Was Madeleine seen after Sunday?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], I too would be very interested in hearing what your own thoughts are, including date, cause of incident (& perpetrator if applicable), and reason for cover up.

Looking forward to your post.

HiDeHo wrote:I believe that Maddie WAS in PdL and in the apartment for these reasons...

1) Fatima gave a detailed description of Maddie as part of the family leaving their apartment and likely heading up to the Paynes for luch (as we are told happened but Fatima would have no knowledge of that)


Fátima María Serafim da Silva Espada  (Cleaner) - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

She states that this took place on Sunday 29th April, just before she finished her morning work shift (13.30) as she had the afternoon off that day. At about 13.15 she went to help her mother, who was cleaning apartment I of the same block (5) situated on the first floor. She clearly remembers seeing the girl accompanied by her siblings and mother leave their apartment (5 A) and walk to the stairs leading to the floor above. She was very close to them at a distance of about 1 metre, observing their movements for a few moments because she was charmed by them. Madeleine led the way with a plate (perhaps plastic) in her hand bearing a piece of bread. As regards the clothes she was wearing she only remembers a skirt but cannot recall its description. She noted, because she thought them nice, the type of shoes she was wearing, tennis shoes, light in colour she thinks, which had little lights along the soles, which lit up each time she stepped on the ground. Her siblings followed behind her, wearing the same king of shoes and each holding a piece of bread in their hands, their mother followed behind them without holding their hands. She seems to remember that the mother was also carrying a plate. Moments afterwards, perhaps the time it took to close the apartment door, the father came out and also headed to the apartment upstairs. When asked, she does not remember whether the father pulled the door closed or locked it with a key.

After she chatted to her mother about there being many children in the apartments, she had the idea that the family in 5H were friends of Madeleine’s family who were staying in 5 A.

She never cleaned any of these apartments referred to as they were allocated to her mother. Her mother never mentioned anything strange to her, either before or after the girl’s disappearance that could be related to the disappearance. The only comment she remembered concerned the clutter in the apartments, mainly clothing which was left all around the place. She thinks that her mother cleaned the apartments in that block on Monday and Wednesday (02-05).


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



2)    I DON'T believe the pictures are photoshopped (and if they were it would be for the same reason as changing the date on the exif data... to place Madeleine in the club during the week)

Playground pic, Last photo and tennis pic are easily taken during the first couple of days and just attributed to later in the week.

3)  How much DNA would one expect (after a basic clean) from a child that arrived in the apartment Saturday and was only back to go to bed later that day.

SUNDAY - Supposedly straight to the creche in the morning, or at least out of the apartment during the morning, up to Paynes at lunchtime, a trip to sit by the pool at lunchtime, creche in the afternoon, and time at the playground until bedtime.

MONDAY - Likely similar to Sunday....but at this point she may not have been there...

DNA would have been very scarce is my guess...

4  The DNA results are the biggie for me...

All of Madeleine's components found in the blood behind the sofa...


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



15 of 19 of Madeleine's markers found in the rental car...Claimed as a MATCH by Lowe, which means it was either Madeleine in that vehicle or a combination of some of her relative's markers in the same sequence and ALL dropped in the same spot...?

What are the chances?


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

Thank you. Very compelling.

aquila wrote:@j.rob, would you like to answer on another thread why you 'stalked' someone you thought was Matt Oldfield?

No I wouldn't and please don't make false accusations. Jumping into one's car and failing to follow someone is hardly stalking as you very well know. I was curious as to whether the person I saw who bore a strong resemblance to one of the Tapas was who I thought it was.

In any case, I don't really care one way or the other.

The only reason my interest was piqued was because he was not keeping as low a profile as I would have thought given the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine.

Really, I couldn't care less whether it was him or not in actual fact.

Please stop making ridiculous accusations. And being deliberately provocative. 

It's incredibly boring.

What do you think happened to Madeleine McCann and what role, if any, do you think the parents and tapas played?

j.rob wrote:

Verdi wrote:@j.rob wrote:  " Not suggesting that this is the only scenario or that this is even the whole picture. It's bigger than that but I think it accounts for what might have happened to Madeleine that week."


Is there actually a  scenario or part picture hidden somewhere there or have you been at the myths again?  Reads to me like a random selection of j.rob thoughts, or failing that a preview of 'what's on next in Jackanory'.



