txtusa has forensically torn apart mrs fenn, but the data i presented hered was deleted, along with all my carefully thought out comments

To say i am annoyes is an understatemnt, to call what i posted gibberish sadly telects on the person accusing me is such

Anyways to your psragraph above

There was no wait. They have them probably since day 3 when they got CT's one, which we know only because they mentioned it in the April 2008 statements. Logically the only reason there 'appears' to be a 109 day wait is because the May ones have not been released

The above is all supposition. Not admissable im afraid.

I would love to read the Irwin ones, these have never been released either nor have any of the guests at the Tapas that night. I do not believe for one single second the police did not interview these guests that were all right in the centre of it that night. Impossible to believe they didn't

It looks like i am wasting my time, you can lead a horse to water etc.

Anyways if all this is not deleted then i expect a lot of people will GET whst i am saying.

Setimes too long on a case you need fresh eyes

Take a break

Way i see it right now os CRuck and TM toying with all the fora

Txtusa is one of the very very few on the right track

But when i post this portuguese womans thoughts some xenophobe deletes everything and moans that a few paragraphs were in Portuguese!!! lol4

Hillarious.

You couldnt make it up! lol4

by jd 21.01.12 1:44

Any obvious LIEAS ARE THERE FOR A REASON!! The reason is MISDIRECTION

Yes this is true there are lies there for a reason, but there are also reactive comments to try best explain away facts that have been highlighted against their fairytale, and a lot of the bewk is written to counteract this

by jd 21.01.12 1:49

But jd you dont KNOW THAT DO YOU? You say 'probably'. These are not facts these are suppositions

I don't think you need to question or get proof if the police got Mrs Fenn and all the others in the block and Tapas Bar statements. Any police force in the world would have got these as top priority. What you are saying is in effect discrediting the PJ and that they are incompetent.... which they are not, far from it

by Advocatus 21.01.12 1:56

jd wrote:
Any obvious LIEAS ARE THERE FOR A REASON!! The reason is MISDIRECTION

Yes this is true there are lies there for a reason, but there are also reactive comments to try best explain away facts that have been highlighted against their fairytale, and a lot of the bewk is written to counteract this

I agree with you jd that is very true. I just get the overwhelming impression

Even from the esteemed dr roberts and j blacksmith

That they are taking the bewk at face value

Do they REALLY think that it has not been combed over by literally dizens of experts in .intel .carter-ruck, uncle tom cobblers and all oops cobley thank you peter always remember a good joke

No

They are having a laugh and the fora are dancing to their pied piper lilts

As i said cr etc have it all figured out

Without remains nobody will get life

I would suggest the "cremation of care" was done

Thrse people are not stupid

The parents mccann will bluff it out to the bitter end, the establishment will aid and abet

Jd i really suggest you read all the txtusa articles on mrs fenn and it will open your eyes

Cheers!

Advokaat lol4

by Advocatus 21.01.12 2:06

jd wrote:
But jd you dont KNOW THAT DO YOU? You say 'probably'. These are not facts these are suppositions

I don't think you need to question or get proof if the police got Mrs Fenn and all the others in the block and Tapas Bar statements. Any police force in the world would have got these as top priority. What you are saying is in effect discrediting the PJ and that they are incompetent.... which they are not, far from it

I don't think you need to question or get proof if the police got Mrs Fenn and all the others in the block and Tapas Bar statements. Any police force in the world would have got these as top priority. What you are saying is in effect discrediting the PJ and that they are incompetent.... which they are not, far from it

No My dear, that is a fallacious STRAW MAN argument aimed at discrediting ME - I SAID NOTHING WHATSOEVER DEROGATORY ABOUT THE PJ IN THE THREE HUNDRED IDD POSTS I HAVE NADE

(no jokes please about the odd, above lol4

)

Au Contraire, I am discrediting YOU!

How's about that then! lol4

No offence but all you are giving is suppositions.

Here is mrs fenns statement IN FULL

109 days after the fact

YOU TELL ME WHETE IN THIS STATEMENT THERE IS EVEN ONE IOTA OF A TEFERENCE TO A PREVIOUS MYTHICAL STATEMENT!

IF INDEED THERE

WAS

A PREVIOUS STATEMENT - which there wasn't

THIS ONE ON AUG 20th WOULD BE USELESS IN COURT

BECAUSE THE PJ IN THEIR PREAMBLE AND QUESTIONING

IN THE STATEMENT

HAVE NOT MENTIONED!

