Re: McCann DISCREPANCIES : Their statements tell a 'story' that wasn't known...UNTIL NOW!

by **HiDeHo** 29.10.15 19:54

willowthewisp wrote:Hedeho,
Interesting fact of the Jon Corner video of the McCann couple at the villa, both parents appeared to be wearing surgical gloves,Gerry,Boxes into the Renault Scenic and Kate handling washed clothes?

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

by Richard IV 29.10.15 23:56

If Grange are on the straight and narrow and come up trumps, you will have been their greatest asset HiDeHo. Hats off to you howdy

by **HiDeHo** 02.11.15 11:02

Thanks Richard.

Now, I have one 'discrepancy' that I have yet to find someone to take the time to understand it, as it is very involved but, for me this is HUGE in that it questions whether the last pic happened.

Basically....

What many people don't realise is that it is apparent the Rachael may have lied about the last time she saw Madeleine.

She claims it was at mini tennis, BUT mini tennis was on Tuesday (according to the files) so was the last time she saw Maddie on Tuesday? Was it on Thursday when Jane was playing tennis with her at the time the last picture was taken?

Was there REALLY a last pic at that time?

Rachael was 'supposedly there...Why didn't she see Maddie?

I can take the time to explain how this all fits together, but would love to know first that there are members that are interested enough to discuss it.

The Police knew that something was amiss with Rachael's statement as they took the time to be very specific in asking her WHICH court Madeleine (supposedly) played on...

Rachael got it wrong.. (according to tennis records)

I'm hoping that this is of interest to someone as it really questions the 'last picture' timing, and if that is the case...it's HUGE!

by joyce1938 02.11.15 12:09

Hi De Ho, what a huge amount of work you have given to this case and ofcourse for us too thanks a lot . One thing I seem to have im mind about the tennis times ,could you tell me which was the one where we were told that maddie had gone along to pick up balls where daddy had played , that looks like the picture taken with her arms full of balls ? were other kids doing it too and ansd which day was that ? joyce1938

by Doug D 02.11.15 12:24

Did we ever get to the bottom of where the tennis lessons and also the mini-tennis were actually held? It has previously been suggested that the lessons were not held at the 'Tapas' courts, but at the Millenium site.

Similarly with the mini-tennis, I believe Maddie's club was based upstairs at the Main Reception, so did they all traipse across to the Tapas courts holding 'Sammy Snake' or whatever he was called, or did they play elsewhere?

Was mini-tennis played with sponge balls, as you would expect, or proper tennis balls as in the tennis photo?

Definitive answers to these questions would at least go some way to clarifying ‘Tuesday’ in the bewk.

‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the
world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. At the end of their session, the children had been asked to run around the court and pick up as many balls as they could. Madeleine had done really well and was very pleased with herself.’

Oh, and who was it that took the photo?

by guest12345 02.11.15 13:31

HiDeHo wrote:
guest12345 wrote:
The tapas statements were clearly fabricated/altered to make the 'child checking rota' look plausible. I am in no doubt that no police force involved in the case believes a word of them. This is why they have not pushed for a reconstruction...why reconstruct rubbish??

I do however believe that the tapas statements will be used in court in future to help unpick the truth regarding the parenting/checking of the children, or more so....the lack of it and thus be used against the McCanns and the Tapas group to press for neglect charges.

IMO these charges are being delayed due to the PJ wanting to pursue a death by neglect claim against the parents and therefore the focus at the moment is to find a body or the get a confession from the person who killed Madeleine and removed the cadaver.

If they did go to the court for 'Memory of the future' they would have given statements over and above the ones they gave to the PJ. We don't know whether they were asked questions or how their statements were given in court but I would guess there is more information on record in that courtroom than they would have preferred.
>>> Yes, there are the non-public files which only the PJ and OJ have seen so far. We have only seen the PI files, i.e a subset

The PJ did not pursue the 'neglect issue, probably for two reasons...

