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 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:15 pm

I think too that in fact she is, as a professional, covering-up for Kate. After all, she wasn't the only one that night, who noticed the twins sleeping comateus through all of the goings-on ... and offered a professional opinion: the twins were fine.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Woofer on Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:30 pm

@PeterMac wrote: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.
ok, yes, I get what you`re saying - its likely, but IMO not definite.

She KNEW they were fine as in -  "But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn’t, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird... ".

She is still saying that Kate`s behaviour was weird.  Is this because she knew what the twins had been given and would be fine and couldn`t see why Kate was worrying - in this case it would hardly be very friendly of her to say what she did in that statement.  I think its more likely because she knew Kate had given the twins something and was just dropping in a little seed of doubt to cast suspicion on her.

Wonder what she meant to say after `they didn`t ......?`

____________________
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear - Jiddu Krishnamurti

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 Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:49 pm

@Woofer wrote:
Wonder what she meant to say after `they didn`t ......?`
. . . wake up despite the noise ?

____________________


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 Woofer on Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:31 pm

@PeterMac wrote:
@Woofer wrote:
Wonder what she meant to say after `they didn`t ......?`
. . . wake up despite the noise ?
Well that would indicate they were NOT fine.

If she was an experienced anaesthetist, wouldn`t she check their pulses, their eyes etc.

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 Monty Heck on Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:55 pm

@Woofer wrote:
@PeterMac wrote: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.
ok, yes, I get what you`re saying - its likely, but IMO not definite.

She KNEW they were fine as in -  "But they were okay, I mean, they were fine, they didn’t, they were asleep, but at the time it did seem weird... ".

She is still saying that Kate`s behaviour was weird.  Is this because she knew what the twins had been given and would be fine and couldn`t see why Kate was worrying - in this case it would hardly be very friendly of her to say what she did in that statement.  I think its more likely because she knew Kate had given the twins something and was just dropping in a little seed of doubt to cast suspicion on her.

Wonder what she meant to say after `they didn`t ......?`
This line of enquiry is something that ought to have been vigourously followed to get to the bottom of it.  It is extremely strange that something so fundamental to the previous as well as the present enquiry was and is still being ignored.  Whether or not any of the children were sedated, with what and by whom is crucial to determining what really went on that night    It matters not that the PJ missed the chance to run tests early in the investigation, there is enough information in this and KMcC's testimony for this line of enquiry to have been followed up.  It is hard to understand why this still appears to be so when it really would be a straightforward matter to probe this further, starting with Dr FP who needs to explain why she indicated a concern about sedation in a serious crime, which as a professional  she did nothing about, and did not even mention these suspicions to police until 11 or months or so after the event. 

Could it be that it was fear that sedation of their young children by a group of holidaying NHS medics getting into the press was behind the intial diplomatic flurry, unprecedented government intervention and above all the media and image management so that attention was diverted here, there, anywhere but at the T9?  That once started on this route, things snowballed particularly since the McCs embraced the media with probably quite unexpected fervour and the juggernaut could not be stopped?  If so, none of the establishment figures involved could ever admit their mistake; after all which of them could have forseen that the likes of FP's above statement would ever have been made public.  Once it was all made public, there seems to have been nothing else for it but to blunder on on the same track, not only gagging the media but it would seem, funding a review then investigation which is apprently looking everywhere but at elemental issues raised by the T9 own testimony.

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 Dr What on Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:08 pm

It could well be as 'simple' as that, Monty Heck.A group of NHS medics doing 'things' that would bring more disgrace to the NHS.

At the time, the Brown government was pouring money into the NHS institution, and unknown to the public at the time, there were massive scandals in the NHS that were being suppressed at that time but were about to break into the news, ie Mid Staffs and many other Trust hospitals, that would not reflect well on the Labour Govt in 2007,particularly when an election was being considered.We all know how news about the NHS affects how people vote.Another 'scandal' about a group of medics on holiday would just add to the woes.

Perhaps 'something' had to be done to protect the image of the NHS, rather than a specific group of crass and idiotic medics, whose behaviour, however appalling, just could not be exposed.

The irony, of course, is that these scandals were exposed [as scandals always invariably are], but by that time, Brown had gone, ministers replaced, but a 'lie' that was established in Portugal,had to be protected.