ONCE!!

Anything about any previous talks between the PK and Mrs Fenn.

A decent defence silk would rip the statement to shreds should it turn out to be a 2nd statement!

"""IT NEVER HAPPENED"""

Witness statement of Pamela Fenn PJ Files

Processo IX, pages 2412 to 2414

Date: 2007/08/20
Time: 15H30

Comes before the Court as a witness.

Being of British nationality and in spite of living in Portugal, does not have knowledge of the Portuguese language in its oral and written form, therefore a police interpreter is present, LIEVE VAN LOOCK.

Thus, according to the facts noted in the files, she says that she has lived in the apartment since 2003, which is located on the upper floor, immediately above the room from which the child disappeared.

She states that on the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22H30 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 23H45, 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.

When questioned, she said that she did not know the cause of the crying, perhaps a nightmare or another destabilising factor.

As soon as the parents entered the child stopped crying.

That night she contacted a friend called XXXX XXXX, who also lives in Praia da Luz, after 23H00, telling her about the situation, who was not surprised at the childs crying.

She did not have anything to report for the 2nd May, because she was only home at night.

On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece CAROLE during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCANN apartment, a situation which has been told to the police, her cousin even made a photo fit.

During the day nothing unusual happened, until almost 22H30 when, being alone again, she heard the hysterical shouts from a female person, calling out "we have let her down" which she repeated several times, quite upset. She then saw that it was the mother of little Madeleine who was shouting furiously. Upon leaning over the terrace, after having seen the mother, she asked the father, GERRY, what was happening to which he replied that a small girl had been abducted. When asked, she replied that she did not leave her apartment, just spoke to GERRY from her balcony, which had a view over the terrace of the floor below. She found it strange that when GERRY said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios. At that moment she offered GERRY help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22H30.

She said that after the mothers shouts, she had seen many people in the streets looking for the girl. She also refers to an episode when GERRY was speaking to a policeman, she doesn't know what kind of police force, saying that more police officers were needed to carry out the search.

When asked, she replied that on 3rd May she did not hear any noise from the McCANN apartment, not even the opening of doors. She also said that before hearing the shouts she was watching television, as she often stays up late.

When questioned, she said that she never heard any arguments between the couple or with their children. She said that the family would spend much time outside of the apartment and therefore she did not notice their presence.

She said that until that night she had never spoken to the McCANN's, because up until the 3rd May, she only sometimes saw them walking in the street. She never saw them with any vehicle.

She also said that she never told the McCANN's that she had heard their daughter crying previously on 1st May because she thought it would just increase their suffering.

When questioned she said that she never saw any strange person or action before or after the event. She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

Having read and approved the statement, she signs, together with the interpreter.

Burglar was on loose at Maddy resort, 21 August 2007

by jd 21.01.12 2:09

People like Dr Martin are very intelligent people, of course they know CR have been through the bewk with a fine toothcomb and have it all figured out

I have always felt the smugness the mccanns show and what appears to be their knowledge that they 'know' Maddie will never be found is because if she was there and did die in the apartment, they know 100% her remains would never be found because either she has been cremated or at the bottom of the sea. Certainly not buried in a mountain where she could be found one day. they show absolute confidence she will never be found

I too know that they are laughing at everyone with the lies, mis information and confusions. I have often wondered that the money box that looks like an urn in their front room if there are ashes inside, I would't be surprised that they are laughing at people to this extent

by jd 21.01.12 2:13

When asked, she replied that on 3rd May she did not hear any noise from the McCANN apartment, not even the opening of doors. She also said that before hearing the shouts she was watching television, as she often stays up late.

This is interesting, missed this before....so much for the 15 mins checks then

by Advocatus 21.01.12 2:31

jd wrote:People like Dr Martin are very intelligent people, of course they know CR have been through the bewk with a fine toothcomb and have it all figured out

I have always felt the smugness the mccanns show and what appears to be their knowledge that they 'know' Maddie will never be found is because if she was there and did die in the apartment, they know 100% her remains would never be found because either she has been cremated or at the bottom of the sea. Certainly not buried in a mountain where she could be found one day. they show absolute confidence she will never be found

I too know that they are laughing at everyone with the lies, mis information and confusions. I have often wondered that the money box that looks like an urn in their front room if there are ashes inside, I would't be surprised that they are laughing at people to this extent

OK truce jd, there is really no point in bickering. If the case is ever reopened and or goes to trial we will find out if mrs fenn gave a top secret statement to the pj on the 4th.

