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

Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by russiandoll on 30.08.13 14:13



Susan Healy= 'if Madeleine had an acccident'+ 'doctors' ...Panorama.

SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
 Makes sense on the surface, but we know because it is in the book of truth in black and white, that Kate was on one occasion worried about her children's health, anxious enough for police to be told that the twins might have been sedated. She was not sufficiently concerned, despite being knowledgeable about sedation and scale of  [un] consciousness, to insist upon a trip to hospital to ascertain what and how much might have been used, despite the twins not so much as blinking during all the commotion.
 FP must have been looking closely at the twins to notice a lack of eye movement, so she [ also a qualified anaesthetist] might have advised a trip to hospital.  No help was sought for the twins, however.
 It has to be asked if this not seeking help was because at least one of the doctors saw no need for it, because they knew what was administered in what dose and that there was no cause for concern.
 Susan Healy is firm about this. Kate would have sought help regarding an accident.
 Kate says she would never take the smallest risk with any of her children, it is in her book.
 
 No help was sought for the twins.
 Kate says she told the truth in her book, so it has to be accepted as fact that she did not take a risk with any of her children.
 Therefore it seems reasonable to conclude that she was confident that there was not any risk to the twins despite the sedation scenario.
 Someone seems to have known that the twins were safe and could be cared for at OC.
  How could that be, if an abductor had sedated them? The drug and amount would need to be confirmed.
  If they had been sedated, the twins seem to have been sedated by someone in the group, doctors who would have known how to manage sedation.
 My opinion, based on words from the McCanns and their friends and family.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by tigger on 30.08.13 14:23

I meant that a number of lies may have been told to the T7 .  

E,g they may have been told that there was an accident and K or G tried resuscitation so that's why this crops up with Rachel. Imo they told them a suitable story.

Imo they certainly used ROB and JT , the fact that those two stood up to them and hired a lawyer makes me think they were tricked.  

In the article above there's also a suggestion that the delay in calling the police on the 3rd was due to debating the consequences of presumably leaving all their children unattended.
If this is the case it looks as if most of them didn't know what the implications would be.
We also have the 'leaving children alone Tapas booking' either by a man on Sunday or Rachel on Monday.
What if that 'testimony'  was facilitated by MW, retro fitting the story. We know this retro fitting was going on and it could only have been MW.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by russiandoll on 30.08.13 14:28

Thanks Tigger, I  get it now. Just re- reading the RIs. Some of the group have the most awful command of their native language for professional people!

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Cristobell on 30.08.13 14:48

@tigger wrote:I meant that a number of lies may have been told to the T7 .  

E,g they may have been told that there was an accident and K or G tried resuscitation so that's why this crops up with Rachel. Imo they told them a suitable story.

Imo they certainly used ROB and JT , the fact that those two stood up to them and hired a lawyer makes me think they were tricked.  

In the article above there's also a suggestion that the delay in calling the police on the 3rd was due to debating the consequences of presumably leaving all their children unattended.
If this is the case it looks as if most of them didn't know what the implications would be.
We also have the 'leaving children alone Tapas booking' either by a man on Sunday or Rachel on Monday.
What if that 'testimony'  was facilitated by MW, retro fitting the story. We know this retro fitting was going on and it could only have been MW.
At the time they made these interviews they had no idea if they were 'home and dry' and may have been planting seeds for their own defence in the future. Gerry has since reminded them that it was a collective decision.  

Kate's 100% faith in her friends makes no sense. She didn't 'know' them that well and in the traumatic circumstances of your child disappearing, I feel you would suspect everyone - even your own partner.  The toing and froing from the tapas to the apartments meant that each of the group were absent from the table for varying amounts of time during the critical period when the child was 'taken'.  How could you not suspect them?  

The note left at reception has come in handy. It is quite a stretch of the imagination to believe that a wandering child snatcher would just happen upon an unlocked holiday apartment with three cherubs sleeping soundly while their mum and dad were down the pub. However the fact that all the parents informed total strangers that they were leaving their babies on their own brings their judgement into question (again) - but it does support their joint alibi of all the 'innocents' dining together in plain sight while the waiters were on the line to paedophile gangs and child traffickers.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by tigger on 30.08.13 15:08

Hi Christobel, perhaps a topic on retro fitting alleged events to a story might be useful? I'm thinking of the lost photo printer, the adjusted statements of the nannies, this handy invite to paedos. A lot of puzzles are solved when we take all these as being post event?