1) There is no evidence (apart from their word) that the children were left alone. Many of us believe they claimed they left them alone because that was the only way they could claim the window of opportunity for the 'abductor'. Without neglect, there couldn't have been an abduction.
>>> Well, they claim they left them alone but only for 15mins at a time, which was deemed 'within the bounds of good parenting', thus allowing a small window for the claimed abduction and removing any threat of neglect charges. This 'story' can be maintained if they stick tot he rota story and no body is found/confession from the guilty party (and thus blow the 15mins max time alone story out of the water).

2) I don't have the text handy at the moment but neglect in Portugual requires INTENT and there was no indication of that, so 'neglect' was not pursued.
>>> As above, at the moment, the PJ cannot prove neglect as it is the tapas 7 collectively against those questioning them. However, if a body is found or confession obtained and this is aligned to the length of time Madeleine was alone in the apartment (and as such, development of cadaver scent which was subsequently picked up by the dogs), then the intent is there and means the PJ can proceed with 'death by neglect' charges, not just neglect. If I were the PJ, that's what I would be pushing for, but you need rock solid evidenced (the cadaver or confession) before you go to court, especially if facing a team of parents who have had years to think of everything and who are accompanied by carter-ruck lawyers on tap.

by Guest 02.11.15 15:14

Doug D wrote:

Definitive answers to these questions would at least go some way to clarifying ‘Tuesday’ in the bewk.

‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the
world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. At the end of their session, the children had been asked to run around the court and pick up as many balls as they could. Madeleine had done really well and was very pleased with herself.’

Give me strength! What mother in their right mind would allow a three year old child to play tennis in sandals? The woman talks out of her rear quarters.

I think Joyce is on the right track - the photograph so widely publicised (if genuine) was not taken during a mini-club tennis session. Much more likely the incident when Madeleine was collecting tennis balls either for the adults practice session or it was staged for some reason, maybe to confuse or maybe just because it makes for a sweet picture.

by **HiDeHo** 02.11.15 20:06

joyce1938 wrote:Hi De Ho, what a huge amount of work you have given to this case and ofcourse for us too thanks a lot . One thing I seem to have im mind about the tennis times ,could you tell me which was the one where we were told that maddie had gone along to pick up balls where daddy had played , that looks like the picture taken with her arms full of balls ? were other kids doing it too and ansd which day was that ? joyce1938

The tennis timetable tells us that Madeleine's group played on Tuesday morning (10 or 10.30-11am)

We have no knowledge whether regular racquets were used. It is possible as one MW resort shows this (separate tennis not included in crèche activities)

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

These are the only MW photos that I could find

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

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

Whether real equipment or kiddies equipment, the 'tennis' would likely be nothing similar to a tennis game and so I doubt that shoes were of prime importance but I don't know.

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

Was the picture taken at one of the adult games at 6.30pm? (Mon apparently Ladies, Tuesday Mixed, Wednesday Beat the Pro, Thursday Mens.

What time of day was it taken?

The wet court suggests rain. It rained on Wednesday but the Booking form tells us it was cleaned (hosed?) on Tuesday lunchtime. Could the photo have been taken shortly after a cleaning? (We don't have Sunday or Monday booking forms)

If the wet court is due to court cleaning (by hose) and considering Madeleine's mini tennis was BEFORE the court cleaning, then this photo was NOT taken at mini tennis and possibly on a previous day after cleaning.

That is IF something happened to Madeleine earlier and IF they used the photo to suggest she was alive and seen on Tuesday (why not just say Tuesday lunchtime?)

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

by **Nina** 02.11.15 20:15

HiDeHo wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:Hi De Ho, what a huge amount of work you have given to this case and ofcourse for us too thanks a lot . One thing I seem to have im mind about the tennis times ,could you tell me which was the one where we were told that maddie had gone along to pick up balls where daddy had played , that looks like the picture taken with her arms full of balls ? were other kids doing it too and ansd which day was that ? joyce1938

The tennis timetable tells us that Madeleine's group played on Tuesday morning (10 or 10.30-11am)

We have no knowledge whether regular racquets were used. It is possible as one MW resort shows this (separate tennis not included in crèche activities)

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

These are the only MW photos that I could find

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

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

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

Whether real equipment or kiddies equipment, the 'tennis' would likely be nothing similar to a tennis game and so I doubt that shoes were of prime importance but I don't know.

