Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

jeanmonroe wrote:HKP Today at 7:58 pm
.
@ Richard Henshaw. Thanks I would post some of it but as you yourself will know guests are limited.
--------------------------------------

HKP? Why don't you just 'register'?

Your 'input', on other topics/threads/posts would be welcome.

In fact, why don't all the 'guests' register.

'You' are all 'here' now anyway.

'Fresh EYES' and all that!

jeanmonroe wrote:RE: my last 'post'

WHERE and WHEN and WHO 'from', did CEOP get their 'cutesy', (at least six MONTHS?) out of date FIRST 'photo', of Madeleine, to upload onto their website, within hours, days, of the 'disappearance'?

worriedmum wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:RE: my last 'post'

WHERE and WHEN and WHO 'from', did CEOP get their 'cutesy', (at least six MONTHS?) out of date FIRST 'photo', of Madeleine, to upload onto their website, within hours, days, of the 'disappearance'?

HKP wrote:@jeanmunroe. I was outed (although I wasn't hiding) as Hongkong Phooey, I've been banned from here for being quarrelsome & argumentative (someone was having a laugh considering what's been said even on this very thread). I have a new kennel however I felt this was potentially a dynamite subject and wanted to get the best out of both forums by taking the opportunity to post as a Guest here. Apologies for going off topic.

Get'emGonçalo wrote:

HKP wrote:@jeanmunroe. I was outed (although I wasn't hiding) as Hongkong Phooey, I've been banned from here for being quarrelsome & argumentative (someone was having a laugh considering what's been said even on this very thread). I have a new kennel however I felt this was potentially a dynamite subject and wanted to get the best out of both forums by taking the opportunity to post as a Guest here. Apologies for going off topic.

I've reactivated your account if you would like to post with your account so you can upload information.

HelenMeg wrote:

Claire25 wrote:

The Tony Bennett wrote:

XXXXXXXX wrote:"Lizzy Hideho Taylor
1 hr · Edited
I just spoke to Chris about the WBM issues to ask if there could be a further email about the reason the CEOP page appeared on April 30th. His response was that the email he sent to me initially was an acknowledgement of their error in the Timestamp (something to do with a 'subset') and that there really isn't anything else they can reply to.
He has become aware of the 'speculation' but basically cannot respond any further and suggested that if anyone has any queries about anything regarding the error and if they feel that there may be major implications they should contact the police and he will furnish them with any information necessary."

That's not an honest response.

After seeing that report from Lizzy Taylor, to me the balance of the argument has swung again in favour of those who assert there WAS a 'capture' of a 'mccann.html' file by Wayback Machine on the CEOP website at 11.58am on 30 April 2007.

"Something to do with a subset" is not an answer at all.

And if he has got the answer, how many minutes does it take for him to write out an explanation and give it to Lizzy Taylor or anyone else who has enquired about their alleged error?

A subset error that only affects the CEOP site on 30 April 2007?

What subset error and how many other timestamps are affected?

And as for: 'Go to the police', this says to me: "This is very sensitive and we're not telling you anything more - ever. Now leave us alone".

Spot on.  This is exactly what I think.

I've been following and whilst I don't really understand the technical side and also can imagine it's easy to cling onto the hope that some concrete evidence is found, theres some twitchy behaviour going on from some people who seem desperate to convince everyone it's all an error just so we all don't look stupid.  

I've very much swung to the view that the page existed on 30/04 now too.  I don't understand the arguments, but more of the posters in that camp seem genuine.

I've also read the thread and arguments. I have seen nothing to make me believe that the crawler did not find the CEOP McCann page on 30th April. We seem to be bending over backwards to find a reason rather than believing the simple. If Madeleine died earlier in the week then this ties in logically with a call to CEOP from a VIP. 'look we have a massive problem. A small girl has died out here. Its rather awkward and I need to pull in a favour. Due to the intense sensitivity of guests out here we need to cover this as a paedophile abduction - you will be called - please be on standby'...
 The next thing we know, someone is creating a CEOP file in anticipation.

Although I am still to be persuaded on death earlier in the week,  if this file has a valid date stamp of 30th April then its not too surprising, along with a hurried return to Pd L by RM and the beginning of abnormal mobile phone use of Kate Mc Cann (cant remember the exact dates of when she started abnormal use of mobile but it perhaps ties in - taken from thread here: -  On Monday 30th April 2007, neither of the McCanns telephones activated the Luz transmitters. This looks very odd, especially as they were around the Ocean Club to shuffle the kids to and from the creches. On this afternoon, Madeleine remained in the Creche for only 15 minutes and was picked up by her mother at 15.30. We do not know what Madeleine did for the rest of the day, but it is possible she was being fractious. Interestingly, a friend of Mrs and Mr McCann supposedly told the 'Dispatches' team that made a TV program on the tragedy, that 'Madeleine was a screamer'. This could be interpreted in one of two ways, but any use of the past tense in referring to Madeleine would be very significant. It was such a past tense referral, to her supposedly living children, that alerted the FBI to their murder by Susan Smith, their mother.

