What happened in the 12 hrs from 9pm TUESDAY - 9am WED? FOCUS on TUES Night & WED morning..Where was Kate?

by **HiDeHo** 24.01.16 20:28

FOCUS on TUESDAY Night & WEDNESDAY morning..Where was Kate? Why didn't the Quiz Mistress see her between 9 and 10pm (approx)? Why the flurry of phone calls just BEFORE Mrs Fenn heard the crying? Why did they DENY the cot? Why did they DENY the TEXT messages? Why the early phone call Wednesday morning?

Was 'SOMETHING' happening?

TUESDAY NIGHT
According to Mrs Fenn a young child was crying between 10.30pm and 11.45pm and calling for her daddy.
*1 - GERRY claims they returned to the apartment at 11pm
*2 - KATE - claims they went back to check on children every half hour
*3 - Najoua Quiz Mistress - Saw empty setting as if someone had left. Did not remember seeing Kate (possibly David Payne) and NOBODY left the table during the hour (approx) that she was there.
*4 - KATE: Had a 'flurry of phone calls between 10.16pm and 10.27pm (WHERE was she?)

WEDNESDAY MORNING
*5 - KATE called her friend Amanda at 7.36am Unusually early call compared to other days (no calls made til 2 hrs later)
*6 - GERRY - At approx 8am Gerry started to receive the FIRST of several TEXT MESSAGES which were DELETED and DENIED.
*7 - The CLEANER saw one cot in the parents bedroom and one cot in Madeleine's room.
*8 - Both Gerry and Kate DENIED the cot was there

(See below for more info/statements)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*1) Gerry: at the Tapas around 20:30, and then went to the apartment every half hour, until they arrived back, at around 23:00, plus or minus 10 minutes. Occasionally one of the others in the group made the check, he does not remember if this happened on the 1st. It is not true that Madeleine had been crying that night for an hour and 15 minutes, because she was not alone all that time.

*2) KATE :During dinner, every half hour they went to the apartment to check on the children. This was done by the deponent and by Gerry. She does not remember if on this night any of their friends went to the apartment.

*3) Najoya (Quiz Mistress) - May 9th 2007 03-Processos Vol III Pages 798 - 799 -
and at 21.00 did a kind of quiz with the guests who were having dinner in the restaurant.
She remembers that last Tuesday at the end of the quiz, she was invited to the table of nine guests who asked her to join them for a drink.
She was at their table for about fifteen to twenty minutes and it was there that she met Madeleine's father, who directly invited her to the table, however, she does not know whether Madeleines mother was also there.
When questioned, she said that they talked of banalities and she did not notice any aspect or behaviour that was out of the ordinary.
When questioned, she said that during the time that she was there Madeleines father did not leave the table, neither did any of the other guests, however, during this time one of the chairs was always empty, that of someone who had had dinner and left, not managing to indicate any identifying element about this person.
When questioned, she said she was at the table from about 21.30 to 21.50.
------
07-Processo Volume 7 pages 1841 to 1842 20th June 2007
- on the Tuesday, 1 May 2007, that she was invited to the table of the group of which
the McCann couple were part, by Gerry himself.
--- That she recalls there being an empty place [seat] at the table, not being certain if it had been Madeleine's mother's place given that she is not sure if they had met each other there at that time.

*4) "Kate McCann's mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the "Tapas 9".

*5) On Wednesday 2nd May 2007, Kate McCann called her friend "Amanda" at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning."

*6) when he was asked by 'Expresso TV' on 6th September 2008 about the 'sixteen SMS messages' received, he flustered:
'No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got'' Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted; 'Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken'. Gerald McCann continued: 'so you know that it is actually rubbish'
Their McCann's denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous - because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after.