It would also explain the hasty timelines to shore up the frequent checking story. If they'd been completely aware of the facts it would certainly have been ready?

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Cristobell on 30.08.13 15:33

@tigger wrote:Hi Christobel, perhaps a topic on retro fitting alleged events to a story might be useful? I'm thinking of the lost photo printer, the adjusted statements of the nannies, this handy invite to paedos. A lot of puzzles are solved when we take all these as being post event?

It would also explain the hasty timelines to shore up the frequent checking story. If they'd been completely aware of the facts it would certainly have been ready?
Yes, I see where you are coming from Tigger.  I am still intrigued by the tea stain on the pyjama top and still can't figure out where that is supposed to lead us. The retro 'why didn't you come when Sean and I were crying' has morphed into abductor doing a trial run the night before and proves Madeleine was alive and well on the Thursday morning.  

Possibly the first retro would be Jane Tanner's sighting - its quite a shapeshifter she has developed there - but I believe it wasn't part of original plan (if there was one) but was incorporated hastily following someone's encounter with the Smith family.  Lets not forget of course in the immediate aftermath while Kate and Gerry were claiming abduction, she did'nt scream out the very obvious 'he went that way'.  

Good idea on a dedicated thread, do you want to kick it off?

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by tigger on 30.08.13 16:42

@Cristobell wrote:
@tigger wrote:Hi Christobel, perhaps a topic on retro fitting alleged events to a story might be useful? I'm thinking of the lost photo printer, the adjusted statements of the nannies, this handy invite to paedos. A lot of puzzles are solved when we take all these as being post event?

It would also explain the hasty timelines to shore up the frequent checking story. If they'd been completely aware of the facts it would certainly have been ready?
Yes, I see where you are coming from Tigger.  I am still intrigued by the tea stain on the pyjama top and still can't figure out where that is supposed to lead us. The retro 'why didn't you come when Sean and I were crying' has morphed into abductor doing a trial run the night before and proves Madeleine was alive and well on the Thursday morning.  

Possibly the first retro would be Jane Tanner's sighting - its quite a shapeshifter she has developed there - but I believe it wasn't part of original plan (if there was one) but was incorporated hastily following someone's encounter with the Smith family.  Lets not forget of course in the immediate aftermath while Kate and Gerry were claiming abduction, she did'nt scream out the very obvious 'he went that way'.  

Good idea on a dedicated thread, do you want to kick it off?
I'd love you to start off, still poking away with a stylus here and battling an errant spellchecker. roses 

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Hicks on 30.08.13 17:28

@Cristobell wrote:
@tigger wrote:Hi Christobel, perhaps a topic on retro fitting alleged events to a story might be useful? I'm thinking of the lost photo printer, the adjusted statements of the nannies, this handy invite to paedos. A lot of puzzles are solved when we take all these as being post event?

It would also explain the hasty timelines to shore up the frequent checking story. If they'd been completely aware of the facts it would certainly have been ready?
Yes, I see where you are coming from Tigger.  I am still intrigued by the tea stain on the pyjama top and still can't figure out where that is supposed to lead us. The retro 'why didn't you come when Sean and I were crying' has morphed into abductor doing a trial run the night before and proves Madeleine was alive and well on the Thursday morning.  

Possibly the first retro would be Jane Tanner's sighting - its quite a shapeshifter she has developed there - but I believe it wasn't part of original plan (if there was one) but was incorporated hastily following someone's encounter with the Smith family.  Lets not forget of course in the immediate aftermath while Kate and Gerry were claiming abduction, she did'nt scream out the very obvious 'he went that way'.  

Good idea on a dedicated thread, do you want to kick it off?
To me the 'tea stain story' was supposed to give the idea that an abductor had done a dry run the night before, Kate said that 'it looked like a tea stain', is she trying to infer that it could have been something else?
We get M asking 'why didn't you come when we cried'. In her bewk.... " the day she went missing, Madeleine was pale and tired and asked me to carry her back from the pool to the apartment", says Kate, it was odd as usually she had loads of energy".