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

Was the picture taken at one of the adult games at 6.30pm? (Mon apparently Ladies, Tuesday Mixed, Wednesday Beat the Pro, Thursday Mens.

What time of day was it taken?

The wet court suggests rain. It rained on Wednesday but the Booking form tells us it was cleaned (hosed?) on Tuesday lunchtime. Could the photo have been taken shortly after a cleaning? (We don't have Sunday or Monday booking forms)

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

Andoff topic but check out the footwear!! Even the 'coach' is wearing flip flops. eek

by Rogue-a-Tory 02.11.15 22:24

Verdi wrote:
Doug D wrote:

Definitive answers to these questions would at least go some way to clarifying ‘Tuesday’ in the bewk.

‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the
world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. At the end of their session, the children had been asked to run around the court and pick up as many balls as they could. Madeleine had done really well and was very pleased with herself.’

Give me strength! What mother in their right mind would allow a three year old child to play tennis in sandals? The woman talks out of her rear quarters.

I think Joyce is on the right track - the photograph so widely publicised (if genuine) was not taken during a mini-club tennis session. Much more likely the incident when Madeleine was collecting tennis balls either for the adults practice session or it was staged for some reason, maybe to confuse or maybe just because it makes for a sweet picture.

I've previously thought along those lines about the sandals Verdi, that photo to me suggests a casual visit to the courts (to watch mum, dad or an older sibling for example) rather than a child ready to participate in a game.

As a qualified sports coach I'd suggest that sandals would be both inappropriate and unsafe. Compare that to the parents that seem to have every pair of expensive sports footwear known to man. Plus as mentioned previously I'd totally expect soft foam balls to be used for 3/4 year olds.

by Liz Eagles 02.11.15 22:43

Perhaps someone ought to ask Katie Hopkins. She's now a DM columnist and seems to have recently returned from a Mark Warner holiday in Greece.

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

by Guest 02.11.15 23:01

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Doug D wrote:

Definitive answers to these questions would at least go some way to clarifying ‘Tuesday’ in the bewk.

‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the
world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. At the end of their session, the children had been asked to run around the court and pick up as many balls as they could. Madeleine had done really well and was very pleased with herself.’

Give me strength! What mother in their right mind would allow a three year old child to play tennis in sandals? The woman talks out of her rear quarters.

I think Joyce is on the right track - the photograph so widely publicised (if genuine) was not taken during a mini-club tennis session. Much more likely the incident when Madeleine was collecting tennis balls either for the adults practice session or it was staged for some reason, maybe to confuse or maybe just because it makes for a sweet picture.
I've previously thought along those lines about the sandals Verdi, that photo to me suggests a casual visit to the courts (to watch mum, dad or an older sibling for example) rather than a child ready to participate in a game.

As a qualified sports coach I'd suggest that sandals would be both inappropriate and unsafe. Compare that to the parents that seem to have every pair of expensive sports footwear known to man. Plus as mentioned previously I'd totally expect soft foam balls to be used for 3/4 year olds.

Joyce has asked the question on a number occasions about the tennis ball photograph but nobody to date has come up with an answer as far as I know. I'm beggared if I can recall where it was originally said that Madeleine was pictured collecting tennis balls during an adult practice but Crimewatch 2013 certainly took it seriously when reconstructing the events leading up to MBM's disappearance..

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

So, as Joyce repeatedly asks - was the much publicized tennis ball photograph taken during a mini-club session or during an adult knock-about. I'm inclined to opt for the latter - if indeed the photograph is genuine.

by sami 02.11.15 23:05

What a pain that woman is. I for many years travelled with a solicitors letter confirming my kids were mine because my passport was in my maiden name and theirs were in my husbands name. If he was not with me it was the easiest thing to do and avoided delays and questions.

A simple process, easily done.

The security is there for very good reasons. Not every parent is well intentioned, not every "family" are happily travelling together. Sometimes kids are taken by one parent unknown to the other.

Pity she doesn't put her column space to good use.

by Liz Eagles 02.11.15 23:19

sami wrote:What a pain that woman is. I for many years travelled with a solicitors letter confirming my kids were mine because my passport was in my maiden name and theirs were in my husbands name. If he was not with me it was the easiest thing to do and avoided delays and questions.