Dr What

Posts : 241
Reputation : 17
Join date : 2012-10-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:20 pm

I have been considering the NHS-implication and [sorry for maybe being "ignorant"], but wouldn't it have been the opposite? That Brown's Labour government started a cover-up for such reason and then Cameron's Tory government would have been grateful to take advantage of such a stupidity?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Sceneset on Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:02 pm

Chatelaine, that is something that has also never made sense to me. 

I would have thought that any subsequent government would have loved to have embarrassed the former by exposing any type of cover up or improper procedures and delighted in it; especially as there is so much this government would probably like to distract our thoughts from.

I find it difficult to imagine a commonality that both governments think so worthy, that the exposure of a possible crime would be overridden by it.

Sceneset

Posts : 66
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Who?What?Where? on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:13 am

Châtelaine wrote:I have been considering the NHS-implication and [sorry for maybe being "ignorant"], but wouldn't it have been the opposite? That Brown's Labour government started a cover-up for such reason and then Cameron's Tory government would have been grateful to take advantage of such a stupidity?
This could be confusing, if someone believe's what they may have been taught by the media. The media have constantly repeated, that democracy exist's, that you really have a choice. That could be a lie.

Unfortunately, it is possible, that what the media may not tell you, is that if you want to get to a top government position, then you may have to agree to follow a certain, pre-described, agenda. If that is the case, then democracy does not really exist, under the current political system. It would not matter who you voted for, in a system like that, because , while a different face may appear on your screen's and in your newspaper's under a different party name, the overall agenda would remain, exactly the same.

So, Cameron cannot condemn the previous government handling of this case, because he is just following exactly the same agenda as they were?

That might add up.

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 loopzdaloop on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:24 am

@Cristobell wrote:

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. 

Tannic Acid is in tea and has historically been used to clot blood, perhaps the tea stain was real and the result of an attempt to stem a head injury, as doctors they would know this.

loopzdaloop

Posts : 334
Reputation : 40
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by loopzdaloop on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:38 am

@aiyoyo wrote:
@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.
I'd disagree as the majority of 'P's never get caught as their victims are either considered unreliable, or conditioned into thinking behaviour is the 'norm', or are too frightened. I believe it is possible there is a 'P' aspect as Yvonne Martin, independently of the Gaspars also felt that she had come across DP through her line of work. 
This woman is a child protection specialist as well as a social worker and often social workers have more info than police. During the course of her employment she would have access to lots of information on P's, often written in child protection files of incident after incident after incident that is investigated but never goes anywhere due to aforementioned reasons. Yvonne initially gave info anonymously as she was aware of the confidentiality issues, yet felt strongly enough by her convictions that she went on record. It's all about building a picture, for DP to make that 'joke' he got the repertoire of language from somewhere and he felt confident enough to share this with Gerry. 

I do think this is incidental and is relevant to character of the people that kept the narrative as opposed to 'what happened' and the accident. To be a P you have to be devious, similar skills you would need to conduct the worlds biggest deception.

Her email address and details are online: If anyone wants to guide her to invite her to the forum.

Yvonne Martin, Area Commissioning and Parternship Manager
Cafcass (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service)
3rd Floor, Front Street, Benton
Newcastle On Tyne
NE7 7TZ
UK
Email: yvonne.martin@cafcass.gov.uk
Tel: [url=tel:+44 1912701897]+44 1912701897[/url]

loopzdaloop

Posts : 334
Reputation : 40
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Monty Heck on Mon Sep 02, 2013 10:00 pm

@Who?What?Where? wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I have been considering the NHS-implication and [sorry for maybe being "ignorant"], but wouldn't it have been the opposite? That Brown's Labour government started a cover-up for such reason and then Cameron's Tory government would have been grateful to take advantage of such a stupidity?
This could be confusing, if someone believe's what they may have been taught by the media. The media have constantly repeated, that democracy exist's, that you really have a choice. That could be a lie.

Unfortunately, it is possible, that what the media may not tell you, is that if you want to get to a top government position, then you may have to agree to follow a certain, pre-described, agenda. If that is the case, then democracy does not really exist, under the current political system. It would not matter who you voted for, in a system like that, because , while a different face may appear on your screen's and in your newspaper's under a different party name, the overall agenda would remain, exactly the same.

So, Cameron cannot condemn the previous government handling of this case, because he is just following exactly the same agenda as they were?

