Back to basics - NEW Window of opportunity

Gannt charts.

Now we're talking.

All a bit silly isn't it.

What abductor would take such a risk?

BlueBag wrote:
What abductor would take such a risk?

exactly.
However many "Notes" he had been taking, the behaviour that night was, on the McCanns own testimony, different from that of every previous night.
So Kate's ludicrous statement that he had been "watching them" and "taking notes" would not have assisted him.
Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.
What he would have seen is people coming and going on a very frequent but completely irregular basis.
It makes no sense, and we are surely entitled to form opinions based on the available evidence,
and to 'purport the theory' that the entire thing is hogwash, designed to cover up something else.

Nip up the outside stairs to nick a camera left on the outside table - perhaps.
But to go in, sedate three children and take one of them away ?

Even the McCanns must know this is ludicrous.

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

BlueBag wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

OR... who was on the upper balcony sipping a cocktail.

BlueBag wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

OR... who was on the upper balcony sipping a cocktail.

Or . . . which route the local police officer might take that evening
Or . . . which burglar was also hoping for 5 UK passports
Or . . . which tractor driver was plotting revenge for being sacked two years before

PeterMac wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

OR... who was on the upper balcony sipping a cocktail.

Or . . . which route the local police officer might take that evening
Or . . . which burglar was also hoping for 5 UK passports
Or . . .  which tractor driver was plotting revenge for being sacked two years before

A Ninja... I'm telling you...

And the McCanns wonder why they are ridiculed and loathed in their own village.

They are the architects of this nonsense.They have created this backlash.

People can smell a rat when it is put under their noses.I don't really think that you are surprised by the public reaction, are you?

Just sent this thread to all the media who think we are "haters".

Cold reasoning will win the day.

Excellent posts PeterM and well done Bluebag for sending his excellent posts to the media.

PeterMac wrote:We have the two Stickerbook versions.  Let us try to put them into a sort of GANNT chart format.

8:45. pm
Matt returns 9.00-9.05 - listened at all - all shutters down
Jerry 9.10-9.15 in the room + all well  ? did he check
9.20/5 - Ella Jane checked 5D sees stranger & child
9.30 - Russ. Ella Matt check all 3
9.35 - Matt check see twins
9.50 - Russ returns
9.55 - Kate realised Madeleine
10pm - Alarm raised
 
Timeline 2 (as per sticker book above)
 
8.45pm. all assembled at poolside for food
9.00pm. Matt Oldfield listens at all 3 windows 5A, B, D ALL shutters down
9:15pm Gerry McCann looks at room A ? Door open to bedroom
9:20pm Jane Tanner checks 5D - [sees stranger walking carrying a child]
9.30 - 9.55pm Russell O'Brien in 5D. Poorly daughter
10:00pm. Alarm raised after Kate
 
Gerald

In each case a single point in time is given, but we must remember that
Tapas to side gate of 5A is One Minute
Side gate 5A to front door 5A is One Minute
Side Gate up stairs opening gate, baby gate, patio doors, putting on light etc  30 Seconds
Side gate to 5D one and half Minutes
And each of these must then be added both to the 'out' and 'back'
AND the time actually unlocking front doors, entering, seeing children, touching them, checking bedclothes, checking temperature under covers, giving them a little kiss,  (I am assuming most of them are normal parents here !)
So the yellow box is the time given, the brown boxes are the bits either side, during much of which time
the person involved will have been outside, crossing the car park, walking along the road, and passing 5A

Stickerbook Version 1
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />

Stickerbook version 2
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />

Stickerbook1 does leave a 9 minute gap, but this is neatly plugged in Stickerbook2, when it is observed that ROB remains in the apartment. He is in 5D, only two thin walls away from 5A, and it is a cold calm and quiet night. It is noticeable that Stickerbook2 does not mention MO's alleged check of 5A, and that has been discussed at length elsewhere.