A simple process, easily done.

The security is there for very good reasons. Not every parent is well intentioned, not every "family" are happily travelling together. Sometimes kids are taken by one parent unknown to the other.

Pity she doesn't put her column space to good use.

That wasn't the point I was making sami. Katie Hopkins is a load of hot air employed to up the rant ratings. It's akin to Roman times.

Here is the snip

Admittedly I was coming in from a Greek island. Greece’s magnetic attraction for rubber inflatables overloaded with half the Middle East and Africa is well documented.
But I am pretty sure the last illegal immigrants didn’t brazenly wander up to Passport Control from a British Airways flight with the rest of the Mark Warner holiday-makers, looking like a bad advert for John Lewis.

................................................

Mark Warner holidays are given a mention. British Airways are given a mention - none of those cheap flights.

Now, if anyone wants to know about tennis lessons in a Mark Warner holiday then write to Katie Hopkins and ask her.

by joyce1938 02.11.15 23:21

Yes, Verdi, I too for some reason thought that this activity was most likely of kids going back in evening for a short time to play before bed. I just don't know why this is in my head, in that way? I am no good at trying to get back somewhere to find it either. joyce1938

by sami 02.11.15 23:45

N

aquila wrote:
That wasn't the point I was making sami

................................................

Sorry Aquila I didn't mean to suggest it was roses

....I was just ranting about the piece in general and her making a mountain out of a molehill as usual.

by **HiDeHo** 03.11.15 6:03

Apologies guest12345 and Doug D I will get back to you on your questions, but while I was researching joyce's question I discovered a NEW discrepancy (or two)

For anyone interested in recognising the discrepancies....please bear with me...

Studying the tennis photo, it appears the court is wet... It rained on Wednesday..

Checking the Tennis booking sheets (Sunday and Monday are missing) it appears that the court was cleaned (washed? hosed?) during lunchtime on Tuesday (12.00pm)

IF the phot was taken at mini tennis there would have been NO WET COURT as it was 2 hrs later that it was cleaned.

THEREFORE the pic was NOT taken at mini tennis....

IF Kate tells us that the photo was taken on Tuesday at 10.30am to place Maddie alive at mini tennis and it was not actually taken until AFTER mini tennis...maybe at lunchtime after the courts had been cleaned, there would be NO REASON to have siad it was taken in the morning... Tuesday lunchtime would have placed Madeleine at the tennis courts a few hours later.... BUT

IF the courts were also cleaned ANOTHER day...(Sunday , Monday or maybe Saturday) then that court could have been cleaned and the pic taken a short while after...

There is more to this...a LOT more to this....but Ill leave that for now...

WHY would Kate say it was taken at mini tennis when the courts wouldnt have been wet for another two hours?

by Doug D 03.11.15 8:06

Before we get carried away with this ‘discrepancy’ and it becomes a 'definite' forum myth, although it looks as if the court could be wet, it is possible that this is just permanently stained. Maybe someone that was around soon after could confirm one way or the other.

Also wouldn’t it be lovely to see the actual booking sheet. There are clearly a number of changes, black lines on both courts between the 8 & 9 sessions painted out, a join (?) between 10 & 11 (no black dividing line), McCann at 2.30 been overwritten on tippex, (what is the printed capital ‘A’ about?), 6.30 court 2 tippexed and overwritten (no black line underneath).

And what is the top of the ‘T’ on Tuesday and the date 1/5, in the same red ink as the page title and flower picture all about?

The sheet also appears to have been randomly stained in other places, possibly as an attempt to disguise these changes.

by Guest 03.11.15 12:48

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote: Studying the tennis photo, it appears the court is wet... It rained on Wednesday..

Has anybody studied this photograph technically? My naked eye cannot detect a wet surface.

Is it usual for an organized event involving children of such a young age to be held on a hard surface, like that captured in the tennis ball photograph? I've never visited a Warner holiday venue so know nothing whatsoever about their childcare facilities but I would have thought an outdoor mini tennis session would be held on grass with appropriate scaled down equipment.