Any chance you can precis by just saying what you think accounts for what might have happened to Madeleine that week?  Thanks!

I thought I was being fairly clear and I am not quite sure what you mean by 'have you been at the myths again'? 

If you consider what I have written to be akin to what's on next in Jackanory (!!??) then perhaps best not to bother reading my posts.

What do you think happened to Madeleine that week?

No offence intended, clearly I must keep my warped sense of humour in check!

So I'll cut to the chase..  Any chance you can precis by just saying what you think accounts for what might have happened to Madeleine that week?  Thanks!

@ aquila - thank you for your question

@ j.rob - thank you for your answer

Please let's keep Lizzy's thread on topic now, thanks.

j.rob wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:I believe that Maddie WAS in PdL and in the apartment for these reasons...

SNIPPED

Thank you. Very compelling.

Thanks for the input....

I am trying to give all the 'facts'/details that I am aware of to help people see the details and to draw their own conclusions

I am not here to claim I have a theory...

I'm providing the facts of what we 'know' about the week and hope that members read them and let me know their opinions on them.

There is SO MUCH MORE to get to in this thread that I would like to know if I have covered everything on this topic satisfactorily for everyone before I move on to the many discrepancies that will leave everyone wondering WHAT THEY WERE HIDING during that week....

Okay Verdi I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are genuine and have a (relatively) open mind as to what might have happened and all the various possibilities and theories.

I believe that Kate, Gerry and their friends actually revealed a lot about what might have happened, albeit inadvertently perhaps.

My own view after researching this case for hours and leaning very heavily on what others have researched long before me (bearing in mind I was a McCann believer for ages) is that the parents and friends told us the truth when they said that the reason for Madeleine's disappearance was paedophilia.

As is often the case with TM they get you to look in one direction rather than another direction. I think a paedo ring is indeed a part of the story. Where there is sexual abuse there may well be other abuse and this could also apply.

As is so often the case with children who disappear in mysterious circumstances, the perpetrators are usually well known to the child. Often even parents, relatives, close friends or other adults that the child trusts.

There are a huge number of red flags surrounding the statements of the McCanns and Tapas and their subsequent behaviour, words and actions in media interviews. Especially the interviews with Gerry and Kate.

I think the Gaspers were right.

I think Kate has buried her head in the sand and adopted an ostrich position. 

I think that the children, especially Madeleine, were indeed drugged on at least one occasion. I believe something or someone woke up Madeleine early on in the holiday and lead to her being distressed. Kate - as she admitted in that early media interview - failed to establish exactly what it had been. Then I suspect that someone lashed out in anger to silence a sobbing child.

I won't and can't name names as this is purely a theory. 

It is intriguing that Detective Amaral has stated he thinks Madeleine had an accident which was covered up. It could indeed be that some of the 'inner circle' were led to believe this was the case. (Not suggesting Amaral is in the 'inner circle' but possibly wider family - once they twigged that Madeleine was no longer alive - were fed the 'accident' theory rather than the truth which is much darker than an accident, imo).

However, statistically if a child mysteriously disappears or dies suddenly in mysterious circumstances those behind what happened are usually well known to the child. I have seen NOT ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE that the Madeleine McCann case does not fall into this statistical norm.

Not one. But would certainly like to.

It is utterly fascinating, to me at least, that those who look most guilty, imo, and who statistically are likely to have some involvement, are the ONLY people who are not 'people of interest.'

Extraordinary. But really for how much longer can the public be fed this hog-wash? It's just embarrassing.

As always I would like to be proved wrong as I don't like to think about an innocent child suffering.

Thanks for the replies @ j.rob and @ Tony Bennett .
I think HiDeHos detailed research has proven that witness testimonies cannot be taken at face value.The way she has discovered that people were either mistaken,unclear or not credible shows that the answers lie in the finer detail of things.I assume rightly that she has cross referenced testimonies to Madeleine's known whereabouts at the times witnesses have alleged to have seen her.This huge piece of research is indicating what many have believed to be possible but haven't had the resources to investigate.
I just wanted to mention something regarding the finer details.Regarding the photographs of Madeleine in the playground at PDL and the" last "photo at the pool.People may not agree with me but I am convinced they were taken on either the same day or a day apart.I have posted about this on here before about Madeleine's hair.On these photos her hair falls the same way,not only her fringe but the rest of her hair.So in my opinion her hair was not washed in between these photos.If the playground photo is from the first day and the last photo from Thursday then I would have expected her hair to be slightly different.It may seem insignificant to many here but it's the small details that count.
What about the checking timeline written on Madeleine's book.Is this a red herring,left for all to see what a hurried attempt it was to write the times of the checks?When in reality the group could have had days to prepare their timelines.
I don't believe this was a false flag event.The dogs told a story.False timelines is now looking more likely.