At the moment i am 100 per cent with txtusa ref the alliance

Witting or unwitting

Between mrs fenn and the gm km statements

Personally i thonk mrs fenn was used.

by Willo 21.01.12 2:55

candyfloss wrote:
Willo wrote:How did Mrs Fenn die?

The poor lady was getting on for 85, so I don't think we need to go into that.

I should think I do need to go into that just to completely satisfy myself that there was no foul play. Which I'm almost certain there wasn't.

I'm sorry if it has all been done before but I just would like to know how she died. Eighty-five or not, does anyone know was it natural causes? did she slip over? was she in a car accident? respritory faliure?

Also how was her hearing? If it was poor was the TV turned right up drowning outside sounds? Would she have heard any activity at all with the TV on? Or was she a bright, alert Mrs Marple Charater or a even a nosey curtain twitcher?

Nothing sinister implied yet just curious to find out in what circumstances a lady with an such an important piece of the puzzle dies not long after the event.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 3:20

Willo wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Willo wrote:How did Mrs Fenn die?

The poor lady was getting on for 85, so I don't think we need to go into that.

I should think I do need to go into that just to completely satisfy myself that there was no foul play. Which I'm almost certain there wasn't.

I'm sorry if it has all been done before but I just would like to know how she died. Eighty-five or not, does anyone know was it natural causes? did she slip over? was she in a car accident? respritory faliure?

Also how was her hearing? If it was poor was the TV turned right up drowning outside sounds? Would she have heard any activity at all with the TV on? Or was she a bright, alert Mrs Marple Charater or a even a nosey curtain twitcher?

Nothing sinister implied yet just curious to find out in what circumstances a lady with an such an important piece of the puzzle dies not long after the event.

Very good questions, I am really fed up of idiots here saying, ooooh, she was 85, wouldn't harm a fly, leave her alone, she would NEVER lie etc etc etc.

This is supposed to be a bloody investigative site into what happened to Maddie.

Mrs Fenn plays IMHO a crucial part.

Evidence I have submitted, has been deleted by a mod.

What chance do we have of getting anywhere when this kind of rubbish is going on?

Earlier this evening some backstabbers (you know who you are) started a "two-pronged attack" thread about me.

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

A motley bunch came along and all convinced themselves that I am some genius from Team McCann.

I just posted this on THAT thread, and I am off to bed now.

I am thoroughly disgusted.

You can read my post below.

Nice post Willo. I am back home now, and on a proper keyboard.

People don't seem to be used to someone energetic, like I am sometimes. I
am a writer and researcher, I am galactic cruiser class (I am taking
the piss out of myself for those with no SOH, seems like most here???),
and many are most certainly NOT. Though they may think they are sharp
little thumb tacks.

I keep late hours, because my daughter lives in the USA. I have made
around 300 posts in a relatively short period of time, all anti-McCann
incidentally, because this case interests me. It seems to me that some
sort of cosey fireplace tea and biscuits by the fire, nice comfy slippers
etc, aura is going on. Make a few posts a day and go back to bed. Alarm
is raised when someone comments on anything to excess, in your opinion,
of course.

Why? Is this a forum or not? Place to discuss ideas or not? All my
discussion was on the DEBATE section, the 5a thread, and old farts moan
at me for going 'off topic'...!

LMAO boys and girls, the whole bloody case is OFF TOPIC, it is totally
bizarro! And anyways I wasn't off topic at all, go back and read every
word I said (well, those comments that have not been DELETED), it was
all around 5a, and the whole waste of time it is chasing shadows when
the 9 adversaries and their LONDON handlers are having a laugh and
constantly changing their stories.

The PJ were onto all this crap from the START. Praia can see it, I can
NOW see it (it took me a while), so in the DEBATE section, for
PURPORTING THEORIES I am bullied by the mods and talked about behind my
back (on this thread), and, if I may say so, I have been slandered by
some very two-faced people who have PM'd me, you know who you are.

Almost all the posters are women, for a start, too! I find that quite weird.

I come along and because I have new eyes, fresh perspectives, I am
shunned. It is totally disrespectful, and if I may so, very rude.

No wonder it took Poppy 5 bloody years to work up the courage to enter your cosey little parlour!!!

My 2nd ever thread on the Sandringham/Royal possible connection was binned, I never even got a PM.

