Dr. Martin Roberts - Seventeen come Sunday

With thanks to McCannfiles:

EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
01 October 2012

SEVENTEEN COME SUNDAY

"There could be two key bits of information that individually don't seem key but put together could give you some valuable information that could take you one step closer to finding Madeleine." (Kate McCann, 2010).

Seventeen Come Sunday is the title of an old English folk song and regular 'Proms' favourite. It's a simple statement. Looking forward toward a birthday event, it is as good an example as any of thinking ahead. Birthday celebrations are customarily planned in advance and, certainly when children are young, usually recorded for posterity. Madeleine McCann's disappearance was not such a happy eventuality, but Kate McCann has nevertheless seen to it that a record of the immediately preceding period exists. Hence we may read in her book ('Madeleine,' p.57):

"In the afternoon Gerry and I decided to take the children down to the beach. To be honest, I think they'd have been just as happy to go back to their clubs, but we wanted to do something slightly different with them, just the five of us."

And, two pages later:

"We dropped the kids off at their clubs for the last hour and a half, meeting up with them as usual for tea," (p.59).

The 'afternoon' in question was that of Tuesday, May 1st 2007.

So much for what was done, and why possibly no one else saw Madeleine early that afternoon, because she was in her parents' company outside the Ocean Club perimeter at the time.

Coincidentally, on the same page in her book, Kate McCann reinforces the importance of record keeping. As she tells us:

"Gerry and I would soon be painstakingly trying to extract from our brains every tiny incident, no matter how small, that might have been significant. Armed with notebook, pen and dated photographs, I would be challenging myself to piece together as comprehensive an outline of the sequence of events as I could."

During that fateful first week in May, the McCanns were on holiday. They had not signed up for a conference or sponsored training, hence their presence, and that of their children, at any venue, and at any particular time, was entirely optional. They were under no obligation to attend anywhere at all and could have spent the entire week in their apartment had they so wished. Kate's description of the spontaneous beach trip makes the situation perfectly clear. As for the Ocean Club 'nannies,' they could not have cared less if Madeleine McCann never appeared at the Kids' club at any stage. Their responsibility was guardianship of those actually present, not preoccupation with absentees. And it is in this context that we should consider the function of 'registers.'

In any school or kindergarten the register serves a two-fold purpose. Like an accounting 'day book' and journal combined, it shows who is present on the day and, by implication, who might need to be contacted in the event of emergency. It also serves as a vehicle for future analysis, when the benefit of good record keeping becomes abundantly clear, albeit in retrospect. While the Ocean Club junior staff needed to observe the first function, they would have had no interest at all in the second - a casual register kept in respect of an optional facility therefore.

Besides telling readers of 'Madeleine' what the family did that Tuesday afternoon, Kate's explanation of the beach trip tells of something that was not done. Madeleine did not join her young 'lobster' group friends at the Kids' club immediately after lunch. Whatever her innate charms or talents, she was physically incapable of being in two places at the same time. The same anecdote, embellished as it is with angst over the ice creams, tells us, inadvertently perhaps, of something else the McCanns did that afternoon - They deliberately falsified, personally or vicariously, entries in the Kids' club registers for the second period of the day.

There can be no doubt that is what happened, since Kate's 'account of the truth' explains with impeccable clarity how the whole family went to the beach that afternoon to do 'something slightly different;' in Madeleine's case different from – going to the beach, which is what 'lobster' group attendees at the Kids' club that afternoon were scheduled to do. Equally unmistakeable is the signature of one G McCann in the Kids' club register, alongside the name Madeleine, for 2.30 p.m. when, according to Kate she only made it for the last hour and a half (i.e., from 4.00 p.m.). The parents, by the way, are recorded as being at Tennis or the Pool. Meanwhile Kate was busy elsewhere signing in the twins at exactly the same time.