From my experience tourists can be very ruthless if they smell compensation. Can you imagine the public outcry if a three year old child was seriously injured while playing tennis at a holiday resort because the tour company failed to provide adequate facilities and/or supervision?

That aside, if I remember rightly, the 'tennis ball' photograph didn't materialize until a few days after Madeleine disappeared - and then I think was initially circulated by Auntie Philomena back in the UK. Raises the question - how did Philomena get her hands on the photograph if it was taken in PdL during the holiday week? Wouldn't it have been more sensible to give that image to the PJ as the most up to date, rather than issuing a photograph of Madeleine when she was younger?

More importantly, IF it was taken on KM's camera or that of one of the friends - why wasn't it included in the photographs handed over to the PJ ???

by Guest 03.11.15 12:52

joyce1938 wrote:yes Verdi, I too for some reason thought that this activity was most likely of kids going back in evening for a short time to play before bed ? I just don't know why this is in my head ,in that way ? I am no good at trying to get back somewhere to find it either.joyce1938

I'll see if I can find something later. In the interim this is quite an interesting observation I found on YouTube..

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

by jeanmonroe 03.11.15 12:56

WHY would Kate say 'I TOOK' (the 'tennis balls photo) when she DIDN'T??????

JT............... DID!

WHY did KM , ('desperately'?) 'need' everybody to 'know' SHE 'took the tennis balls photo'?

Even to the 'point' of 'dissing' JT's and RO's 'proven' claim, to have 'taken' the tennis balls 'photo'

WHY?

by **HiDeHo** 03.11.15 13:34

Here is a closer pic of what I have always felt was a 'wet' court...

Cleaning was done on Tuesday lunchtime 12-12.30 so IF the court is wet and IF it was due to being hosed down in the cleaning process, then that pic was taken during lunchtime as the guests had access to the courts during lunchtime.

Does anyone have a phot with better resolution? I have one somewhere just cant find it right now...

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

by Guest 03.11.15 14:16

jeanmonroe wrote:WHY would Kate say 'I TOOK' (the 'tennis balls photo) when she DIDN'T??????

JT............... DID!

WHY did KM , ('desperately'?) 'need' everybody to 'know' SHE 'took the tennis balls photo'?

Even to the 'point' of 'dissing' JT's and RO's 'proven' claim, to have 'taken' the tennis balls 'photo'

WHY?

Don't look there: look here:

Could it be that KH in reality was somewhere else, where she shouldn't have been?
That she wanted to hide that fact and her whereabouts?

That she therefore linked up herself to an event which could be timed exactly?

"Look you dingbats: I was at the tennis so and so late! See, this is my picture of Maddie to prove I was!"

by joyce1938 03.11.15 14:34

Another thing I had in mind too was this. Was there a time, possibly Tuesday, that Maddie was supposed to be at tennis, and someone else remarked, I think one of nannies, that Maddie was on boat trip with nannie taking kids one by one on small dingy to a larger small boat and maddie said she was frightened? Does anyone else link this? joyce1938

by **HiDeHo** 03.11.15 14:48

Portia wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:WHY would Kate say 'I TOOK' (the 'tennis balls photo) when she DIDN'T??????

JT............... DID!

WHY did KM , ('desperately'?) 'need' everybody to 'know' SHE 'took the tennis balls photo'?

Even to the 'point' of 'dissing' JT's and RO's 'proven' claim, to have 'taken' the tennis balls 'photo'

WHY?

Don't look there: look here:

Could it be that KH in reality was somewhere else, where she shouldn't have been?
That she wanted to hide that fact and her whereabouts?

That she therefore linked up herself to an event which could be timed exactly?

"Look you dingbats: I was at the tennis so and so late! See, this is my picture of Maddie to prove I was!"

When you put all the statements together about the mini tennis there are so many discrepancies that in my opinin it never happened and thats why the tennis pic is important....it was probably taken earlier... shortly after a court cleaning...

by **HiDeHo** 03.11.15 15:29

I uploaded this vid 4 1/2 years ago... It was one of the first that I did. I created it using all the research I had put together in the years before and TO THIS DAY I have not seen any serious discussion on such major issues that should NOT have existed...