That might add up.
Exactly so.  They all do it and it matters not which side of the political spectrum parties claim to represent.  To expose such practices in a previous government would be to expose one's own party to the unwelcome light of scrutiny.  The aim at the beginning was, IMO, to deflect away from any potential issues arising from the T9 comprising so many medics and questions of just why exactly they felt it was so safe to leave all of their young children unattended and free to wander in strange appartments if they awoke when unsuperivsed.  The second aim was to help shape the image of the McC couple as devout Christians and devoted parents and therefore above reproach and the third was to shape the story itself, presenting opportunities for senior political figures to show their softer side, only too willing to help and support the McCs in their distress, which they hoped would be a vote winning strategem.  After all the political and media support, Cameron couldn't risk being the bad guy who turned his back on them, who let down this iconic child which, together with the persuasion of Rebekah Brookes may have left him rather short of options.  Hence we are now financing a SY investigation with what appears to be a brief to re-examine everything except the T9, again IMO.

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 Hicks on Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:24 pm

This thread is interesting. I had totally forgotten about this story from El Mundo.

Just to refresh the story from page one.

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/friends-of-mccanns-scared-to-tell-truth.html.

It has a ring of truth to it. There was/is a powerful ring around the McCann's, including politicians, big business men and so on. Certainly daunting and intimidating to anyone who might have been prepared to stand alone and tell the truth. 

The choice of words are interesting. The 'man' wanted to tell what happened 'before' the dinner on May 3rd, during and after.
I have had the belief that Madeleine died earlier than the 3rd, however, I believe that the Smiths did see GM, and that would make sense if the death occurred that day. If the death had occurred a day or two before, why wait until that time to remove the body? It doesn't make sense.  

Now who was missing in the group photo taken on the steps after the court settlement?


 A message to that person,  just remember.... it is never too late to tell the truth.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

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 Guest on Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:55 pm

Interesting, Hicks. The lawyer in that article who says his client wants to, but is scared to confess the truth because of the McCann's high-flying political allies, describes him as a member of the Tapas 9.

That means one of 3, David Payne, Matt Oldfield or Russell O'Brien was ready to blow the whistle back in November 2007, according to the article. Wonder if he's more or less inclined now?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by palm tree on Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:06 pm

Reading that article, I kind of get the feeling that it was an accident but then again, if it was an accident, why did they not seek help? Does this not also prove that someone (male) of the tapas 7 knows the truth?
IMO

palm tree

Posts : 365
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-08-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by inspirespirit on Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:28 am

If the police re-interviewed and probed enough with those 3 men, they would get the truth out of them.  Especially now with public opinion against them and having carried their secret for so long.

Why on earth don't they re-interview the McCanns and Tapas lot.  It defies belief.

inspirespirit

Posts : 178
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2014-06-26
Age : 63

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by palm tree on Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:42 am

@inspirespirit wrote:If the police re-interviewed and probed enough with those 3 men, they would get the truth out of them.  Especially now with public opinion against them and having carried their secret for so long.

Why on earth don't they re-interview the McCanns and Tapas lot.  It defies belief.
Your right, one of them knows the truth and wanted to speak back then. So WTF are OG doing interviewing and digging up Portugal? Would OG not know of that article, do they need lead by the hand to it? Must admit though,  stupidly enough, I'd forgotten about it!
IMO

palm tree

Posts : 365
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-08-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Hicks on Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:24 pm

The man who wanted to talk is still being prevented from doing so imo. Reading between the lines that's what the article really says. The involvement of 'politicians', very rich people like Richard Branson, and likely the intelligent services, all pitted against one man.

The fact that SY are also blatantly ignoring this person tells you all you need to know about the investigation.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to put the three Tapas men under the microscope, and see what they are doing at present.

So we had a 'man' who wanted to tell the truth but couldn't due to political pressure. We had a British police Officer who witnessed the lies of JT on tape, at different times, but was 'banned' by the British government from speaking out.

Something happened to Madeleine during the day on May 3rd (before the dinner) Madeleine did not die from being neglected. Now I can see why it was important to give out the idea that the children were left most nights. Why the crying story was so important, to reinforce the idea that something happened to Madeleine when she was ALONE. In truth it is more likely that Madeleine was NOT alone when she died.  

 The above is yet another reason to think that this whole mystery was, and still is being covered up. Why? 

What could have happened to Madeleine during the day of May 3rd?