Joannep43 wrote:I just wanted to mention something regarding the finer details. Regarding the photographs of Madeleine in the playground at PDL and the "Last" Photo at the pool. People may not agree with me but I am convinced they were taken on either the same day or a day apart. I have posted about this on here before about Madeleine's hair. On these photos her hair falls the same way, not only her fringe but the rest of her hair. So in my opinion her hair was not washed in between these photos. If the playground photo is from the first day and the last photo from Thursday, then I would have expected her hair to be slightly different. It may seem insignificant to many here but it's the small details that count.

I'm open to correction but I think we have seen eight photos of Madeleine on holiday that week in Praia da Luz, if you include the two videos. So here are my eight:

ONE - Airport bus video - Saturday

TWO - Aeroplane steps video - Saturday

THREE - Playground photo, Gerry playing with Madeleine - genuine photo Saturday (same or similar clothes as on the videos) 

FOUR and FIVE - Madeleine playing in the Wendy House - Saturday - same reason as above

SIX - Black-and-white image of Madeleine and Lily Payne, both wearing sunglasses and laughing - could also be Saturday

SEVEN - Last Photo - said to be Thursday but could be Sunday on the photographic evidence

EIGHT - 'Tennis Balls Photo' - impossible to say as two different people claim to have taken it, there is disagreement about when it was taken, and there is reasonable doubt about whether the photo is genuine.

@ joannep43 - that probably ties in with your analysis, doesn't it?

@j.rob wrote:  "Okay Verdi I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are genuine and have a (relatively) open mind as to what might have happened and all the various possibilities and theories."

Thanks but I only asked for a précis of your previous post, I didn't expect you to commit yourself.

I've always looked on the McCanns performance as 'the wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found' [sic] - Clarence Mitchell.

Aside from their initial witness statements and subsequent public appearances before the media, can you recall a single incident when they have actually said or done something for themselves?  I can't!

Tony Bennett wrote:

Joannep43 wrote:I just wanted to mention something regarding the finer details. Regarding the photographs of Madeleine in the playground at PDL and the "Last" Photo at the pool. People may not agree with me but I am convinced they were taken on either the same day or a day apart. I have posted about this on here before about Madeleine's hair. On these photos her hair falls the same way, not only her fringe but the rest of her hair. So in my opinion her hair was not washed in between these photos. If the playground photo is from the first day and the last photo from Thursday, then I would have expected her hair to be slightly different. It may seem insignificant to many here but it's the small details that count.

I'm open to correction but I think we have seen eight photos of Madeleine on holiday that week in Praia da Luz, if you include the two videos. So here are my eight:

ONE - Airport bus video - Saturday

TWO - Aeroplane steps video - Saturday

THREE - Playground photo, Gerry playing with Madeleine - genuine photo Saturday (same or similar clothes as on the videos) 

FOUR and FIVE - Madeleine playing in the Wendy House - Saturday - same reason as above

SIX - Black-and-white image of Madeleine and Lily Payne, both wearing sunglasses and laughing - could also be Saturday

SEVEN - Last Photo - said to be Thursday but could be Sunday on the photographic evidence

EIGHT - 'Tennis Balls Photo' - impossible to say as two different people claim to have taken it, there is disagreement about when it was taken, and there is reasonable doubt about whether the photo is genuine.

@ joannep43 - that probably ties in with your analysis, doesn't it?

I mostly agree with you Tony as you can see from this thread from April 2010

Title: THE HOLIDAY SCHEDULE with Creche/Mobile Times

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


Regarding [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] The black and white pic with sunglasses. It is possible I created one like that but it would probably be derived from this comparison using another phot of Madeleine...

What IS interesting is that her hair length is similar to that 'old' pic used for the posters, and therefore did they remember this 'other' child?