Sets the scene doesn't.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 30.08.13 18:23

@Hicks wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@tigger wrote:Hi Christobel, perhaps a topic on retro fitting alleged events to a story might be useful? I'm thinking of the lost photo printer, the adjusted statements of the nannies, this handy invite to paedos. A lot of puzzles are solved when we take all these as being post event?

It would also explain the hasty timelines to shore up the frequent checking story. If they'd been completely aware of the facts it would certainly have been ready?
Yes, I see where you are coming from Tigger.  I am still intrigued by the tea stain on the pyjama top and still can't figure out where that is supposed to lead us. The retro 'why didn't you come when Sean and I were crying' has morphed into abductor doing a trial run the night before and proves Madeleine was alive and well on the Thursday morning.  

Possibly the first retro would be Jane Tanner's sighting - its quite a shapeshifter she has developed there - but I believe it wasn't part of original plan (if there was one) but was incorporated hastily following someone's encounter with the Smith family.  Lets not forget of course in the immediate aftermath while Kate and Gerry were claiming abduction, she did'nt scream out the very obvious 'he went that way'.  

Good idea on a dedicated thread, do you want to kick it off?
To me the 'tea stain story' was supposed to give the idea that an abductor had done a dry run the night before, Kate said that 'it looked like a tea stain', is she trying to infer that it could have been something else?
We get M asking 'why didn't you come when we cried'. In her bewk.... " the day she went missing, Madeleine was pale and tired and asked me to carry her back from the pool to the apartment", says Kate, it was odd as usually she had loads of energy".

Sets the scene doesn't.
It rather does! It's also a bit like an alibi that if she were "found" it could explain away anything that might show up in toxicology. IMHO.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by aiyoyo on 30.08.13 18:47



SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
So,,,,,maybe Maddie didn't have an accident!

Now then .....now then...Grandma Healy is giving people idea....

That would explain the deployment of the Best Murder Squad to do the investigation.....

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Hicks on 30.08.13 19:23

@aiyoyo wrote:


SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
So,,,,,maybe Maddie didn't have an accident!

Now then .....now then...Grandma Healy is giving people idea....

That would explain the deployment of the Best Murder Squad to do the investigation.....
It would wouldn't it. 
One would imagine that the Gaspar's have been interviewed at length by SY, and Yvonne Martin.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by aiyoyo on 30.08.13 19:40

@Hicks wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:


SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
So,,,,,maybe Maddie didn't have an accident!

Now then .....now then...Grandma Healy is giving people idea....

That would explain the deployment of the Best Murder Squad to do the investigation.....
It would wouldn't it. 
One would imagine that the Gaspar's have been interviewed at length by SY, and Yvonne Martin.

Personally, I don't believe there's that angle in this case.

IMV, the Murder Squad is indicative of what is possibly being investigated....as in "death" but not by accident .....

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Casey5 on 30.08.13 19:49

@tasprin wrote:
Casey I remember a Radio 4 interview with Rachael Oldfield and that is exactly what she said. I didn't hear Fiona Payne's comments but RO definitely did say it and she was nicknamed 'Rachael Resuss' on the blogs and forums, as a consequence. It was a strange thing to say and seemed very much like a Freudian slip at the time because she insisted that if an accident had occurred there were plenty of doctor's on hand to resuscitate the child, therefore, in her opinion, something like that couldn't possibly have happened. But it doesn't make any difference how many doctors are present if the patient has already died.
Hi tasprin, Many thanks
Sorry folks about getting the name wrong, i should have looked it up before I jumped in.big grin
Anyway, it was at least one of the tapas 7 and she did make this strange remark but then they're all strange I think and all with their secrets and lies. How do they live with themselves?