But then we come to the typed Sequence of events, agreed to by the entire group, and served on the PJ by the Liaison officer.
It runs to three A4 pages but the essence is shown below.  (As usual I would welcome any observations and corrections.)

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


Suddenly we see a Window having been created, since was are now told that ROB came back to the restaurant at 2145, rather than at 2150, or 2155 according to Stickerbook1 & 2.

IF it had been known at the time that Tannerman was irrelevant and was just going to impede the search for three or four years, THEN one might see why this Window had suddenly been created, but it wasn't, and there was therefore no reason to do it.

Questions
Which of the three versions of the Truth are the McCanns and / or Grange relying on ?
Which of these versions are the ardent Pro-McCann supporters relying on, and why that one ?
Why that one, and what is wrong with the other ones ?

Excellent analysis! Really helps to see it in tabular/graphic form.

Have you done this for the rest of the holiday? It would be a task and a half but v. useful.

BlueBag wrote:Just sent this thread to all the media who think we are "haters".

What on earth makes you think this? The media couldn't give a monkey's about it beyond seeing an opportunity to shut down any sort of comment on the internet in a last desperate attempt to prevent their demise.

Okeydokey wrote: Excellent analysis!  Really helps to see it in tabular/graphic form.

Grange have access to HOLMES II and to ANACAPA, which will have produced this sort of analysis within a few hours - YES I mean a few HOURS - of their starting the investigation.
HOLMES II sorts out the differences between and among statements (LIES, in Police parlance)
ANACAPA produces time charts and diagrams to show whatever you ask it to.

Grange KNOW that this is a heap of ordure. The only problem is whether they are independent of someone else.
(Like the McCann / Brunt / Sky assassination squad ? JOKE C-R !)

PeterMac wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

OR... who was on the upper balcony sipping a cocktail.

Or . . . which route the local police officer might take that evening
Or . . . which burglar was also hoping for 5 UK passports
Or . . .  which tractor driver was plotting revenge for being sacked two years before

Incidentally, shown on Police photo, only 4 passports were on the table?

Whose was missing ? Why was it not needed?

Dead give away or what ?

aiyoyo wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Similarly he was not to know which of the children would be on vomit or diarrhoea duty that night.

Or who was playing football on the telly or who was walking the streets with a pushchair trying to get their child to sleep.

OR... who was on the upper balcony sipping a cocktail.

Or . . . which route the local police officer might take that evening
Or . . . which burglar was also hoping for 5 UK passports
Or . . .  which tractor driver was plotting revenge for being sacked two years before

Incidentally, shown on Police photo, only 4 passports were on the table?

Whose was missing ? Why was it not needed?

Dead give away or what ?

I think in the GNR reports it states they were given Maddie's passport almost the moment they arrived, together with a photograph. 

ROB mentions having the photographs printed and given to the GNR 'well before the PJ arrived' . 
ROB's movements that evening, both before and after zero hour (10 pm) don't add up. 
Tierney states she printed the photographs around midnight. 
ROB says he gave  them to the GNR before 11 pm. Silvia Battista confirms the handing over of the passport iirc. 
Photographs of 5a must have been taken afterwards. 

A reconstruction would have been worth watching if they'd all stuck to their individual stories. 

GNR arrived ca 11.00,  PJ ca. 12.00

tigger wrote:
Tierney states she printed the photographs around midnight. 
ROB says he gave  them to the GNR before 11 pm. Silvia Battista confirms the handing over of the passport iirc. 
Photographs of 5a must have been taken afterwards. 
A reconstruction would have been worth watching if they'd all stuck to their individual stories. 
GNR arrived ca 11.00,  PJ ca. 12.00

2 bits in bold.
So Tierney had "The camera' around midnight
The family were chucked out into another apartment
Photos of 5A were then taken
and the OTHER camera was still on the dining table.