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

Lily Payne seems to have pretty dark hair, even in outdoor pic with her father. She's certainly not blonde.

MrsHyde wrote:Lily Payne seems to have pretty dark hair, even in outdoor pic with her father. She's certainly not blonde.

Jane Tanner's daughter was only 3 months younger than Madeleine and had similar colour hair (hence my reasons for looking at the possibility that in the creche she was mistakenly remembered as Madeleine.


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

HiDeHo wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

SIX - Black-and-white image of Madeleine and Lily Payne, both wearing sunglasses and laughing - could also be Saturday

Regarding [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] The black and white pic with sunglasses.  It is possible I created one like that but it would probably be derived from this comparison using another phot of Madeleine...

What IS interesting is that her hair length is similar to that 'old' pic used for the posters, and therefore did they remember this 'other' child?


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

@ HideHo

Just so as I am clear, then, what you are saying about this image of Madeleine with the sunglasses (below, top left):

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

...is that it is a photoshopped recreation of the colour pic of Madeleine above, converted to black-and-white, with the image reversed (L to R), and then the sunglasses added?

Yes?

Tony Bennett wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

SIX - Black-and-white image of Madeleine and Lily Payne, both wearing sunglasses and laughing - could also be Saturday

Regarding [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] The black and white pic with sunglasses.  It is possible I created one like that but it would probably be derived from this comparison using another phot of Madeleine...

What IS interesting is that her hair length is similar to that 'old' pic used for the posters, and therefore did they remember this 'other' child?


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

@ HideHo

Just so as I am clear, then, what you are saying about this image of Madeleine with the sunglasses (below, top left):

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

...is that it is a photoshopped recreation of the colour pic of Madeleine above, converted to black-and-white, with the image reversed (L to R), and then the sunglasses added?

Yes?

I do recall reversing the image and changing to black and white and probably adding the sunglasses, however IF I posted anywhere I would have made it clear it was a comparison pic and only the top pic, not the bottom 2 or the text

HiDeHo wrote:

I do recall reversing the image and changing to black and white and probably adding the sunglasses, however IF I posted anywhere I would have made it clear it was a comparion pic and only the top pic, not the bottom 2 or the text

Thank you for the speedy clarification.

But the black-and-white one of Lily Payne was apparently taken at Praia da Luz in the holiday week 28 April to 5 May, right?

Tony Bennett wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:

I do recall reversing the image and changing to black and white and probably adding the sunglasses, however IF I posted anywhere I would have made it clear it was a comparion pic and only the top pic, not the bottom 2 or the text

Thank you for the speedy clarification.

But the black-and-white one of Lily Payne was apparently taken at Praia da Luz in the holiday week 28 April to 5 May, right?

You are correct. Both the pictures of the Payne's daughter are from the files.

Here are all the Black White & Greyscale pics from the files, but to make it clear, I cut them from the files pages as they were difficult to view and separated them into individual pics with numbers for identification.

You can see the above pics on this page..

Title: Black/White Greyscale Photos from the holiday
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

To my eyes (at least) Ella and Madeleine look completely different, including hair colour, and I wouldn't even say they look like siblings.

Perhaps I should go to Specsavers.

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

I agree and disagree in equal measures and I think your response probably sums up why confusion ruled in Luz. That is no way a criticism of you, it simply means that so many people who were there at the time seem to have no clear picture of MBM. Why would they? Apparently so many young blond girls running around, who would pay much attention?

I agree that Ella isn't a doppelganger but she is the same age; blond; about same length hair; similar smile. If I saw 2 young girls in passing with similar attributes and was then asked a few days later (or minutes) which was which, I probably wouldn't have a clue and I consider myself reasonably observant. I think I would naturally relate the child to the adult that was seen accompanying them. Lily was a lot shorter and had darker hair.

So perhaps Luisa saw Ella with her dad on Sunday and with the Mc's on another day? After the 3 May, she obviously thought the child she had seen on the Sunday was the child that was missing. Perhaps she did see MBM with ROB on Sunday, although I feel this is highly unlikely. More likely she was confused, seemingly like many others at the time.

