pre-emptive remarks and stage setting

by bobbin 16.02.13 20:50

This quote has galvanised me into an action that has been on my mind for some time.
Quote from the thread '5A Forensics taken 01/05/07'

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Today at 7:20 pm
quote: There was an apparent clean up of 5a but hairs were found of previous occupants & few of any of the McCanns considering they were there a week/6days,always possible they stayed in another apartment...post accident but appearing in 5A for cleaners & stage setting Quote:

With saltnpepper’s post I feel this is a good time to propose a new thread: pre-emptive remarks and stage setting.
It will be complicated to assimilate the information that comes forward, but like with jd’s brilliant ‘car hire’ thread, the time is coming together now where bits of the jigsaw are taking on extra significance.

New thread: “pre-emptive remarks and stage setting”.

I had been discussing the ‘pre-emptive remarks’ thread with other posters (as a ‘stand-alone’ thread) but with saltnpeppers’ post above I now wonder where is the cut off point between something being a ‘stage setting’ and something being a ‘pre-emptive remark’.
Both are injected deliberately to cover up mistakes or to set the scene.
Pre-emptive remarks are those put in to answer a question that’s not yet been asked. They are nevertheless 'pointers' to something that is sensitive. The MM site has already run a thread on this but I’m sure we can add to it since some time has passed since it was running.
Stage setting however, is in advance of action, whilst pre-emptive remarks are an after effect, cast onto the stage to deflect a suspected or feared discovery.
It’s all smoke and mirrors to create an illusion, and what was planned in advance must be maintained at all costs.

I suppose another thread could be started ‘own goals’ and things that have ‘blighted the intended theme’, like the dogs and GA and TB.

But back to the pre-emptive remarks and stage setting one, the reason I can’t really separate them is because, in the cleaner's statement, she seemed ‘surprised’ that the McCanns were still in 5A, (long enough for her to ‘see them there’ as in saltnpepper's post) but they were then off out immediately once they had given her permission to carry on with her work.

Another red flag is the cleaner's remark that she saw the three McCann children (the bigger girl, assumed to be Maddie, with sneakers with lights on) in 5A, leaving and going ‘UPSTAIRS’ not downstairs, from the apartment.

So, anything that flags up a query in anyone’s mind will be worth noting.

If anyone has any ideas about how to collate the gathered material efficiently so that it can be cross referenced, and later easily found, then I'd be glad for any suggestions since I don't really know how I'd go about doing it effectively.

Now is a good time though to start putting some of those significant jigsaw bits together.

I’ll start it off with the easiest pre-emptive remark (non-verbatim I’m afraid - hope someone will correct me)
Clarence Mitchell’s, "there is an completely innocent explanation for anything that may or may not be found".
If anyone has any better ideas to improve this thread, can they please put them forward. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

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

by saltnpepper 16.02.13 21:33

The lack of hair thread opened my mind to a stage to be set,you would think if their was no trace of Maddie then the apartment had been cleaned thouroughly but with hairs from previous occupants it hints of the apartment 5A as the stage,would be no good if the apartment was on the second floor so 5a on the corner was perfect
pre-emptive is the McCanns middle name,to me they have suggested scenario's that there was a possibility of witnesses,examples are the drunk in the road,the tea stain,the crying incident,maybe an idea to offer explanations of each pre emptive quote?George Brooks...he stated he seen a couple scurrying down an alley 6 a.m on may 4th & in the bewk/diary Kate stated they had gone out looking for Maddie 6am but im sure everyone remembers the Jane Hill interview where Kate implied she had not searched...first 48hrs non functioning then working incredibly hard

by Guest 16.02.13 21:46

It should be forbidden to remind me of that video. It's going to take some time [again] to get my curled toes back in shape to fit my shoes ... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by saltnpepper 16.02.13 21:57

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

Just highlighting a proven lie...she searched?...she did not search?
Pre empting could be saying she had not searched as she was aware when she was out with Gerry the next morning that a driver had possibly seen them,doing what i dont know...she made herself come across cold in that intervie,maybe that is her character though

by Guest 16.02.13 22:22

I know, Saltnpepper, just jesting ;-)
She has stated numerous times,
that they didn't go out searching. It was dark. They waited for the
light. They did have a torch the next day, of course, to read their
sorry story from a paper to the media. And, they did go out in the early
morning, after GM managed to get some sleep [!?] and met the driver,
who saw a couple and a child in his car lights ...

by saltnpepper 16.02.13 23:26

The crying incident...