PeterMac wrote:

tigger wrote:
Tierney states she printed the photographs around midnight. 
ROB says he gave  them to the GNR before 11 pm. Silvia Battista confirms the handing over of the passport iirc. 
Photographs of 5a must have been taken afterwards. 
A reconstruction would have been worth watching if they'd all stuck to their individual stories. 
GNR arrived ca 11.00,  PJ ca. 12.00

2 bits in bold.
So Tierney had "The camera' around midnight
The family were chucked out into another apartment
Photos of 5A were then taken
and the OTHER camera was still on the dining table.

Did I not read that the poster photo printed by AT was from a memory stick? So I suppose the camera could still have been on the table or the stick/card was not from that camera at all. Sorry I am a bit of a technophobe when it comes to gadgets so you are more likely to be correct than me.

Having seen the Gannt charts, and being told that the Police use HOLMES to build a timeline in a crime, how can experienced detectives in Operation Grange operate in such a state of Cognitive Dissonance?  Just what the hell is going on here?  A ridiculously short window of opportunity to enter an apartment, sedate three children, and remove the oldest and biggest, all the while people are randomly roaming around outside, and entering apartments.  How can people still believe this BS?

They have to because they had no different option to go at.
I do not consider operation grange any longer as a unique brittish investigation. They only had been given an mandate to investigate the abduction hypothesis by the portuguese .
That means the parents could never be suspects, just because legally they could not be. It is technically impossible for parents with full custody over a child to abduct a child.
 
Only if one of the parents make an accusation to the other parent, that he or she had abduct a child it could.
 
If you think in everything that is coming out of grange, as ‘in the light of an abduction’, it make far more sense.
 
The slips of sir b., not could communicate to the press and the people as normally, it is not thinkable portugal could tell the brittish what they could say or not say in a true brittish investigation, the parents are no suspects or persons of interest, the e-fits of smithman.
 
The only onion to peel back is abduction, not any other point or hypothesis . So even if they did see information from their research in the case, they can’t work it out. The only can handle it to the portuguese, because it is outside the remit and mandate of og.
 
All that was done on the timeline was creating room for an abduction, there was just to little possible to leave room for a tannerman, that would have discredited the t9 to much, so it was focus on smithman. Smithman don’t have to be a person at all, he is only important as the last not known man in the hypothetical abduction.
 
Matt’s testimony is offered, but also the witnesses like the carpenters, the chef of the kitchen, the people in the penthouse, and there where others too, who did not see anybody at all on the street around 5a, between 21.00 and 22.00 hours. Et voila, there is the abduction gap!
 
All we did for to long is believing in a smokescreen, an impression that operation grange could and would look into the disappearance of madeleine mccann, they don’t.
The remit is only to look into an abduction. If redwood states he want to find the people who did it, he means just an abductor. The parents are not in his task until the portuguese would let the brittish give the permission to take over the case.
 
The reviewing stage was different, a review is not an investigation at all, it won’t come with competences, under a review you can’t bring in people to ask questions, the only thing you could do is ask politely to talk to you. It has no further juridical consequences at all.
 
Yes, sir b. Was right, they did review maybe also the possible murder of madeleine mccann, but they did not investigate it or not beyond murder as a result of an abduction. That was what they did in the last searches in portugal.
 
As long the portuguese will claim territory on this case, there can’t be an unique brittish investigation or a brittish trail. That would be seen as harassment into the state affairs of portugal. All they do must be seen as in assisting the portuguese investigation. All they got was crumbs.
 
Only if you still believe in an abduction, operation grange is yours. It doesn't make out what 38 senior police officers of high quality think between themselves, they can’t simple work outside the remit and the mandate they got, that is just all there is.

PeterMac wrote:

tigger wrote:
Tierney states she printed the photographs around midnight. 
ROB says he gave  them to the GNR before 11 pm. Silvia Battista confirms the handing over of the passport iirc. 
Photographs of 5a must have been taken afterwards. 
A reconstruction would have been worth watching if they'd all stuck to their individual stories. 
GNR arrived ca 11.00,  PJ ca. 12.00

2 bits in bold.
So Tierney had "The camera' around midnight
The family were chucked out into another apartment
Photos of 5A were then taken
and the OTHER camera was still on the dining table.