Joannep43 wrote:Thanks for the replies @ j.rob and @ Tony Bennett .
I think HiDeHos detailed research has proven that witness testimonies cannot be taken at face value.The way she has discovered that people were  either mistaken,unclear or not credible shows that the answers lie in the finer detail of things.I assume rightly that she has cross referenced testimonies to Madeleine's known whereabouts at the times witnesses have alleged to have seen her.This huge piece of research is indicating what many have believed to be possible but haven't had the resources to investigate.
I just wanted to mention something regarding the finer details.Regarding the photographs of Madeleine in the playground at PDL and the" last "photo at the pool.People may not agree with me but I am convinced they were taken on either the same day or a day apart.I have posted about this on here before about Madeleine's hair.On these photos her hair falls the same way,not only her fringe but the rest of her hair.So in my opinion her hair was not washed in between these photos.If the playground photo is from the first day and the last photo from Thursday then I would have expected her hair to be slightly different.It may seem insignificant to many here but it's the small details that count.
What about the checking timeline written on Madeleine's book.Is this a red herring,left for all to see what a hurried attempt it was to write the times of the checks?When in reality the group could have had days to prepare their timelines.
I don't believe this was a false flag event.The dogs told a story.False timelines is now looking more likely.

Agree that testimonies cannot be taken at face value. Also agree about the detail. The devil is in the detail as they say. That is why the analysis of the creche signing in register is interesting.  The problem with witnesses saying that they saw Madeleine is that we simply don't know if the child they saw was indeed Madeleine McCann or was another child who resembled her. I personally think Ella does look a lot like Madeleine McCann.

As for the photos, I find them all quite weird. Not at all like like 'normal' holiday photos. But interesting point about Madeleine's hair. The so-called 'last photo' I find utterly unconvincing. It's the strangest photo and Gerry is staring manically at the camera. 

The checking timeline written in a page torn out of Madeleine's book is a curiosity. I agree that the group might have had days to prepare their timelines but I am still of the opinion that something went wrong at the last minute. Hence the Mcs and Tapas made a bodge-job of the timings and the wider family talked about 'jemmied shutters' when in actual fact there was no sign of a break-in.

I agree about false timeline. However, I think that this was supposed to be a huge media hoax to sell papers, distract from Iraq, make parents paranoid about 'stranger danger', possibly introduce the concept of microchipping and generally give the state more control over the individual. The fact that the media ran with the story so soon and that TM were so insistent on getting the media onboard, in spite of police warning that it would be the death sentence for Madeleine, suggests to me that this was, in part, a media hoax.

However, it is not that simple, obviously, because "something" happened to Madeleine that week, imo. I think this is where the dreaded paedo stuff comes in. It is very suspicious, imo, that her health records were never released. The hugely inappropriate photos of her that were released wearing make-up and posing in a very unnatural way are red flags. Plus so many other red flags in this direction.

So, I theorize that it was a media hoax that went wrong/was deliberately sabotaged and/or some other mishap happened that week.

The media and the wider Mc family ran with the original story. But the Mcs and Tapas were forced - quite late in the day, imo, hence the bodge-up about the jemmied shutters - to shoe-horn the original script into a new scenario. 

From what the Mcs and Tapas have said and how they behaved I think Madeleine died that week. So what was (possibly!) intended to be the staged and faked abduction of a live child - the UK version of the USA Elizabeth Smart case - ended up being a staged, faked abduction to cover up for the death of a child. 

Despite "the disaster" TM couldn't let the script go. The Mcs wanted their ££££££££££ and to admit to the death of a child would not bring them the fame and fortune they wanted. However, milking the 'poor grieving' parents role was lucrative, at least for a time. 

I am fascinated by the role of Jez Wilkins as the timing of him allegedly 'bumping into' Gerry outside apartment 5a - just after Gerry's alleged 9pm check when he admired Madeleine sleeping beautifully so he says - obviously puts him as a person of considerable interest. I refuse to believe it is just a coincidence that he makes his living out of TV drama and documentaries and that his partner is a journalist who just happened to work on Crimewatch.

Was the media hoax deliberately sabotaged? Perhaps when it became clear that all was not what it seemed? When "a disaster" happened?  I strongly believe that someone or several people landed TM in it (not saying they didn't deserve it!) right at the last minute - hence the bodged time-lines.