And yet the timing of Madeleine's afternoon arrival at, and later departure from, the kids' club that Tuesday afternoon (14.30 and 17.30 p.m. respectively) appears to receive confirmation from information archived in the case files and which derives in some measure from Ocean Club 'nanny' Catriona Baker's (aka 'Cat nanny') statement to Police (Catriona Baker, p.88 re: 01.05.07 in 12 Outros Apensos Vol. XII Annex 59), although itself not entirely consistent with the original crèche registers.

Such a small thing perhaps. Then again, so is nuclear fission.

No doubt the likes of that renowned 'source close to the McCanns' would bluster and 'pooh pooh' these observations. 'Nothing to them. The creche records are perfectly accurate. Kate merely got her days mixed up when re-telling the story. It's been several years don't forget.'

Perhaps it is the carefully constructed book which is in error and not the Ocean Club records after all. A serious problem for anyone engaged in maintaining a lie however is the obvious requirement to reproduce it faithfully. The deceiver has to be sure to tell the same lie - repeatedly. A sure-fire way of exposing oneself to an inevitable truth on the other hand is to tell a similar, additional lie, since this does not lessen the risk of detection but increases it. That is exactly what Kate McCann has done in 'Madeleine.'

Talking about May 3rd this time, she writes (p.66):

"Together we took Sean and Amelie back to the Toddler Club at around 2.40 p.m. and dropped Madeleine off with the Minis ten minutes later. Ella was already there...Having arranged for Gerry to meet the children, I opted to go for a run along the beach...I wondered whether Madeleine had been OK about staying behind at Mini Club when Russ or Jane had collected Ella.

"I had finished my run by five-thirty at the Tapas area, where I found Madeleine and the twins already having their tea with Gerry."

There is no ambiguity here. For Kate to meet up with the rest of her family at 5.30 p.m. at the Tapas Bar, husband Gerry (or someone else at the very least) must have collected all the children previously, Kate 'having arranged for Gerry to meet the children.' The minis register for May 3rd does indeed record Madeleine's arrival at 2.50 p.m., ten minutes after the twins were deposited and with Ella already there. But who signed Madeleine out again afterwards? Why, none other than Kate McCann - at 5.30 p.m. Exactly the moment when she tells readers of her chronicle that she encountered Madeleine elsewhere, already in the company of Gerry and the twins.

The significance of these duplicitous accounts resides, as ever, in the question 'why?'

Attendance at venues/events was voluntary don't forget. So if a child would not be present at one or other crèche facility, for whatever reason, then no one would care over much (one less to worry about really). After all, any child could succumb to a mild illness and be back in a day or two. It certainly would not have been necessary to 'sign in' just so as to secure immediate leave of absence. In a nutshell, there would have been absolutely no point whatsoever, at the time, in recording the presence of a child who was in fact absent. As an entry in the 'day book' it was meaningless. In the journal however...

Since it is Kate McCann herself who appears intent on calling both parents' registration activities into question, one is obliged to face up to the contradictions and consider exactly what set of circumstances might have led either or both of them to lay a deliberately false trail. Given that spurious register entries will have served no present purpose, they could only make sense if they served a future one (see also: The Cerberus Problem, McCannfiles, 13 August 2011).

Kate has, on more than one occasion, coined the neologism 'findable' in respect of her missing daughter. Deliberate falsification of the Ocean club's crèche registers, not by any abductor but by the McCanns themselves, would suggest that prior to the evening of Thursday May 3rd 2007, the parents already knew Madeleine would not be seventeen come Sunday, but 'findable' by Friday.

A very clever piece of forensic analysis.
Come on Clarence. Give us an answer.