And so is a, what I think, map, folded a certain way.
IMO

I'd like to purport a theory. Just a theory.

Kate went to dinner on her own Thu night. Gerry was to follow on and join her there. He took a long time.
He hadn't returned to 5A at 9ish - he was only just leaving it to head for the tapas.

Please pull to pieces.

palm tree wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

tigger wrote:
Tierney states she printed the photographs around midnight. 
ROB says he gave  them to the GNR before 11 pm. Silvia Battista confirms the handing over of the passport iirc. 
Photographs of 5a must have been taken afterwards. 
A reconstruction would have been worth watching if they'd all stuck to their individual stories. 
GNR arrived ca 11.00,  PJ ca. 12.00

2 bits in bold.
So Tierney had "The camera' around midnight
The family were chucked out into another apartment
Photos of 5A were then taken
and the OTHER camera was still on the dining table.

And so is a, what I think, map, folded a certain way.
IMO

I think it's the colouring book.

Lance De Boils wrote:I'd like to purport a theory. Just a theory.

Kate went to dinner on her own Thu night. Gerry was to follow on and join her there. He took a long time.
He hadn't returned to 5A at 9ish - he was only just leaving it to head for the tapas.

Please pull to pieces.

I think this is perfectly possible - we certainly cant believe any of their statements.  The fact that it was mentioned that Kate referred to Gerry taking a long time and possibly watching football supports this theory.
If he had gone wit her to TAPAS then there was never any need for her to refer to his taking a long time.

With such a lot to do on that evening then perfectly feasible that he went long after she had gone.... if your theory is correct what does it imply?

This is something that keeps bugging me.

If G&K went to dinner together at 8.30, arriving at the tapas bar just after, there surely wasn't time for Kate to be moaning about Gerry taking a long time before Jane got up and left the table.

In the company of a few friends, with the wine flowing, how long would it take for someone to realise that their other half had been gone for 'too long' for what they were supposed to be doing? If Mrs de Boils had gone to the toilet, I probably wouldn't even notice she was taking ages till she'd been gone for at least half an hour. Maybe that's just me.

Yes - i thought of this the other day when I saw it being discussed on another thread about Gerry's timeline and that he could only have been away less than 10 mins or so (cant remember the exact details).  
It rings true that Kate may have said something like 'I bet he's watching the footy' in response to one of the friends wondering where Gerry was.
But she would have only said this after a good long period of time, IMO, 30 mins or so as you describe.
So I think your theory makes sense... 

It is logical to imagine if they were staging an abduction and GM was trying to 'set the scene' that he would take quite a long time..

The stuff about Kate "moaning on about Gerry being away for a long time"  came as far as I can be certain, from that ludicrous re-construction,
stage managed by Gerry and directed by Gerry / Corner or whoever.
The one where eventually Jane broke down in tears as Gerry trashed everything she had said, and effectively called her a liar, in front of the audience of the world.
Jane told the story but had clearly forgotten that in her statement she had said that she left the table exactly five minutes after Gerry.
Which means that given that it takes ONE minute Tapas to stairs,
and then a finite but calculable time - second gate / stairs / baby gate / patio windows / curtains / view children / have a pee, curtains / patio doors / baby gate / stairs / gate
and THEN Stand talking to JW
at which point JT crams herself past the two of them with the pushchair on a normal 2m pavement

means that this particular story about Kate complaining is a FABRICATION.  
A lie.
Kate of course makes no mention of it in her autobiography, so JT is on her own with this particular lie.  Even if she had been set up to tell it, she has been dumped.

Lance De Boils wrote:This is something that keeps bugging me.

If G&K went to dinner together at 8.30, arriving at the tapas bar just after, there surely wasn't time for Kate to be moaning about Gerry taking a long time before Jane got up and left the table.