I am pretty disgusted, frankly, at this kind of treatment. I spent a
long time this evening making comments on Mrs Fenn on the 5a thread, and
because I posted useful information, some in Portuguese (yes, mods,
some people in this forum speak Portuguese), it was binned.

I wouldn't mind do much the binning of a cut and paste job, but the mod
also binned all my PRECEDING comments, which took me a good 15 minutes
of one finger typing to put together. Totally disgusting. When I
complain, I am told it was all too complicated, no time to go through
the 'gibberish' - so it was all binned.

Totally and utterly disgusting.

Good night!

by rainbow-fairy 21.01.12 3:33

Willo wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Willo wrote:How did Mrs Fenn die?

The poor lady was getting on for 85, so I don't think we need to go into that.

I should think I do need to go into that just to completely satisfy myself that there was no foul play. Which I'm almost certain there wasn't.

I'm sorry if it has all been done before but I just would like to know how she died. Eighty-five or not, does anyone know was it natural causes? did she slip over? was she in a car accident? respritory faliure?

Also how was her hearing? If it was poor was the TV turned right up drowning outside sounds? Would she have heard any activity at all with the TV on? Or was she a bright, alert Mrs Marple Charater or a even a nosey curtain twitcher?

Nothing sinister implied yet just curious to find out in what circumstances a lady with an such an important piece of the puzzle dies not long after the event.

I am curious too, Willo - Mrs Fenn may have been 85, but my great-nan was 101 when she died, and would've been compos mentis enough to stand up in court, too!

by Advocatus 21.01.12 5:24

Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:She seems to be thoroughly confused, and contradicts herself many times. Even the photofit was not the one she gave she says.

And what is this, who exactly came to see her to get this photofit, the DC1485 doesn't seem to know anything about this, here she describes who came to see her and DC1485 seems rather shocked............................

This is very serious and very important. It is something I pointed out quite some time ago. This poor woman got a call from someone who she thought was the Police. She gave him a description of a blonde man, short hair, pale skin ets. Then when it came to this interview, LP are trying to tell her the photo-fit Tasmin Silence gave, the young girl, was her one. Her one has gone missing. No one knows who this person is who visited her. It was probably a private investigator, posing as a police officer. But she is adament that the guy she saw was blonde, not this dark haired fellow the girl saw and the McCann's want everyone to believe was hanging around there. This is where this stinks and someone is trying very hard to stop the identity of the blonde man leaving 5b from coming out.

Why do you think they made a big thing about what the girl saw? It was to confuse with the blonde fella, who is important.

OK I'm back. Can't sleep.

Going through this 'file' I have a few comments.

This is where this stinks and someone is trying very hard to stop the identity of the blonde man leaving 5b from coming out.

Or trying very hard to make sure the fantasy 'comes in'?

by Advocatus 21.01.12 5:26

Stella wrote:
Daisy wrote:You're confusing me Stella. She is clearly not referring to confusion of the position of the gate in this quote I just gave. What has it got to do with the gate?

Quote CT: "
She bought it in 2003'since 2003 and
it is the second or third floor, I
am never certain, but I believe that
there is one more apartment"

Someone somewhere is having a great laugh at the expense of this forum. How much time have we spent discussing this disinformation - because that's what it is. Someone's playing games and we're wasting time being lead down dead ends. Obviously this is just my opinion. Although I know for a fact I'm not the only member that believes this to be true.

Daisy, when referring to the gate I was actually talking to Candyfloss re her quote, not you with yours.

No one serious is having a great laugh at anyone. The trolls maybe, but not genuine people. But what some are really noticing is how certain posters, clearly do not want certain things discussed and that is very obvious.

Perhaps you should leave this thread altogether Daisy and let the rest of us get on in peace.

The trolls maybe, but not genuine people.

No comment.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:10

Daisy wrote:
Stella wrote:
Daisy wrote:You're confusing me Stella. She is clearly not referring to confusion of the position of the gate in this quote I just gave. What has it got to do with the gate?

Quote CT: "
She bought it in 2003'since 2003 and
it is the second or third floor, I
am never certain, but I believe that
there is one more apartment"

Someone somewhere is having a great laugh at the expense of this forum. How much time have we spent discussing this disinformation - because that's what it is. Someone's playing games and we're wasting time being lead down dead ends. Obviously this is just my opinion. Although I know for a fact I'm not the only member that believes this to be true.