Casey5

Posts : 321
Reputation : 18
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by BerylJ on 30.08.13 19:57

@Casey5 wrote:
@tasprin wrote:
Casey I remember a Radio 4 interview with Rachael Oldfield and that is exactly what she said. I didn't hear Fiona Payne's comments but RO definitely did say it and she was nicknamed 'Rachael Resuss' on the blogs and forums, as a consequence. It was a strange thing to say and seemed very much like a Freudian slip at the time because she insisted that if an accident had occurred there were plenty of doctor's on hand to resuscitate the child, therefore, in her opinion, something like that couldn't possibly have happened. But it doesn't make any difference how many doctors are present if the patient has already died.
Hi tasprin, Many thanks
Sorry folks about getting the name wrong, i should have looked it up before I jumped in.big grin
Anyway, it was at least one of the tapas 7 and she did make this strange remark but then they're all strange I think and all with their secrets and lies. How do they live with themselves?
It would have to be an accident with a serious outcome to require resuscitation though. An accident might require a clean up, a plaster, a hug and a kiss, A more serious accident would require a hospital visit say for an xray to see if there are any breakages anywhere. An accident that requires resuscitation means the person is dead as in drowning. So to resuscitate in this accident Rachael must have meant that Madeleine had died.

BerylJ

Posts : 56
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Hicks on 30.08.13 20:52

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Hicks wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:


SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
So,,,,,maybe Maddie didn't have an accident!

Now then .....now then...Grandma Healy is giving people idea....

That would explain the deployment of the Best Murder Squad to do the investigation.....
It would wouldn't it. 
One would imagine that the Gaspar's have been interviewed at length by SY, and Yvonne Martin.
Personally, I don't believe there's that angle in this case.

IMV, the Murder Squad is indicative of what is possibly being investigated....as in "death" but not by accident .....
I would agree with you, however, I wonder at times why two doctors would come forward, voluntarily, and being friends of the MC'S, to give accounts of conversations between DP and GM that Mrs G in particular found so disturbing, plus she did not want DP anywhere near her child.
In Mrs G statement she goes on to say that during the holiday in Majorca DP and his wife took Madeleine off for the day to give Kate and Gerry a rest and also to give them time with the twins, it seems to me that M was farmed off at every opportunity.
Add to this some of the photos of M, the vile make up photo, plus some others that seem so unnatural, I don't think this angle can be discounted, oh and GM registered in the CATS system.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by aiyoyo on 30.08.13 21:17

@Hicks wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Hicks wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:


SUSAN HEALY: If Madeleine had an accident in Kate's presence, Kate is a doctor for goodness sake, they were on holiday with doctors, the first thing she would have done would have been to have sought help for Madeleine, you know, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that Kate would do anything else.
So,,,,,maybe Maddie didn't have an accident!

Now then .....now then...Grandma Healy is giving people idea....

That would explain the deployment of the Best Murder Squad to do the investigation.....
It would wouldn't it. 
One would imagine that the Gaspar's have been interviewed at length by SY, and Yvonne Martin.
Personally, I don't believe there's that angle in this case.

IMV, the Murder Squad is indicative of what is possibly being investigated....as in "death" but not by accident .....
I would agree with you, however, I wonder at times why two doctors would come forward, voluntarily, and being friends of the MC'S, to give accounts of conversations between DP and GM that Mrs G in particular found so disturbing, plus she did not want DP anywhere near her child.
In Mrs G statement she goes on to say that during the holiday in Majorca DP and his wife took Madeleine off for the day to give Kate and Gerry a rest and also to give them time with the twins, it seems to me that M was farmed off at every opportunity.
Add to this some of the photos of M, the vile make up photo, plus some others that seem so unnatural, I don't think this angle can be discounted, oh and GM registered in the CATS system.
If you ask me, my belief is that the Gaspars were cautious by nature. Mrs Gaspar may have been disturbed by what she saw but over read into it.
As for Payne and wife taking Madeleine out for the day to give kate a break, it has been reported Madeleine was a difficult child, so it;s not unusual for friends to want to help out. Besides it was Payne and wife who took her out.

As for the CATS ref without content, that's bit harder to discern how that could come about.




aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Who?What?Where? on 31.08.13 0:58

It's only my point of view, but the Gaspars' natural instinct, seems to have been, to protect their child from possible danger. That is an  instinct, which seems much more believable, to me, than the McCann's instinct, which was to leave their children vulnerable, to possible danger.