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

*7) Maria Julia S. da Silva.
She remembers that when she entered Apartment A on the Wednesday, the parents were inside. After being duly authorized, she entered and carried out her work, because they were already on their way out. While she was in the apartment, there were no children there, and she supposed that they were in the creche.
While performing her work, she remembers having noticed that the couple was sleeping in the room located opposite the entrance, where she confirmed the presence of a child’s bed (crib). The room gives onto an outdoor garden by means of a terrace, as it is on the ground floor,. In the room next to the entrance to the apartment there was a bed placed next to the wall (where she supposed the missing child slept), and also the second child’s bed (crib).
All these beds were untidy at the time, meaning that they had been used. She also declares that in the room next to the entrance was another bed that had not been used.

*8) GERRY - It is not true that on a certain day they placed one crib in their room, leaving the other in Madeleine’s room

KATE - When asked, she said that the cleaning, which was provided by the resort, took place on Monday and Wednesday. Thus she mentions once more that she never altered the above described disposition, which means it is not true that at any one moment in time a cot was in the deponent’s bedroom and the other one in MADELEINE’S bedroom.

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

by **Tony Bennett** 24.01.16 22:37

HiDeHo wrote:FOCUS on TUESDAY Night & WEDNESDAY morning...Where was Kate? Why didn't the Quiz Mistress see her between 9 and 10pm (approx)? Why the flurry of 'phone calls just BEFORE Mrs Fenn heard the crying? Why did they DENY the cot? Why did they DENY the TEXT messages? Why the early phone call Wednesday morning?

Was 'SOMETHING' happening?

TUESDAY NIGHT
According to Mrs Fenn a young child was crying between 10.30pm and 11.45pm and calling for her Daddy.

REPLY: @ HideHo In order to analyse what was happening on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, it would be better to set aside this, as there is no corroboration of it - and a great number of facts which suggest she did not give a truthful account of this alleged 'crying incident'. These are at least TWELVE reasons for disregarding Mrs Fenn's account:
1. She didn't make her statement until 111 days after the date Madeleine was reported missing.
2. She only made this statement after being prompted by members of the McCann Team or those working for them.
3. Two days before she made her statement, there was a flurry of major articles in the British mainstream press, all forecasting precisely what she was going to say before she made her statement (clear breach of the fabled Portuguese judicial secrecy rules, by the way).
4. She made a convoluted statement explaining that the crying was not of a child 'two years or under'. Howe exactly could she tell the difference between the crying of a 2-year-old and a 3-year-old? It's nonsense, isn't it? It looks like it was contrived to suggest this was Madeleine.
5. Only one child crying for 75 minutes? What about the other two?
6. Mrs Fenn says she 'phoned her friend Mrs Glyn about the crying at about 11.00pm. The only thing Mrs Fenn reports is Mrs Glyn saying: "I'm not surprised". How credible is it that these two women would allow a child to be heard sobbing for a continuous 75 minutes and yet not pick up the 'phone to someone?
7. Mrs Fenn claimed she had a 'burglary' attempt. She gave four different dates for this burglary attempt: one week before, two weeks, three weeks, and finally 'several weeks'.
8. She gave different versions of the incident: 'He climbed in through a window' or 'He broke in' or 'He entered with a key.
9. She gave several different versions of whether she contacted the police, including: "So shocked she 'phoned the police immediately" and "Nothing was stolen so I didn't bother reporting it".
10. She gave a highly unlikely account of what actually happened: "Tried to grab his ankle as he jumped out of the window" [this was a first-floor window and the concrete floor below was a 12' to 15' drop.
11. Afterwards, she told journalists to "ignore what I'm supposed to have said", adding: "It's all rubbish".
12. Not one other resident, holidaymaker or staff member head this crying during a period of 75 minutes - so there is no corroboration of it.

Her account cannot be relied on and is best ignored in any analysis of the night's events

*1 - GERRY claims they returned to the apartment at 11pm
*2 - KATE - claims they went back to check on children every half hour
*3 - Najoua Quiz Mistress - Saw empty setting as if someone had left. Did not remember seeing Kate (possibly David Payne) and NOBODY left the table during the hour (approx) that she was there.