Tigger, I will move this to Latest News for a bit so that everyone can see and read it, if that's ok. Will move back later

For the record

"In the afternoon Gerry and I decided to take the children down to the beach. To be honest, I think they'd have been just as happy to go back to their clubs, but we wanted to do something slightly different with them, just the five of us."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20[112-120]/processopdf01page116-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01-pages-107-111[105-109]/processopdf01page110-CrecheRecords1.jpg

Cat Baker Statement 10th May 2007
- We were told by Catriona that the only days they went to the beach were Tuesday afternoon (1 May 2007) between 15:30 and 16:30, on Wednesday (the next day) at the same time and on Thursday between 10 and 11 o'clock

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA-B.htm

------------

"Talking about May 3rd this time, she writes (p.66): I had finished my run by five-thirty at the Tapas area, where I found Madeleine and the twins already having their tea with Gerry."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01-pages-107-111[105-109]/processopdf01page107-CrecheRecords3.jpg


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20[112-120]/processopdf01page119-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg

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

On Thursday the 3rd of May 2007, I remember Gerry having accompanied Madeleine to the club between 9h15 and 9h20 in the morning. I do not remember who came to pick her up for lunch but after she returned in the afternoon for a dive/swim. These activities were realized with the other children. On this day I remember that we sailed and I saw friends of the McCanns on the beach, David and Jane. Around 14h45 Madeleine returned to the Minis Club on top of the reception but I do not remember who accompanied her. This afternoon we went swimming. Kate went to get Madeleine from the Tapas Bar area and according to what I remember she was wearing sporting clothes and I assumed that she was practicing some form of athletics. It was around 15h25/18h00. I think that Gerry was playing tennis.

Finn wrote:http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CAT_BAKER.htm

On Thursday the 3rd of May 2007, I remember Gerry having accompanied Madeleine to the club between 9h15 and 9h20 in the morning. I do not remember who came to pick her up for lunch but after she returned in the afternoon for a dive/swim. These activities were realized with the other children. On this day I remember that we sailed and I saw friends of the McCanns on the beach, David and Jane. Around 14h45 Madeleine returned to the Minis Club on top of the reception but I do not remember who accompanied her. This afternoon we went swimming. Kate went to get Madeleine from the Tapas Bar area and according to what I remember she was wearing sporting clothes and I assumed that she was practicing some form of athletics. It was around 15h25/18h00. I think that Gerry was playing tennis.

That's a rather wide margin! Over 2.5 hours - so is it an error in the statement or does CB think that's a good approximate time?
The tennis question has been addressed both here and by Blacksmith I believe, since the CCTV evidence of the Paraiso Bar is evidence of quite a different story and very different timeline.

tigger wrote:

Finn wrote:http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CAT_BAKER.htm

On Thursday the 3rd of May 2007, I remember Gerry having accompanied Madeleine to the club between 9h15 and 9h20 in the morning. I do not remember who came to pick her up for lunch but after she returned in the afternoon for a dive/swim. These activities were realized with the other children. On this day I remember that we sailed and I saw friends of the McCanns on the beach, David and Jane. Around 14h45 Madeleine returned to the Minis Club on top of the reception but I do not remember who accompanied her. This afternoon we went swimming. Kate went to get Madeleine from the Tapas Bar area and according to what I remember she was wearing sporting clothes and I assumed that she was practicing some form of athletics. It was around 15h25/18h00. I think that Gerry was playing tennis.

That's a rather wide margin! Over 2.5 hours - so is it an error in the statement or does CB think that's a good approximate time?
The tennis question has been addressed both here and by Blacksmith I believe, since the CCTV evidence of the Paraiso Bar is evidence of quite a different story and very different timeline.

I thought that 15.25 was a typo in the translation but it's on the PJ official copy.

What makes it interesting is when you read the first statement from 2007/05/06 from Catriona

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA.htm

"In continued answer to our questions, she responds that she has known the McCann family since last Sunday, April 29th, when the McCann parents placed their daughter in the "Mini Club". She adds that until Thursday May 3rd, the little girl came every day."

It's a lot of confusion and ambiguity from the star witness.

Finn wrote:What makes it interesting is when you read the first statement from 2007/05/06 from Catriona

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA.htm

"In continued answer to our questions, she responds that she has known the McCann family since last Sunday, April 29th, when the McCann parents placed their daughter in the "Mini Club". She adds that until Thursday May 3rd, the little girl came every day."

It's a lot of confusion and ambiguity from the star witness.