A question, if you don't mind? What does CATS refer to? I don't remember reading that before.

Who?What?Where?

Posts : 187
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by tigger on 31.08.13 5:58

It's in the CATS  file topic -still on the portal here.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by aiyoyo on 31.08.13 6:33

@Who?What?Where? wrote:It's only my point of view, but the Gaspars' natural instinct, seems to have been, to protect their child from possible danger. That is an  instinct, which seems much more believable, to me, than the McCann's instinct, which was to leave their children vulnerable, to possible danger.

Gaspars parenting skills are obviously protective of the children.

While the Mccanns is a different story.
I dont think they left their children alone on the 3rd.   That's just their alibi for the abduction - a charade.
Maddie was gone, the twins left with friends next door, and the rota checks just play acting - IMO.

The reason I dont believe there's a *p* aspect is simply because had there been something in Gerry's CATs file pointing to that, I cant see how the UK Police can ignore that, or for the matter delete the record for obvious reason.
Ditto Payne. One imagines Police must have verified and eliminated that lead.  No reason for the Police to cover that up.

That said, I can't grasp how an already created CATs file can be void of contents.  
On the premise that the file was started in preparation of use for a purpose and the computer automatically generates a ref nr. then if there's nothing to go into the file one supposes surely the creation can be deleted.   Unless an automated computer generated nr cannot be deleted.  




A question, if you don't mind? What does CATS refer to? I don't remember reading that before.

There's a thread on that.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Guest on 31.08.13 10:27

candyfloss wrote:Thanks sharonl. thumbsup 

So that is how come Moura said Jane Tanner never left the table in the video on the other thread.  So there were several witnesses to this.


Fiona, David and Dianne guaranteed to the PJ that she never left the restaurant before the alarm was given by Kate. This information was corroborated by several workers of the Tapas Bar restaurant”. These witnesses also stated that Gerry McCann did not even go to check on the children, when he went away of the restaurant, and that he only stayed at the apartment of Praia da Luz entrance
Fiona, David and Dianne are certainly persons of interest

snipped from David Ike Forum 2009:


There are two people missing from this photograph taken just 10 days after Maddies disappearence. Dianne Webster and Gerry McCann are both missing.

Why is the civil servant NHS auditor Dianne Webster and the consultant and NHS doctor Gerald McCann not here?

A grab from Spanish TV and by coincidence exactly the same TV station that commissioned then pulled the plug on Mercedes planned McCann fraud expose. It is amazing that despite the intense 3year media firestorm that had enveloped the McCanns by the time this documentary series aired this was a TV station couldn't find even one single image of Dianne Webster Matthew Oldfield or David Payne to use in their McCann documentary series.



The TV station didn't want to present too many obvious facts to their audience did they. If they had we could have ended up with the nightmare scenario of a 68 year old widow from Barcelona joining up the dots and suggesting there just might be a backstory to the McCanns 'holiday' that spring.

An obvious set of clues that were so obvious the press on all fronts and not just those in the UK were desperate to coverup. Hell the old dear might even have written a book, solved the case made Scotand Yard look like the barrell of paid chimps they really are and then gone on to make millions and millions of Ecus. Nobody in their right mind could ever wish for such a thing, could they?

One way or another Webster and the other NHS employees were airbrushed out and that means we've all now ask ourselves why the McCann media machine was so very careful to exclude or minimise the presence of certain members of Gerry McCann's Group. Did Dianne Webster and the doctors really have a role to play other than that of 'holiday' friends to the McCanns?

Dianne Webster works for the Audit Commission, a GVMT body that analyses how public money is spent in GVMT organisations like the NHS. It is supposed to be 'independent' but in 2004 the commission reccomended abolishing PCTs. Now in 2012 guess what. Yes you just won the car , we have no PCTS.




14. FCO told the Commissioner that a family member had made clear to FCO staff that all comments made by that individual to FCO had been made in strict confidence and were not intended for disclosure to third parties. FCO did not approach the family member again during the Commissioner's investigation but told the Commissioner that they were confident the individual would not appreciate being contacted regarding disclosure of the relevant personal information, a position the Commissioner accepted.