Very interesting video on the crying incident with three seperate accounts from the McCann's

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

The
crying heard by Mrs Fenn was made to be a day later by the McCann's (old senile
lady)...Mrs Fenn heard Daddy Daddy on the tuesday night,with the McCann's claiming they never
called her Maddie,which is a proven lie,i rightly or wrongly put two
& two together
Don't think the McCanns gave up the crying incident to the investigation in their first two interviews,it was made available later after a bit of thought(Pre-empting as aware of Mrs Fenn's statement?)
From the link below it appears Kates phone was used between 10.15-10.27 with Mrs Fenn hearing crying between 10.30-11.45(in shock on the phone,then the realisation hits home?)

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

The cleaner also noticed a cot next to the wardrobe on the wednesday,with only one bed used...Kate has told us she slept in the childrens room on the wednesday night but if this again is moving it one day forward it paints a picture...that Kate slept in the childrens room tuesday night,the cleaner only noticed one bed used & one of the cot's was next to the wardrobe,where Eddie alerted to a cadaver
No theory makes 100% sence & with the McCann's leaving the cleaner in 5A with a possible bluebag in the wardrobe,i have a major problem with...hope this makes a little sence to someone

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

by Guest 17.02.13 8:19

The new pink trainers.

I've seen footballers wear pink and take a look at the colour of their football boots. I know we're talking about women and shoes but even an inexperienced runner knows you need good shoes. Colour is the last thing you care about.

And then there's the dog. The dogs don't like the McCann's very much, do they?

I think it's a useful paragraph for Kate, she explains new shoes, potential bruising and blood. But if she had really been attacked by a dog there would have been a chapter about it not to mention a complaint. Did she get an anti-tet and what if the dog had rabies?

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

by Guest 17.02.13 9:50

I hope that the dog was taken to a vet for treatment after biting such a venomous creature!

by bobbin 17.02.13 10:03

saltnpepper wrote:The crying incident...

Very interesting video on the crying incident with three seperate accounts from the McCann's

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

The
crying heard by Mrs Fenn was made to be a day later by the McCann's (old senile
lady)...Mrs Fenn heard Daddy Daddy on the tuesday night,with the McCann's claiming they never
called her Maddie,which is a proven lie,i rightly or wrongly put two
& two together
Don't think the McCanns gave up the crying incident to the investigation in their first two interviews,it was made available later after a bit of thought(Pre-empting as aware of Mrs Fenn's statement?)
From the link below it appears Kates phone was used between 10.15-10.27 with Mrs Fenn hearing crying between 10.30-11.45(in shock on the phone,then the realisation hits home?)

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

The cleaner also noticed a cot next to the wardrobe on the wednesday,with only one bed used...Kate has told us she slept in the childrens room on the wednesday night but if this again is moving it one day forward it paints a picture...that Kate slept in the childrens room tuesday night,the cleaner only noticed one bed used & one of the cot's was next to the wardrobe,where Eddie alerted to a cadaver
No theory makes 100% sence & with the McCann's leaving the cleaner in 5A with a possible bluebag in the wardrobe,i have a major problem with...hope this makes a little sence to someone

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

Kate in her bewk then recounts the tale of Mrs. Fenn leaning over the balcony to offer help, only Kate makes her out to be 'plummy voiced' and Kate and Fiona give her a mouthful of swear words attached to a deprecating dismissal of significance by associating her with a mere, valueless, tin of beans .
Kate is trying to diss this respectable lady, to diminish the value of her statement.
Stage setting, the version given by Kate is corrupted, pre-emptive, she wants to destroy the testimony of a respectable witness. Kate is indicating fear, the very thing she wishes on Goncalo and Tony.

by **tigger** 17.02.13 10:16

Vanity Fair interview: ... ' the twins were asleep on one bed'

I think the whole story of Kate sleeping in the children's room on the Wednesday night because of a tiff with Gerry doesn't wash imo.

The photographs of the PJ show one bed under the window rumpled, a stage-set neat bed against the wall opposite.

Questions:

Why didn't they say that Maddie was in the rumpled bed? Was that because they were determined to have the ingress through the window and the abductor would then have stepped on Maddie?
But the PJ noted no footprints on the bed near the window and nothing to show someone had stepped on it.
Was it because the twins had been sleeping on that bed the previous night? No-one slept on the other one? Why was it so important to them that the twins allegedly slept in cots? Sean was too big for a cot by that time.

We had the last sighting of the three children on Sunday morning (if that was Maddie - due to the lack of the trainers following her disappearance I don't think it was) . On the 30th the anomalies begin - with the creche, the phone pings etc.
Sometime during the next few days one cot is moved to the main bedroom, for no reason given. Was that the night of the 1st?
The cots didn't have sheets in them when the PJ saw the twins asleep and there are pointers that the twins weren't there around 10.00 p.m. on 3/5.
So did the twins routinely sleep in one of the single beds? With the cots propped up against the bed just in case? Then no sheets in the cots would be logical.
Still, why is it so important to the 'story' that the twins were in cots?
I think they were in the bed under the window from the start. Maddie's bed was not in use as from? I think the 30th when 'something' happened, when Murat was called back from Devon etc.