REPLY: Quoting what you've written later down, Najoua Chekoua [?sp] said:  "When questioned, she said that during the time that she was there Madeleine's father did not leave the table, neither did any of the other guests, however, during this time one of the chairs was always empty". Answer: This statement is consistent with one of the group not being present at all that night. And indeed I believe one of the Tapas 7 was indeed absent due IIRC to 'feeling unwell' or because their child was sick

*4 - KATE: Had a 'flurry of phone calls between 10.16pm and 10.27pm (WHERE was she?)

REPLY: I think you meant 'made' a flurry of 'phone calls. An article by Paulo Reis on 'GazetaDigital' thought that the mobile antennae proved she was in her apartment when she made those calls. But I can't recall why he was so certain about that

by **Jill Havern** 24.01.16 22:49

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

More on the deleted call records

Where Was Kate McCann? (*)

The CD issued by Ministerio Publico de Portimao in July 2008, contains a great deal of information on the mobile calls made and received by the “Tapas 9” but it is dispersed, difficult to retrieve and with important pages and charts missing. The main documents of interest from the CD are:

* A 3 page report by the Policia Judiaria (undated, but probably 4th May 2007) listing call records retrieved from the handsets of Mr and Mrs McCann
* A detailed (and excellent report) by Inspector Paulo Dias, Inspector of UNI-Sector de Análise, Lisbon, dated 9th November 2007
* Schedules provided by Vodafone on 14th December 2007 covering a period from 29th April 2007 for Gerald McCann, David Payne, Rachael Mampilly, broken into four separate sections for incoming and outgoing telephone calls, incoming and outgoing SMS traffic
* A second report by Inspector Dias dated 5th February 2008, containing time bars, link charts and maps pinpointing where the “Tapas 9’s” sets were when they activated antennae
* A third report by Inspector Dias dated 2nd June 2008 which includes details of activations of the Luz and other mobile antenna from 28th April 2007 to September 2007
* The Rogatory Letter requests and correspondence dated from 5th December 2007 to May 2007 and responses from the Home Office in April and May 2008

The PJ used a program, called the “Analyst’s Notebook” as well as “Excel” to handle what were very large datasets. Inspector Dias pointed out that “Excel” was far from ideal, because of its limited capacity and it seems that much of the data provided was paper based and had to be rekeyed. Also the main focus of the research was limited to the evening of Thursday 3rd May 2007. But, despite the problems, the PJ’s work is impressive, innovative and very detailed. For example, there is a brilliant analysis (which unfortunately led nowhere) based on the hypothesis of two abductors each working with mobiles in the Ocean Club area immediately before Madeleine was reported missing. There is another excellent piece of work which tracks down a misrouted call, from Swansea, to Kate McCann at 11.21 on Wednesday 2nd May 2007.

However, there are potentially serious omissions:

* The most important records were not available when Mr and Mrs McCann attended their “Arguido interviews” on 6th and 7th September 2007 and it is doubtful that they were ever reviewed by the very experienced analysts from the Leicestershire Police, whose team left the Algarve soon after the McCann’s return to the UK in September 2007
* There are no detailed call records from the mobile operators for Kate McCann, Russell O’Brien, Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner
* When the PJ obtained the McCann’s mobiles they do not appear to have retrieved deleted data or to extract their contact lists
* None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered
* The details of over 50 UK subscribers contacted by the Tapas 9 in the critical period, as well as their onward local and international call records, was included in the Rogatory Letter request in December 2007. If this information was provided, it is not in the CD
* A critical link chart (Anexo 37) for Tuesday 1st May 2007 is missing from Inspector Dias’s report

These omissions make interpretation of the data difficult but what is available provides an interesting picture. First, it is obvious that the memories in the McCann’s mobiles were incomplete and, in Kate McCann’s case, selectively deleted.

Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea “wrong number”), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been “whoosh-clunked” from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night?. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.

The first call found in Gerald’s mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wife’s handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.

If the deletions were deliberate (and it is an “if”) it implies the McCann’s were both “forensically aware” and crafty and wanted to hide something from the PJ. For this reason, it is important to explore the call record data and to match it against other evidence.

On Saturday 28th April 2007, after their arrival in Luz, Kate McCann’s mobile triggered the antenna 9 times. It is not possible to say, from the available records, whether these were incoming or outgoing calls or SMSs or for how long they lasted. The last activations were at 20.55 and 20.59 when (based on their statements) the Tapas 9 returned for an early night after eating at the Millennium Restaurant with their children. All of these records were erased from the memory of Kate McCann’s mobile. Gerald McCann’s mobile did not activate any of the Luz antennae that day.

On Sunday 29th April 2007, the first activation of Kate McCann’s mobile was at 9.23, but again there are no Vodafone logs or time bars to provide further detail. However, by internally matching the antenna records it appears that she called her husband at 12.26 and 17.02.

The crèche records indicate that he collected Madeleine at 12.15. He also picked up the twins around 17.00 but mistakenly recorded the time as “12.30”. Chances are that the calls from Kate McCann were to check that he had picked up the kids. At 10.13 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx3899. The last activation by Kate McCann’s mobile was at 19.30 and Gerald’s at 17.02.

A pattern on this sheet (and it applies to all of the Tapas 9) is that no activations took place at any time during the week while they were at dinner. So maybe Clarence Mitchell was right, after all, and that they were so “into each other” that they didn’t want to be disturbed while sardine munching and left their mobiles in their rooms. They were never specifically asked this question, but it is very important and the point will be addressed later.

On Monday 30th April 2007, neither of the McCann’s 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 crèches. On this afternoon, Madeleine remained in the crèche 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 McCann’s mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the day’s 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 crèche 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.

At around 8.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007, Miss Nejoua Chekeya, the Ocean Club’s busty Aerobics Instructor, held a “Quiz Night” and was later invited, allegedly by Gerald McCann, to join his table which she did sometime between 9.30pm and 9.50pm. She did not say how long she had remained with them, but she is not the sort of woman men would wish see to leave too quickly. Miss Chekeya stated that one dinner setting was unused and that she could not remember seeing Kate McCann.

However, both Jane Tanner and Russell O’Brien have stated that he did not go to the Tapas Bar on the “Quiz Night” (ie Tuesday 1st May 2007), but had stayed in their room looking after his sick daughter. Jane Tanner took his dinner to the room; thus explaining the unused plate setting. Russell O’Brien was not asked by either the Policia Judiciaria or Leicestershire Police whether he had heard Madeleine crying!

Kate McCann’s mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the “Tapas 9”.

The evidence from the call logs gives the strongest clue that the “Tapas 9” left their telephones in their rooms when they went to dinner. Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s spokesperson, confirmed this. In an interview, reported on 6th April 2008 by Ned Temko of “The Guardian”, Mr Mitchell said: “You had nine people in a bar without watches on, without mobile phones and absolute panic set in when they realised what had happened…. We would say that, if the police had a perfect time line across nine people, that would be a damn sight more suspicious than the fractured, illogical, composite statements they might have got”

Mrs Fenn, the McCann’s neighbour, reported that Madeleine had cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45. The evidence shows that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A 14 minutes before Madeleine started crying. Tuesday 1st May 2007 is the only night (except, of course, for Thursday 3rd May 2007) that either of the McCanns or any of their friends made calls after dinner.