When the PJ shelved the investigation they were left with many witness statements etc and the evidence from the dogs.  At this time they were looking at numerous witness statements which were indicating that Madeleine was alive up until the Thursday evening.  They would have known that Cavaderine takes time to develop.  The short window of time for the abduction to occur would not have allowed cadaverine to be left.  So in 2007 when the PJ investigation was shelved it's my opinion that nothing was giving either way so to speak.
It's now 2015 and the public and all have had many years to inspect,dissect and digest the PJ files available.  In my opinion this is where we are at...
If you imagine a pair of weighing scales sitting on one side are the dogs and on the other are the witnesses who have given statements to say they saw Madeliene that week.  After reading HiDeHos research most of the witnesses have now fallen off their side of the scale and the dogs have now shot high up into view. It seems the PJ may have been "stuck" with a balancing act, but the dogs have just outweighed the people.

skyrocket wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - morning

I agree and disagree in equal measures and I think your response probably sums up why confusion ruled in Luz. That is no way a criticism of you, it simply means that so many people who were there at the time seem to have no clear picture of MBM. Why would they? Apparently so many young blond girls running around, who would pay much attention?

I agree that Ella isn't a doppelganger but she is the same age; blond; about same length hair; similar smile. If I saw 2 young girls in passing with similar attributes and was then asked a few days later (or minutes) which was which, I probably wouldn't have a clue and I consider myself reasonably observant. I think I would naturally relate the child to the adult that was seen accompanying them. Lily was a lot shorter and had darker hair.

So perhaps Luisa saw Ella with her dad on Sunday and with the Mc's on another day? After the 3 May, she obviously thought the child she had seen on the Sunday was the child that was missing. Perhaps she did see MBM with ROB on Sunday, although I feel this is highly unlikely. More likely she was confused, seemingly like many others at the time.

Hi skyrocket,

Many thanks for your reply.  Sorry my mistake, I should have said Lily and Madeleine look different (isn't that Lily Payne in the above picture?) One's blonde and one's brunette, and they look very different to me.

I don't think we've seen a picture of  Ella O'brien's face, just her hair from the back when she's in Jane Tanner's arms.  So, yes she could look more like Madeleine as her hair looks the same and her build too (from the little we can see of her). I agree with you that a stranger seeing a child with an adult would not scrutinize that closely for the most part. Although I don't believe the nannies at the Creche (with just a few children in their care) would be that easily fooled.

I still personally believe Maddie's catastrophe happened on the evening of 3rd.

@ Pennylane 

No apology necessary! Lack of good photos is the problem.

I'm pretty sure that the child on the left of the photo in the PJ files 'Payne and Tanner Greyscale Holiday Snaps' found at
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is Ella O'Brien, with Lily Payne on the right.

Shame all the photos weren't included in this format rather than the almost impossible to interpret black and white scanned images.

skyrocket wrote:@ Pennylane 

No apology necessary! Lack of good photos is the problem.

I'm pretty sure that the child on the left of the photo in the PJ files 'Payne and Tanner Greyscale Holiday Snaps' found at
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is Ella O'Brien, with Lily Payne on the right.

Shame all the photos weren't included in this format rather than the almost impossible to interpret black and white scanned images.

Yes, I see what you mean.  Thanks skyrocket x

So if that's Ella, she looks slightly chubby then.

@j.rob

So have I got this right.   In a matter of weeks your thoughts as to what happened to MBM have progressed as follows..

a)  swinging..

b)  paedophilia..

c)  a huge media hoax to sell papers, distract from Iraq, make parents paranoid about 'stranger danger', possibly introduce the concept of microchipping and generally give the state more control over the individual to..

d)  a staged and faked abduction of a live child - the UK version of the USA Elizabeth Smart case - ended up being a staged, faked abduction to cover up for the death of a child..

e)  a media hoax that went wrong/was deliberately sabotaged and/or some other mishap happened that week..

f)  The Mcs wanted their ££££££££££ and to admit to the death of a child would not bring them the fame and fortune they wanted..

Have I forgotten anything?