So, I don't believe that Kate slept in the children's room. It was an explanation for the rumpled bed, which was important to explain in order to justify the story.

by saltnpepper 17.02.13 10:34

Hi Bobbin,You saying Kate has alerted us to the fact Mrs Fenn's potential testimony was important then?

Hi Tigger,the cleaner on the wednesday morning seen Madeleines bed had been used,that is the bed next to the wall...opposite the window,i take it you dont think Madeleine slept in the bed tueday night?

by bobbin 17.02.13 10:34

tigger wrote:Vanity Fair interview: ... ' the twins were asleep on one bed'

I think the whole story of Kate sleeping in the children's room on the Wednesday night because of a tiff with Gerry doesn't wash imo.

The photographs of the PJ show one bed under the window rumpled, a stage-set neat bed against the wall opposite.

Questions:

Why didn't they say that Maddie was in the rumpled bed? Was that because they were determined to have the ingress through the window and the abductor would then have stepped on Maddie?
But the PJ noted no footprints on the bed near the window and nothing to show someone had stepped on it.
Was it because the twins had been sleeping on that bed the previous night? No-one slept on the other one? Why was it so important to them that the twins allegedly slept in cots? Sean was too big for a cot by that time.

We had the last sighting of the three children on Sunday morning (if that was Maddie - due to the lack of the trainers following her disappearance I don't think it was) . On the 30th the anomalies begin - with the creche, the phone pings etc.
Sometime during the next few days one cot is moved to the main bedroom, for no reason given. Was that the night of the 1st?
The cots didn't have sheets in them when the PJ saw the twins asleep and there are pointers that the twins weren't there around 10.00 p.m. on 3/5.
So did the twins routinely sleep in one of the single beds? With the cots propped up against the bed just in case? Then no sheets in the cots would be logical.
Still, why is it so important to the 'story' that the twins were in cots?
I think they were in the bed under the window from the start. Maddie's bed was not in use as from? I think the 30th when 'something' happened, when Murat was called back from Devon etc.

So, I don't believe that Kate slept in the children's room. It was an explanation for the rumpled bed, which was important to explain in order to justify the story.

Gerry also goes into length some time later, to announce that the twins are now going into 'beds', as if it's a developmental event. Another question answered before it has been asked. More stage setting to detract from the fact that the twins were reportedly (by the careless early (nanny pennington) statement) that the twins were brought back in. And yes, tigger, if the twins were on the bed, the broken shutter man would have stepped onto their little faces and started a screaming event. There was another event where Gerry did a quick U turn when describing the twins 'on the...', whoops, 'in their... cots'.

by Rosemary 17.02.13 10:46

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

Transcript from BBC Panorama

Gerry Mccann - speaking in August:

"The twins were still sleeping in their cots. So.... you'd be trying to leave it as undisturbed as possible and they slept very soundly until we moved them out of the cots into their own apartment which does make me wonder about whether there was any substances used to keep them asleep."

Where were the twins before they were moved into their own apartment?

by saltnpepper 17.02.13 12:00

At Christmas the couple said they had been “impressed and encouraged” by
the Yard’s work so far and hoped the Portuguese authorities would
re-open the case .

I really hope this is pre-emptive..> "but we asked for the case to be opened" mwah mwah Sad

by Guest 17.02.13 12:13

Jean wrote:I hope that the dog was taken to a vet for treatment after biting such a venomous creature!

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

by Spaniel 17.02.13 13:54

Her saying on the Andrew Marr show today that she complained about the Brazil sighting to the Editor.

Was that before or after it was exposed as a hoax?

by **tigger** 17.02.13 18:33

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

Transcript from BBC Panorama

Gerry Mccann - speaking in August:

"The twins were still sleeping in their cots. So.... you'd be trying to leave it as undisturbed as possible and they slept very soundly until we moved them out of the cots into their own apartment which does make me wonder about whether there was any substances used to keep them asleep."

Where were the twins before they were moved into their own apartment?

Bless, you. I've been trying to find this quote. Others have an idea all the children were together. See [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **tigger** 17.02.13 18:41

saltnpepper wrote:Hi Bobbin,You saying Kate has alerted us to the fact Mrs Fenn's potential testimony was important then?

Hi Tigger,the cleaner on the wednesday morning seen Madeleines bed had been used,that is the bed next to the wall...opposite the window,i take it you dont think Madeleine slept in the bed tueday night?