All the above my own opinion. Not fact.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

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 HelenMeg on Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:52 pm

@Hicks wrote:The man who wanted to talk is still being prevented from doing so imo. Reading between the lines that's what the article really says. The involvement of 'politicians', very rich people like Richard Branson, and likely the intelligent services, all pitted against one man.

The fact that SY are also blatantly ignoring this person tells you all you need to know about the investigation.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to put the three Tapas men under the microscope, and see what they are doing at present.

So we had a 'man' who wanted to tell the truth but couldn't due to political pressure. We had a British police Officer who witnessed the lies of JT on tape, at different times, but was 'banned' by the British government from speaking out.

Something happened to Madeleine during the day on May 3rd (before the dinner) Madeleine did not die from being neglected. Now I can see why it was important to give out the idea that the children were left most nights. Why the crying story was so important, to reinforce the idea that something happened to Madeleine when she was ALONE. In truth it is more likely that Madeleine was NOT alone when she died.  

 The above is yet another reason to think that this whole mystery was, and still is being covered up. Why? 

What could have happened to Madeleine during the day of May 3rd?

All the above my own opinion. Not fact.
I can well imagine that keeping up the persistent lies would not be easy or comfortable and that someone would have felt a strong urge to 'tell the truth'.

I'd go for RO, but just on the basis that he wasn't there for the photo call on the steps. I feel that the establishment would not have wanted a loose cannon who may spill all at any minute and advised him to stay quite and let the situation be 'managed'.
I still puzzle over why JT ended up playing a key role, both in the docu / mocku mentary and as part of the whole charade. I would have expected it to be FP rather than JT. I think perhaps JT was thought to
come across as more believable and perhaps was more gullible and able to be manipulated. I would have expected the majority if not all of the TAPAS 7 to quickly distance themselves from the whole affair. I think it is quite revealing in who actually agreed to participate in the Mocku.  MO, JT - not sure if there was anyone else...  Why did those 2 agree ? Certainly, at that time, I think they all must have felt protected - safe in the knowledge that they would not be held to account in anyway.  Perhaps things changed when the government changed

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by missmar1 on Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:16 pm

After reading this it makes you go back and think about the tapas get together when they had a meeting just prior to the PJ's arrival in this country to question the tappas.   I seem to remember Clarence Mitchel admitted this meeting had taken place ....I believe it was about 6 months after the holiday.

 I may be wrong, but I also seem to remember him stating this was the first time they had all met since the holiday and I remember thinking it was strange that they had all waited so long to meet up - after what had happened to their friends little girl, wouldn't they have wanted to meet up earlier to support and help the Mccann's and also one another through their anguish ? -After- all, they were all part of the same holiday group when Madeleine went missing.

I also had the thought that per'haps they KNEW what might have happened to Madeleine and that was the reason they had not met up before the 6 months was because they were no longer on very good terms with one another ?   If they did know what happened to Madeleine then the PJ coming over to question the other 7 tappas may have been the only reason that meeting took place as they would have needed to get their stories straight and to make sure everyone was sticking to them ?   
 Does anyone know if these people are still all friendly with each other because as far as I'm aware, there is never a word printed about the relationship the other 7 tappas have with the Mccann's in the MSM   ?  

It's also interesting that the Mccann's never publicly ( As far as I'm aware) complained that these so called " friends" refused to go back for a reconstruction when they were asked to by the PJ.  As usual, all my opinion only

missmar1

Posts : 253
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Lawyer from “Tapas 1”:

Post by Hicks on Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:20 pm

In the Crimewatch reconstruction I seem to remember that there were witnesses who saw two men arguing by a car, near the OC after the alert.
Am I dreaming or did these witnesses confirm they overheard one of them say , "I don't like lies"? Or something like that.

Whilst starting to read Russell O'Brien's statement taken in the UK, I didn't get past the writing in blue at the top.

Russell James O'Brien & the lost DVD interview.
He was questioned on the 8th April from 9.55 am to 8.18 pm. In all this time nobody--allegedly-- checked the tape to see if it was working!
Something is definitely not right about that.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

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 petunia on Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:31 pm

Hicks how i would love to have the time to read through that statement. When i was on a plane to Portugal in 2007 with our Grandson we were so occupied in keeping him entertained that i would find it impossible to identify any person that was on it,yet he identified not only one person but two persons,maybe he is more observant than me? also you would think that the nanny Charlotte would already be installed at the OC rather than have just flown in.

petunia

Posts : 482
Reputation : 69
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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