On Tuesday 1st May 2007, Gerald McCann's handset was silent all day. Kate McCanns mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the days calls have been deleted from the handset and there is no nothing in the CD from her mobile provider. Another activation took place at 12.17. The Creche records show that Gerald McCann picked up Madeleine at 12.20 (a bit earlier than usual) but Kate McCann's call at 12.17 does not appear to have been to him, (because his mobile was not activated at all that day). Kate McCann dealt with her last call before leaving for the Tapas Bar at 20.35.

Furthermore:


.

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

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]  Guest on Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:03 am
Monday 30th April

Compared to other days, this day appears to be blackout day.

Kate, no calls or texts. Phone appears to be switched off.

Gerry, no calls or texts. Phone appears to be switched off.

GuestGuest

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

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

  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:17 pm
Tuesday 1 May

Kate McCann involved in at least 13 mobile phone conversations and/or texts. The PJ log omits to indicate with whom - but they must know. A whole bunch of these were just before 2230 that evening.
Gerry McCann's mobile appears to be silent, but since Annex 37 of the PJ report has been withheld, it is impossible to say for certain.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Researcher

Posts:  617
Join date:  2010-10-13
Location:  Catalunya, Spain

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

Or is this just one huge distraction to take us away from Goncalo's appeal  and the Fund?

HKP wrote:@ Get'emGonçalo. Whilst a generous offer I'm going to decline I won't be a member (as such) where the outrageous attack on the likes of  PeterMac the other day go unpunished, I was banned for much, much less. Thanks but no thanks I am happy just to 'guest' (even though the enter code sequence is a pain in the bum)

Apologies for off topic again (one of my pet hates  )

HelenMeg wrote:

HKP wrote:@ Get'emGonçalo. Whilst a generous offer I'm going to decline I won't be a member (as such) where the outrageous attack on the likes of  PeterMac the other day go unpunished, I was banned for much, much less. Thanks but no thanks I am happy just to 'guest' (even though the enter code sequence is a pain in the bum)

Apologies for off topic again (one of my pet hates  )

Oh I'm slightly sad about that - I was hoping that we might get to a time when we could wander freely between both communities - like in the EU.... I have no problem with either community There's things I like about both - but felt awkward about flipping between both

Doug D wrote:Verdi:
 
‘I took a random selection of pages from the CEOP website, going back to 2005, and pasted onto Wayback machine, every single one of which showed the first grab shots to be either dated 19th September 2010 or 6th October 2010 (including a press release concerning Madeleine McCanns disappearance from 2007) - coinciding nicely with the CEOPs merger with SOCA etc.  Could be wrong but this indicates to me that the CEOP was not accessible to the web crawler prior to that time so where do the April 2007 + come from?’
 
Too little too late I believe. Many of the old CEOP pages have been whooshed and diverted to the ‘CEOP Command’ page.
 
Using:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
you can however still go back to the very first CEOP Press Release captured on 24^th December 2005, announcing the launch of the new CEOP Centre in April 2006 and tab forward from there.
 
 
HKP:
 
‘was there an actual crawl on the 30/04/07 that included the Ceop site, if there was then what was captured, if there wasn't then what's gone wrong.’
 
If you look at the ‘Wayback captures bar’ at the top of this screen you can (just about) see the red bar which ties in with the 30^th April date showing. This is the first capture of the 11 quoted in the bar.
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
 
From WBM’s second statement to HideHo the date of this capture was really 31^st July, which again makes little sense for a page which by then should have been nearly three months old. If indeed this capture date was 31/7, there should be at least one white gap between the black bars for June, which there is not.
 
Similarly from this screenshot of 13^th May, there is the ‘pop-up’ date showing for 30^th April and there is clearly a black bar to the left of the red 13^th May one, indicating an earlier capture:


(Sorry can't get 'Host an Image' to work for some reason, I took an actual photograph of the screen as 'screen grab' wouldn't capture the pop-up. Is an 8mb picture too big?)


Nuala will no doubt be back questioning why on earth should WBM respond to anyone, but as they have responded so far, they are going to have to do so again, because this is not just going to go away.