It is not just 'memory' We have Jane, Rachael and Kate describing an event, contradicting each other and the facts.

I urge everyone who is interested, to watch it all the way through... Don't view it as a video... View it as a lot of the files info compiled together to save sifting through pages to find them..

Once you have viewed and understood the comparison statements, there is no doubt in my mind that you will also wonder WHY they contradict each other but also WHETHER the mini tennis really could have happened at all!

Discrepancies: Madeleine's Mini Tennis

by jeanmonroe 03.11.15 15:46

Here's all i 'need' to 'know'

So Rachael Oldfield is claiming in her rogatory interveiw the Tennis photo was taken by Jane on Thursday 3rd at 10.30 am.

RO: "I think it must have been at about ten thirty, Madeleine and E**a and their sort of group came to have a tennis lesson as part of their crèche activities, erm and Kate didn’t have her camera and Jane was there then as well and Jane took some photos of both Madeleine and E**a, that’s one, that poster of Madeleine with the tennis b*lls, that sort of pictures”.

00.51.21HRS 1578 “That was taken on the”?

RO: Reply “Yeah that was that morning”.

1578 “Thursday”?

RO: Reply “Yeah

But Catriona Baker claims in her rogatory interview that on Thursday 3rd at 10.30 am Maddie is sailing.

"I never noted anything strange in Madeleine's comportment during the time I stayed with her. There was one occasion, on Thursday, 3rd of May 2007, around 10H30 in the morning, where she cried at the launch of the yellow safety boat in the ocean where all the children were sailing."

Kate says in her book that she took the photo on Tuesday 1st in the morning.

"On Tuesday 1 May, after my tennis lesson, two maintenance workers came to have a look at our washing machine, which I couldn’t get to operate. Gerry had also managed to break the window shutter mechanism in our bedroom shortly after we’d arrived, in spite of the sign asking guests to be gentle with it. What can I say? It’s the Gerry touch...The two men looked at the washing machine first. Once they’d established that the problem was something simple – not quite as simple as me not having pressed the ‘on’ button, but not much more complicated than that – I went to meet Gerry, whose lesson had started at ten-fifteen, leaving them to fix the shutter."

"During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session. Jane and I stayed to watch them. It chokes me remembering how my heart soared with pride in Madeleine that morning. She was so happy and obviously enjoying herself. Standing there listening intently to Cat’s instructions, she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls."

However,

The creche schedule puts mini tennis as the activity for Monday morning not Tuesday as Kate suggests. Do we know if the activities differed from those on the planned schedule?

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

"SOMEBODY".........IS...............'LYING'!

WHY?

by willowthewisp 03.11.15 16:13

Verdi wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:yes Verdi, I too for some reason thought that this activity was most likely of kids going back in evening for a short time to play before bed ? I just don't know why this is in my head ,in that way ? I am no good at trying to get back somewhere to find it either.joyce1938
I'll see if I can find something later. In the interim this is quite an interesting observation I found on YouTube..

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

Hi Verdi,the person on the youtube video states, that when analysing the actual date of the Tennis photograph,states it was taken on the 5th of May 2007?

by **HiDeHo** 03.11.15 16:25

Thanks Jean, and that is what this thread is all about...

Once everyone (like yourself) starts to see that not only is it a matter of WHO may be telling the truth, but more obviously whether ANY of them are telling the truth!

You have highlighted a small portion of how none of their statements matched... Watching the video you can see how it was so obviously concocted...

Once you realise that, then you start to ask WHY?

Tuesday? Why would there be so may contradictions/lies on TUESDAY?

That was MY question in researching and maybe now you can understand why I believe something happened BEFORE Tuesday and all their statements about the days following would only be acceptable if they were telling the truth and nothing happened to Madeleine...

No question in my mind their statements 'tell us' that they were hiding something.... Something that happened BEFORE Tuesday... sad1

Tennis according to Georgina and the booking sheets was Tuesday as can be seen in the vide above... The activity sheet was changed

by Tennison 03.11.15 16:54

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Have you sent your research/discrepancies to the PJ?

McCann DISCREPANCIES : Their statements tell a 'story' that wasn't known...UNTIL NOW!