Well, if the twins slept in the bed under the window - were both beds used that night? I mean did the cleaner see both beds used on the Wednesday?

Was that the same morning that the cot was in the main bedroom? I wondered if that cot was right in front of the cupboard where the blue bag was.
To stop the cleaner getting close to it?

Otherwise the explanation is that Kate did sleep there for a very different reason than the one she gave.

by Spaniel 17.02.13 19:11

tigger wrote:
Rosemary wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Transcript from BBC Panorama

Gerry Mccann - speaking in August:

"The twins were still sleeping in their cots. So.... you'd be trying to leave it as undisturbed as possible and they slept very soundly until we moved them out of the cots into their own apartment which does make me wonder about whether there was any substances used to keep them asleep."

Where were the twins before they were moved into their own apartment?

Bless, you. I've been trying to find this quote. Others have an idea all the children were together. See [url=https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3295-baby-minding-club?highlight=the+baby+club

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/quote[/url]]
That's an interesting thread, pity it ended so abrubtly.

Logic to me says, the children were at the Paynes, hence Grandma sleeping on a sofa bed whatever. The baby listener also belonged to them and as a poster pointed out, can be used for more than babies crying, but as a communication device between the parents.

I've wondered it before, did the PJ and others suspect the children were not left alone? Is this the reason the mccs don't want to face Amaral in court?

There is a question of "upstairs" in that old thread. Madeleine was described as well as going upstairs in her trainers with lights. Brings a lump to my throat, I remember all the littlies wearing those.

As we know, the apartments were situated on a hill, so the front door was street level but the back required steps up to it.

Is this is what is referred to as going upstairs, because MW said that they only let ground floor apartments at that time. Ground floor being the front door.

by EJW 17.02.13 19:53

Châtelaine wrote:I know, Saltnpepper, just jesting ;-)
She has stated numerous times,
that they didn't go out searching. It was dark. They waited for the
light. They did have a torch the next day, of course, to read their
sorry story from a paper to the media. And, they did go out in the early
morning, after GM managed to get some sleep [!?] and met the driver,
who saw a couple and a child in his car lights ...

Sorry to go OT but could someone point me in the direction of info on the driver who saw a couple and child in the headlights on the4/5 please? Also something that has always confused me regarding the twins sleeping arrangements, and particularly after rereading the vanity fair interview, where did the twins actually sleep, in travel cots or both in a single bed. Is this still a massive discrepancy or has it ever been cleared up?
Thanks
EJW

by Inspectorfrost 17.02.13 21:20

EJW

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

by EJW 17.02.13 22:10

Inspectorfrost wrote:EJW

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

Thank you Inspector Frost.

by joyce1938 18.02.13 11:11

I think the subject of the kids going up the stairs ,was spoken of by the cleaner it was that one child was carrying a plate with bread on and the mum was carrying the other 2 kids plates ,supposedly to join the family above for lunch,?mum and kids dad came out little later and went too. Had trainers on with lights too. joyce1938

by **tigger** 18.02.13 14:00

joyce1938 wrote:I think the subject of the kids going up the stairs ,was spoken of by the cleaner it was that one child was carrying a plate with bread on and the mum was carrying the other 2 kids plates ,supposedly to join the family above for lunch,?mum and kids dad came out little later and went too. Had trainers on with lights too. joyce1938

There's no guarantee that it was Maddie. The trainers would surely have been ideal to take DNA from? So where were they because only 'communal sandals were offered for DNA. Trainers are seen in the playground photos and in the airport bus.
She had trainers, she can't have been wearing them in bed, where did they go?

by bobbin 18.02.13 14:17

tigger wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:I think the subject of the kids going up the stairs ,was spoken of by the cleaner it was that one child was carrying a plate with bread on and the mum was carrying the other 2 kids plates ,supposedly to join the family above for lunch,?mum and kids dad came out little later and went too. Had trainers on with lights too. joyce1938

There's no guarantee that it was Maddie. The trainers would surely have been ideal to take DNA from? So where were they because only 'communal sandals were offered for DNA. Trainers are seen in the playground photos and in the airport bus.
She had trainers, she can't have been wearing them in bed, where did they go?

A Eureka moment. The loving couple of kindly paedophiles, after jimmying the shutters and forcing the window open, packed ALL of Madeleine's things up in the blue bag (including toothbrush), then cleaned up the mess and made the bed again, folding the corner over neatly, so that Kate would know that she was going to a good, tidy home and that Maddie would be able to adjust to her new life so much more easily if she had all of her familiar things with her.
Just a pity about the cuddle cat and the pink blanket. We know where cuddle cat went but the blanket is still a mystery.