Do these individual theories correlate in some way or are they just a random selection of maybes?  It's all very well to be open minded but I think it helps if you can stay within the realms of reality and framework of the PJ files and miscellaneous associated intelligence.  10/10 for blue sky thinking - just don't forget the parachute!

skyrocket wrote:@ HiDeHo

snipped


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], what is your take on the the 3 (I think that's right!) nanny's who clearly state that the creche is closed on Sundays? Have you come across any more info on this in all your research. It intrigues me why the three of them said this almost verbatim. The creche was either open or closed and you would have thought there would be no confusion on this point. I emailled two MW customers who went to Luz in 2007 (from the TripAdvisor feedbacks) - one said that she remembered the creche being open Mon to Fri but she couldn't remember about weekends, although she also said it wasn't open on arrivals day; the other said that it was open 5 days for the week she was there but she didn't specify which days - when I asked again specifically about Sunday neither responded. The second respondent also said that she had been to other MW resorts more recently and again the creche was open just 5 days in the week. Do you believe from all your research that there was a creche available on Sunday?



Mods - apologies if I have strayed OT, but all the above is loosely related to the presence/evidence of MBM after Sunday 29.

Apologies for taking so long to answer your question on whether there is a creche on Sunday.  I knew there appeared to be but couldn't find the link, but I have two.

One is from my Remembering Madeleine forum and the other is the current page for Mark Warner Kids clubs..

Title: Mark Warner Creche Charges
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Childcare Clubs and Activities for all ages
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


NOTE: One important thing to think about... I don't believe they had the intention of using the afternoon creche for the twins, but IF something had happened to Madeleine they would have prebably preferred to keep them out of the way...

The charges for ALL three children for the three or less hours per afternoon would have been an extra £540!! (3x £180)

MISSING - Monday 30th April 2007

I'm very interested to know the source of information reported by the UK press in May 2007 about the McCanns alleged trip to Sagres..

The Telegraph - By Richard Edwards and Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz   12:01AM BST 12th May 2007

ABDUCTORS COULD HAVE SPIED ON GIRL FOR DAYS

Police were last night investigating whether Madeleine McCann was watched by her abductors three days before she was snatched.

Detectives have discovered that the McCann family went to the town of Sagres, on the southern tip of the Algarve, on April 30.

A witness has told police that on the same day he saw a suspicious man following families and photographing children, including his daughter, a blonde girl "strikingly similar" to Madeleine...

Police have asked the McCanns for all the photographs from the trip to Sagres, and the rest of their holiday, looking for suspects in the background..

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

Could this be the real reason for the Nuno de Jesus  story - reported to have occured on 29th April 2007 at Mareta beach, Sagres?
----------

12th May 2007 - Robert Murat hires a car from Auto Rent Algarve for the period 12th - 15th May 2007.  He is reported to be desperate to get a vehicle.
----------


Gerry McCann's blog - Saturday, 11th June 2007

"After this [busy morning] we headed down to Sagres which is the very most southwestern tip of Portugal. There is a very nice beach and we had lunch with the family."
----------

Lobster Club Crèche records 30th April 2007  -  Afternoon

Signed in by Kate McCann at 15H15 and signed out by Kate McCann at 15H30.  (Parent's location - Kate's mobile phone number)

Jellyfish Club Crèche records 30th April 2007 - Afternoon

Signed in by Kate McCann at 15H20  and signed out by Kate McCann at 17H20.  (Parent's location - Kate and Gerry's mobile phone numbers)

There is imo no proof either that she was seen on Sunday by the cleaning ladies. Her description of all three wearing the same kind of shoes, which had little pink lights along the soles is one reason:

These shoes are seen on the playground photo girl - allegedly taken on the Saturday. In my opinion (but won't go into it here) not Maddie in any case, but a happy, healthy and relaxed 4 yr old.

These trainers have never been seen on the twins in the many photographs taken after 3/5. Other trainers have however been seen in photos of the twins not long after the event.

The cleaner didn't know Maddie by sight and all she would have to go on would be the photographs released before she made her statement.

The crying imo was never Maddie on the 1st. They said the twins cried and then added Maddie and then finally gave the stage to Maddie alone so that this same stage could also contain an intruder on the Wednesday night who in some way had left a curious 'not a tea stain' on the pyjamas.

I do believe that if an accident happened, it happened very early in the holiday.

Quite rightly throughout this case the emphasis has been on sightings, photos etc of Madeleine.  If an accident or something grave had happened to Madeleine earlier in the week, then I believe the McCanns would not have been able to care for the twins.  Are there any photographs,witness statements, sightings or accounts of the Twins with the Mccanns from Sunday onwards?  Apart from the McCann accounts?