Daisy, when referring to the gate I was actually talking to Candyfloss re her quote, not you with yours.

No one serious is having a great laugh at anyone. The trolls maybe, but not genuine people. But what some are really noticing is how certain posters, clearly do not want certain things discussed and that is very obvious.

Perhaps you should leave this thread altogether Daisy and let the rest of us get on in peace.

As you wish Stella. I'm sure the truth will out.

You're being deliberately rude and hostile again now. So NO I won't leave the thread. I have done NOTHING wrong! You'll just have to ban me Stella if I get on your nerves that much.

I agree with young Ms Daisy. The bolded comments above are quite rude, and quite annoying to the recipient IMHO.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:14

"Stella"]I hate to say this and will have to be very careful how I word this. But what Praia was saying many pages back, which might explain everything, is that Mrs Fenn's first statement was only given in August 2007. This is the first time she talks to anyone official re crying !!

DING DING DING!

Carole Tranmer allegedly talks to Leicestershire Police on the 8th May and gives them a statement. It is mentioned in her Rogatory interview which took place in April 2008.

If the PJ released her Rogatory information, why didn't they release her first statement? Is it because the PJ never got it to begin with? Did it mysteriously disappear, just like he photo-fit? But why?

DING DING DING!

Clear your heads of all the last few pages for a minute now and consider this...

What if Mrs Fenn hearing a crying incident, was needed to support the McCann's theory? How convenient is that?

DING DING DING!

What if Carole Tranmers mysterious man leaving the rear garden of 5a, as mentioned in April 2008, which all went very wrong, [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] as 5a didn't have a rear gate,[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] perhaps because she was not that familiar with block 5 at all? Convenient also to support another one of the McCann's theories?

DING DING DING!

Can you see now what Praia was trying to point out?

DING DING DING!

If the PJ are only in possession of two statements, one from August 2007, the otherfrom April 2008, should we really trust either of them?

WHO SEZ 2 STATEMENTS?

SUPPOSITION.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:18

Stella wrote:
jd wrote:
as far as I can see it is 5G directly above the McCanns, which CT confirms at the beginning of her statement.

This is also backed up with the photo you posted earlier, and the interview from the Moyes

No one is disputing that 5G is above 5A. We all agree on that point. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

What we need to consider is who owns it? Where is the proof, if any? Is there a document anywhere from the PJ which confirms this? This is where we should go to next.

Why does she also go on about the 3rd floor, when we know 5G is 100% on the 1st floor. There is something terribly wrong here, but what?

English usage of floors is entirely different to the rest of the world.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:25

Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Stella wrote:I hate to say this and will have to be very careful how I word this. But what Praia was saying many pages back, which might explain everything, is that Mrs Fenn's first statement was only given in August 2007. This is the first time she talks to anyone official re crying !!

Carole Tranmer allegedly talks to Leicestershire Police on the 8th May and gives them a statement. It is mentioned in her Rogatory interview which took place in April 2008.

If the PJ released her Rogatory information, why didn't they release her first statement? Is it because the PJ never got it to begin with? Did it mysteriously disappear, just like he photo-fit? But why?

Clear your heads of all the last few pages for a minute now and consider this...

What if Mrs Fenn hearing a crying incident, was needed to support the McCann's theory? How convenient is that?

What if Carole Tranmers mysterious man leaving the rear garden of 5a, as mentioned in April 2008, which all went very wrong, [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] as 5a didn't have a rear gate,[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] perhaps because she was not that familiar with block 5 at all? Convenient also to support another one of the McCann's theories?

Can you see now what Praia was trying to point out?

If the PJ are only in possession of two statements, one from August 2007, the otherfrom April 2008, should we really trust either of them?

5a Had a side gate which led to the rear of the property, perhaps that is what she meant. Imo, if CT's statement was witheld, then perhaps Mrs Fenn's was witheld. Perhaps there is something in them they saw or heard etc. which the PJ have held back.

This is the problem Candyfloss. LP quizzed her many times over just this, because she said he left the gate into the alley. They knew that 5a's gate was on the street, not the alley, so they pressed her to make sure she means the alleyway, which she did. All the gates apart from 5a, open onto the alley. Don't you see, she was describing to LP someone leaving 5b and screwed everything up. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] The PJ are not stupid and they tripped her up here IMO. This is why her statement makes no sense. IMO it is not worth the paper it is written on. If she did give a statement just like this in May 2007, it would have been included as it contains nothing that will stand up in court and they knew it.