" the little girl came every day" is imo purposely said to support the mccanns abduction claim....cuddle cat was invited to Rothley Towers in November in 2007 to 'see how she doing'

Think about cat bakers reaction to the mccanns abduction claim..."said by friends to have been hit hard by her charge's disappearance, even being offered trauma counselling by Mark Warner Holidays."...."within 24 hours of that interview Ms Baker was dispatched by Mark Warner to take up a new position in the Greek resort of San Agostino along with four other members of staff...."The young nanny, described as 'fun and vivacious', has been deeply affected by Madeleine's disappearance, telling friends of nights without sleep and a complete loss of appetite."...."'I was her nanny, so it's been tough for me, you wouldn't recognise me"....."'It's hit me so hard I've hardly slept or eaten"...."My mum came to see me, but transferring me to "San Ag" has put me back at stage one as I am so stressed again"...."I have not been out of the house much."....."I am trying to cope, but not really liking "San Ag"....Mark Warner did not return Ms Baker to Portugal from Greece and she has since left the company. She is now a live-in nanny looking after three children. Her location is being withheld on the request of the McCanns.

This reaction from someone who only knew the child for just 4 days!!!! plus had absolutely nothing to do with the abduction.....Pull the other one, if you hardly know someone and yet have this deep reaction then there can only be one reason for it.....

By contrast, the parents of the missing child who knew her for 4 years and not 4 days had a rather different reaction to Maddie's disappearance


Doesn't quite add up

What an interesting piece, JD. C Mitchell and the McCann couple must have been impressed with the diligent research the Daily Mail conducted. And very thoughtful of them to protect the nanny.

In her first statement Cat doesn't recall seeing Madeleine on Sunday morning though she came every day until Thursday. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.

There's another piece in the files about researching the routes to the beach, they went Tuesday pm, Wednesday pm and Thursday am but no mention if Madeleine went each day.

So if the family of 5 went to the beach on Tuesday afternoon as Kate recalls in her book she's not only admitting to "doctoring" the attendance sheets but as I've seen here already she's admitting to dropping her daughter back to an empty classroom or discrediting her star witness. But it's worth it because she gets to convey that Madeleine got a few stares from the locals.

And again on Thursday morning Jane tells us she saw Madeleine out sailing. The initial nanny statements are a little unclear but in her later statement Cat has a clearer recollection of the event yet Kate merely states Fiona didn't see her. You'd think Madeleine's sailing activity would get a mention during lunch on their last day as a family of 5 but instead Kate recalls Madeleine's peach pink smock top and shorts and no cardigan and that she was bound to capture a few admiring glances.

But there's Madeleine's attire on these days, you'd expect some communication from the creche. Tuesday, tennis, dress your child in comfortable clothing and don't forget their trainers. Thursday, sailing and swimming. Dress your child in warm clothing and don't forget a warm sweater/cardi. What a tangled web.

Re the creche records, I would doubt very much that any of the nannies checked them at all. You're sitting there with a bunch of children, another child is dropped off or you see a parent at the end of the room near the creche sheets, you're not going to walk over and check what they're doing or if they've signed correctly. Unless something happened, the creche sheets would barely get a glance.
For that reason alone, I think a nanny would be happy for some parents to adjust the entries after the event - 'to help her' and to clarify the lists for the police.

One thing the creche sheets definitely do not prove imo, is that a given child was at the creche at a given time. All it proves, its that someone signed the child in and out and exactly when that was done can also not be proved.

A symbiotic relationship so to speak between the parents and the nannies.

tigger wrote:Re the creche records, I would doubt very much that any of the nannies checked them at all. You're sitting there with a bunch of children, another child is dropped off or you see a parent at the end of the room near the creche sheets, you're not going to walk over and check what they're doing or if they've signed correctly. Unless something happened, the creche sheets would barely get a glance.
For that reason alone, I think a nanny would be happy for some parents to adjust the entries after the event - 'to help her' and to clarify the lists for the police.