Mrs McCann volunteered to the PJ that on the night of Wednesday 2nd May 2007, she had slept in the spare bed in her children’s room because her husband had not paid her enough attention over dinner. Or put another way, does she mean the amorous Scot was paying someone else (like Miss Chekeya) too much attention, causing her to stomp out of the Tapas Bar before him: ultimately leading to the spare bed in a strop? Gerald McCann said he thought the reason his wife had slept in the children’s bedroom was because of his snoring and that he did not even bother asking her the following morning what the problem was.

Could it be that their timings are wrong by 24 hours and that Kate McCann’s nocturnal shenanigans took place on the night of Tuesday 1st May 2007? It would fit, but why be untruthful about it? A possible reason is that they wanted to conceal both Kate McCann’s state of mind and the fact that she had returned to Apartment 5A, just before Madeleine’s cried for help.

On Wednesday 2nd May 2007, Kate McCann called her friend “Amanda” at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning: so Kate McCann was “up with the larks”. Amanda returned the calls at 7.50. There is no record of how long any of these calls lasted or whether they were SMSs. They were all deleted from memory.

At 8.07 Gerald McCann received a call from the SMS message centre (447818520047), but does not appear to have responded. At 8.50 Kate McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx27010 and returned it at 8.53, before going to play tennis. Gerald McCann received a series of calls from his SMS message centre between 9.10 and 10.47, again without response.

At 11.21 Kate received a call from what appears to be a landline in Swansea ( xxxxx0023). The report by Inspector Dias researched this call in detail (Page 21 in his report of 9th November 2007) and discovered that it had not activated any of the Luz antennae. But digging deeper, he found that another UK mobile (xxxxx 1583) had triggered the Luz antenna when connecting to the same Swansea number at 14.01. He dug even deeper, tracked all of the calls made from Luz by xxxx1583 and established it had no connection whatsoever with any of the “Tapas 9”. The Swansea call to Kate McCann was simply a “wrong number”, misrouted and thus not logged by the Luz antennae.

What Inspector Dias did not realise was that the Swansea call had become so special to Kate McCann that, when deleting all of the other Portuguese call records from memory, she decided to leave this one intact.

Gerald received five further calls from the SMS message centre and at 15.50 called 91121, probably to collect his messages. He received further calls from the centre at 17.49 and 19.49. The records provided by Vodafone show these calls but that they originate from a different mobile number (0xxxx014310)

At 20.08 Kate McCann received two calls from a UK mobile xxxx7624 and six minutes late Gerald McCann called 91121: again to collect messages before he left for the Tapas Bar. This was the last activation of the day by either of the McCanns; probably confirming that their mobiles remained in Apartment 5A when they went to dinner.

On Thursday 3rd May 2007 (the critical day) at 8.23 and 8.24 Kate McCann’s mobile activated the antenna to call xxxx7624. There is nothing in file to indicate the owner of this mobile but it does not appear to be any of the McCann family or friends.

At 12.24 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK Mobile xxxx1746. Again there is no clue in the file to the subscriber’s name. At 12.31 Kate McCann received a call (or SMS) from her mother’s mobile and responded an hour later.

Neither of the McCanns appears to have had any further activity on their telephones until after Madeleine was reported missing when Gerald McCann called his wife four times between 23.14 and 23.52. At 23.40 he called his sister – Trish Cameron and at 23.52 -Janet Kennedy.

The batch of SMS messages received by Gerald McCann on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 seems to have caused him some anxiety. Although the number “07818520047” is in a block allocated to Vodafone, the company has no record of the subscriber’s name. When the number is dialed, connection is made to a recorded message which explains that changes have been made to the way customers can access their mailboxes and that they can now dial “121” from their handset or “07836121121” from any other telephone.

Thus the number appears to be a message box for Gerald McCann that sends him an SMS when his mobile is unable to accept a call (because it is out of range or turned off). However, when he was asked by “Expresso TV” on 6th September 2008 about the “sixteen SMS messages” received, he flustered:

“No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got…” Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted; “Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken”. Gerald McCann continued: “so you know that it is actually rubbish”

Their McCann’s denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous - because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after.