In the company of a few friends, with the wine flowing, how long would it take for someone to realise that their other half had been gone for 'too long' for what they were supposed to be doing? If Mrs de Boils had gone to the toilet, I probably wouldn't even notice she was taking ages till she'd been gone for at least half an hour. Maybe that's just me.

There are so many improbable things we are asked to believe...not least, remember, that they didn't have mobile phones or watches (thanks Clarence - who then had to revise that to just didn't have their mobile phones, you see, so couldn't communicate with each other, because these highly paid professionals, medical included, are not the sort of people to have working mobile phones about them on holiday)!

Not having mobile phones is essential to being able to weave in these bits of nonsense. Otherwise: "WTF R U up to G? Is it that trt frm the nite B4?!!??"....and maybe "K - jus seen man wiv child lkd like M - u sure she's safe???"

None of the stories fit together.
even allowing for imperfect witness recall most of them are plain nonsense, and only when you try to draw up the time line does it become clear that
thy have well and truly stuffed it up.
Yet again it is the inclusion of too much details which does that. The hall mark of a lying child.

"at 9.04 BY HIS WATCH" . . . Oh come on !

Too much detail yep I think that's right, but sadly she wouldn't go into any detail with the police when she was asked those 48 QUESTIONS.

Oh it was the lawyer who advised her to keep her trap shut - yeah, but she was NOT obliged to listen to that advice now was she?

PeterMac wrote:None of the stories fit together.
even allowing for imperfect witness recall most of them are plain nonsense, and only when you try to draw up the time line does it become clear that
thy have well and truly stuffed it up.
Yet again it is the inclusion of too much details which does that. The hall mark of a lying child.

"at 9.04 BY HIS WATCH" . . .   Oh come on !

But he wasn't wearing a watch, none of them were wearing watches, honest! Straight from the horses' , i.e. Clarence's mouth. This, according to him, explained the discrepancies in their statements. None of them wearing watches, yet knowing exactly when 15/30 minutes had passed and the need for another listen at the shutters or having a quick look in a pitch dark room.


Also not using mobiles although the various masts around PdL do not seem to agree on that point. Not only were the Tapas 9 not wearing watches, time became an elastic concept, Mrs. Fenn not hearing the commotion that took place around 10.00 pm untill 10.30 which she knew to be the right time as BBC news had just ended. Unless BBC decided on another time to broadcast the ten o"clock news that night.

(In fact one of Clarence Mitchell’s more notorious outright falsehoods was to the effect that none of the group had watches or mobile phones with them, and that therefore the exact times were not to be taken as wholly accurate. [31]
Unfortunately for him he said this nearly a year after the Tapas7 group had drawn up two separate and detailed time lines on the night, and a third mutually agreed amalgamation of both, [32] but also the statements of the Tapas 7, of Gerry McCann “When asked at what time he went to check on the children the night Madeleine disappeared, he recalls that this was around 21:04 according to his watch”, [33], and subsequently Kate McCann in her book “by his watch”. [34] , all contradict his assertion.
He backtracked six weeks later. [35] Quite why Mitchell invented, or was asked to tell this particular lie is difficult to understand.)

31 The Guardian 06 April 2008 
32 http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap21
33 Arguido questioning of Gerald Patrick McCann, 7th of September 2007
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html#sta3
34 “madeleine”, by Kate McCann, ibid. p.70
35 Yorkshire Post 29 May 2008 

31 Mitchell said he was not surprised by the inconsistencies in the initial accounts. 'You had nine people in a bar without watches on, without mobile phones, and absolute panic set in when they realised what had happened.”
32 •
33 When asked at what time he went to check on the children the night Madeleine disappeared, he recalls that this was around 21:04 according to his watch.
34 “After ordering his food, Gerry left to so the first check just before 9.05 by his watch.”
35 "It was made out to be the biggest 'conspiracy' since the Diana 'conspiracy,'" says Mitchell. "Some of the group (of friends in the tapas restaurant) had their watches on that night, and others didn't.”


And this lying creature wants to be an MP ! !