One thing the creche sheets definitely do not prove imo, is that a given child was at the creche at a given time. All it proves, its that someone signed the child in and out and exactly when that was done can also not be proved.

A symbiotic relationship so to speak between the parents and the nannies.

Exactly.

So with this in mind how do you explain this reaction from a nanny who knew the child for barely just 4 days, not even 4 days if you take into account the Sagres beach trip on 30th April, beach trip with kate/gerry mccann & twins on May 1st and the Zaival beach whenever this was...This makes even less days cuddle cat nanny ever knew of Maddie...2 days!

"said by friends to have been hit hard by her charge's disappearance, even being offered trauma counselling by Mark Warner Holidays."...."within 24 hours of that interview Ms Baker was dispatched by Mark Warner to take up a new position in the Greek resort of San Agostino along with four other members of staff...."The young nanny, described as 'fun and vivacious', has been deeply affected by Madeleine's disappearance, telling friends of nights without sleep and a complete loss of appetite."...."'I was her nanny, so it's been tough for me, you wouldn't recognise me"....."'It's hit me so hard I've hardly slept or eaten"...."My mum came to see me, but transferring me to "San Ag" has put me back at stage one as I am so stressed again"...."I have not been out of the house much."....."I am trying to cope, but not really liking "San Ag"....Mark Warner did not return Ms Baker to Portugal from Greece and she has since left the company. She is now a live-in nanny looking after three children. Her location is being withheld on the request of the McCanns.

Kate's bewk content is written with the general public readership in mind.
She wont worry about it being used for forensic analyst, or she is past caring about that because she knows she is home and dry.
All that matters to her when she writes that bewk is FINANCIAL GAIN. Nothing else.
It clearly isn't about Madeleine. The poor child hardly got a mention except where the parents want to set events as records.

Portugal Resident
28 August, 2008
McCanns relied heavily on others to care for their children
 
CHILD CARERS working at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz noticed that the McCann children spent the maximum time available in the care of the resort's kids club according to police files released to the media surrounding the case.
Madeleine was described by Gerry as being an extrovert, very active and having happy relationships with other children. She would never go with a stranger and he states clearly that she was not taking any medication.

In a statement made by one of the nannies working at the Ocean Club, Madeleine was described as being a calm, beautiful and happy child.

However, she was portrayed as being more shy than the other children at the kids club.
unquote

CHILD CARERS working at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz noticed that the McCann children spent the maximum time available in the care of the resort's kids club

Oh yes, look at the twins Jellyfish/Starfish club creche sheets...They were the top 2 names on the sheets every single day!...except the day after on May 4th!

The mccanns wanted them out of the way ASAP...To quote fiona webster " to give them normality"...If you notice more...since the afternoon of 30th April the 2 names that weren't around to sign in or out their child (apart from one time each) is gerry mccann and jane tanner. The 2 who were at the forefront of this scam. We know why they were not around to take their kids to creche and left it to their respective partners

Since the afternoon of 30th April only kate mccann signed in and out the twins (except the afternoon of May 2nd)...before this it was gerry mccann but it all changed after this afternoon

- and another bump.

Remember what the forum used to be like? Discussions, links and references.

His new piece is interesting, about a corps being introduced to 5a after seen in the shop IMO I love DR MARTIN ROBERTS    

2014-07-05

Justformaddie wrote:His new piece is interesting, about a corps being introduced to 5a after seen in the shop IMO I love DR MARTIN ROBERTS    

There is a sticky with all Dr. Ronerts' articles:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9404-dr-martin-roberts-on-mccannfiles?highlight=Dr+++Roberts

tigger wrote:2014-07-05

Justformaddie wrote:His new piece is interesting, about a corps being introduced to 5a after seen in the shop IMO I love DR MARTIN ROBERTS    

There is  a sticky with all Dr. Ronerts' articles:  

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9404-dr-martin-roberts-on-mccannfiles?highlight=Dr+++Roberts

Thank you, tigger, he's amazing!