This is a woman who personally knows the Queen, Prince Philip and all the rest of the Royal family. Didn't Charles and Camilla poke their noses in at the beginning to support the McCann's?

Stella, I am convinced you are a sharp thumb tack.

You said ' "This is a woman who personally knows the Queen, Prince Philip and all
the rest of the Royal family. Didn't Charles and Camilla poke their
noses in at the beginning to support the McCann's?"

I opened my 2nd ever thread in the debate section about just THIS.

(One wonders, is there a second column here?)

And it was erased.

I am most miffed.

Here is the link again:

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

I started a 4 page thread on it, vamoosed.

One is very piqued, one can tell you! lol4

You are ENTIRELY along the right lines when you mention the Royal connection, IMHO. Please see earlier comments, they may have withstood the flamethrower.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:30

Stella wrote:I agree JD, I think they were seriosuly testing CT's real knowledge, to see if she was genuinely there.

So much of her statement would suggest, she has never been there.

So in other words it is all fabrication, right?

And what of Mrs Fenn?

Why wait one hundred and nine DAYS to open one's gob.

Team McCann are having a laugh.

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:33

"Stella"]

jd wrote:
Don't you see, she was describing to LP someone leaving 5b

Yes I can see this...so this means then the 'blond man' was leaving the Oldfield apartment which brings them into the equation

Only if CT is considered a reliable witness, but I'm now having serious doubts about that.

DING DING DING!

This is what I am going to settle with, unless something else comes to light, as I am just about to retire for the evening.

Mrs Fenn owns and lived in 5G, on the first floor. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mrs Fenn's statement given in August 2008, is unreliable, as it was only given 3 months after the event.

DING DING DING!

Carole Tranmer's statement is also unreliable, given the fact it is dated May 2008 and is filled with the wrong information.

DING DING DING!

To conclude, I do not believe there ever was a crying incident and I also do not believe anyone was seen leaving through a gate.

DING DING DING!

But to get to this point, I had to explore all the information again. Yes again !! If we have to go over everything time and time again to see the vista, then that's what we have to do, I'm afraid. What a journey. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I WANT TO GIVE YOU A KISS, STELLA!!!! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:44

jd wrote:
To conclude, I do not believe there ever was a crying incident and I also do not believe anyone was seen leaving through a gate

If this is the case, then this would imply that the Fenns are in on the scam too. Maybe this is something everyone has overlooked until now. One of the first things stated was a crying incident, puzzling

DING DING DING!

This Mrs Fenn malarkey needs very VERY CLOSE EXAMINATION.

You will find that txtusa has done all the legwork already for you.

Why reinvent the wheel?

Just look at what txtusa (a Portuguese woman, expert sleuth, amateur, but most decidedly DEADLY, if one gets one's drift, as deadly as a Tarantula,

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

a widowmaker etc etc etc, if one knows what one means, trust one! She is good!) says, and take it apart if you will.

Easy peasie! lol4

by Advocatus 21.01.12 6:57

finch wrote:
jd wrote:
To conclude, I do not believe there ever was a crying incident and I also do not believe anyone was seen leaving through a gate

If this is the case, then this would imply that the Fenns are in on the scam too. Maybe this is something everyone has overlooked until now. One of the first things stated was a crying incident, puzzling

I have a hard time believing Mrs Fenn would be part of the scam, unless she didn't know what she was covering up. Of course, the crying incident indicates the same as the last photo........ that she was alive at that time.

Cheers finch, I am still not sure, but I thing the McCann's agents somehow 'got at' her, you have to agree, it is bloody bizarro to make such a shockinngly important statement after 109 says!!! I don't think she actually lied, as such, I think she was 'used' and 'influenced' and 'worn down' by the implied threats/fuss etc etc etc.

Old as the hills, intimidating a fragile elderly witness.

As to her demise, I don't know. But a big player from 'Ooop North', in the early days, died a mysterious death / died in his bed, in the state of MORPHEUS, from an OD of morphine, sounds like an anaesthetist did it, don't it? lol4

Not funny really, but apparently the guy was talking too much in the local pubs, poor man.

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

So Mrs Fenn supplied a crucial alibi or three.

Sheesh, a 109 day delay, that is similar in time length to the... - remember the Leicester Plod holding onto the Gaspar bombshell evidence for 5 s*dding months, only releasing the paedophile information about Gerry and dear David a week after Goncalo had been axed???

Log in for more topics