So, in part at least, an international incident is averted by not betraying the confidence of a family member, who would not appreciate being contacted.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id282.html

Could one of those people who have been airbrushed out be the family member in one of the Home Office Files?

And possibly one who the lawyer was speaking about?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Who?What?Where? on 01.09.13 0:24

Thank you very much, for your replies to my question's.

I have found the CATS thread now, but I have only read the first page so far.

One thing that does worry me in that thread, but did not really surprise me ,was the mention of the existence of "super user's". In my experience, that is a very negative term. It does not bode well, for a successful conviction of the people, who are or were, really involved.

Only time will tell.

Who?What?Where?

Posts : 187
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by PeterMac on 01.09.13 9:09

Cherry Blossom wrote:
Fiona, David and Dianne are certainly persons of interest
If we then add
that Fiona was Kate's best friend.
That she was similarly a qualified anaesthetist
That she attended the apartment and observed the two comatose twins
That despite seeing the twins comatose took no action whatsoever to check their vital signs or perform any of the normal resuscitation procedures
Then we may safely say she should be high on the list of "persons of interest."
She knows, knows more than she has ben prepared to tell

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Monty Heck on 01.09.13 12:15

@PeterMac wrote:
Cherry Blossom wrote:
Fiona, David and Dianne are certainly persons of interest
If we then add
that Fiona was Kate's best friend.
That she was similarly a qualified anaesthetist
That she attended the apartment and observed the two comatose twins
That despite seeing the twins comatose took no action whatsoever to check their vital signs or perform any of the normal resuscitation procedures
Then we may safely say she should be high on the list of "persons of interest."
She knows,  knows more than she has ben prepared to tell
It's not just a matter of what FP has been prepared to tell, though.  She seems never to have been questioned along the lines of the above, when she would have had to reveal why she did not take any action regarding suspicion of sedation, or alternatively invoke her right to silence.  If FP merely colluded in sedation/covering up sedation of any of the McC children, even if M were abducted by a stranger, there would be the very serious matter of misdirection of a police investigation to be dealt with at the very least.

Having just read PMs posts this morning re Spudgun's summary and Lazzerli timeline summary (thanks for those), any list of persons of interest could not ignore JT, ROB and MO.  SY considering stranger abduction during the constant stream of visits to apartments, requiring a bypass of the McCs apartment as attested by the group, and despite evidence of obfuscation regarding the events of the night from within the group will require some explaining.

Monty Heck

Posts : 470
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-09-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Woofer on 01.09.13 12:45

@PeterMac wrote:
Cherry Blossom wrote:
Fiona, David and Dianne are certainly persons of interest
If we then add
that Fiona was Kate's best friend.
That she was similarly a qualified anaesthetist
That she attended the apartment and observed the two comatose twins
That despite seeing the twins comatose took no action whatsoever to check their vital signs or perform any of the normal resuscitation procedures
Then we may safely say she should be high on the list of "persons of interest."
She knows,  knows more than she has ben prepared to tell
Fiona Kate`s best friend ?  IMO she was dropping KM right in it when she stated :-
"
00.53.22 1485 “Did the twins wake up at all?”

Reply “They didn’t. They didn’t”.

1485 “In the aftermath?”

Reply “No, and that was the other thing, she kept going into the twins, she kept putting her hands on the twins to check they were breathing, she was very much concerned in checking that they were okay. But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn’t, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird, I remember thinking, you know, when the Police came they turned the lights on, there was loads of noise, obviously from the moment Kate discovered that Madeleine was gone, the screaming and the shouting and there was a lot of noise and they, they didn’t, you know, so much as blink”.
IMO this is not someone covering up for a friend - it`s an effort to cast suspicion on Kate.

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by PeterMac on 01.09.13 13:49

But she too is an anaesthetist.
Her, and Kate's refusal to follow the proper procedures is bordering on criminal negligence. It is certainly a lack of action which would cause them both to be severely reprimanded and possibly struck off the Medical Register.
So is she in fact shielding Kate.
To do so she, Fiona, would have to have know what the twins had been given.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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