There were 16 SMS messages, in total, so why prevaricate and deny an allegation that was never made. The question was about received messages, not those sent, and on the day before not on 3rd May 2007 or the day after! In the field of forensic linguistics you must always concentrate on the precise wording of denials and especially on those of allegations not made. The denials made by the McCanns are suspicious. However, Mrs McCann’s statement about her husband not sending SMS messages, until after Madeleine’s disappearance, is confirmed by Vodafone’s records.

Mr and Mrs McCann were never closely questioned by the PJ about the detail of their calls, but Gerald McCann excused the deletions by saying that his telephone’s memory only retained details of the last ten calls made. This obvious inaccuracy (It already had retained details of 17 calls) does not appear to have been challenged by the PJ and it does not in anyway explain the selective deletions from his wife’s handset.

So the bottom line is that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A when Madeleine cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45 on Tuesday 1st May 2007, leading to a unique flurry of late night calls and to unique calls very early the following morning. A forensic examination of the records of Madeleine’s attendance at the “Lobsters” crèche on Wednesday 2nd and Thursday 3rd May 2007 is critically important because if they have been falsified, to establish she was there when she was not, this case takes on an entirely new dimension and sets different search parameters.

Secondly, if the memories of the mobile telephones were deleted in way suspected, a level of cunning is implied that would be capable of conceiving plan to deliberately delay reporting Madeleine’s “disappearance”; if for no other reason than to disassociate it from the crying incident on Tuesday 1st May 2007.

Of course, this is speculation and it is entirely possible that further investigation and the much awaited transparency by Mr and Mrs McCann will totally exonerate them. But why don’t they simply produce the SMS messages and explain why call details were deleted?

By Paulo Reis and associates

(*) This report is a result of cooperation with a leading international investigative firm that is in the closing stages of an 18 month intensive investigation that is expected to reopen the case in Portugal and to start new proceedings in the UK.

Publicada por Paulo Reis em [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Tony Bennett** 24.01.16 23:25

Very quick response @ GEG

Paulo Reis took it as fact that there was a 'crying incident' on the evening of Tuesday 1 May, but this now looks wrong and highly misleading ('confusion is good').

Here's the Reis article again with certain important bits highlighted in blue for those reluctant to wade through the whole article:

==================

More on the deleted call records

Where Was Kate McCann? (*)

The CD issued by Ministerio Publico de Portimao in July 2008, contains a great deal of information on the mobile calls made and received by the “Tapas 9” but it is dispersed, difficult to retrieve and with important pages and charts missing. The main documents of interest from the CD are:

* A 3 page report by the Policia Judiaria (undated, but probably 4th May 2007) listing call records retrieved from the handsets of Mr and Mrs McCann
* A detailed (and excellent report) by Inspector Paulo Dias, Inspector of UNI-Sector de Análise, Lisbon, dated 9th November 2007
* Schedules provided by Vodafone on 14th December 2007 covering a period from 29th April 2007 for Gerald McCann, David Payne, Rachael Mampilly, broken into four separate sections for incoming and outgoing telephone calls, incoming and outgoing SMS traffic
* A second report by Inspector Dias dated 5th February 2008, containing time bars, link charts and maps pinpointing where the “Tapas 9’s” sets were when they activated antennae
* A third report by Inspector Dias dated 2nd June 2008 which includes details of activations of the Luz and other mobile antenna from 28th April 2007 to September 2007
* The Rogatory Letter requests and correspondence dated from 5th December 2007 to May 2007 and responses from the Home Office in April and May 2008

The PJ used a program, called the “Analyst’s Notebook” as well as “Excel” to handle what were very large datasets. Inspector Dias pointed out that “Excel” was far from ideal, because of its limited capacity and it seems that much of the data provided was paper based and had to be rekeyed. Also the main focus of the research was limited to the evening of Thursday 3rd May 2007. But, despite the problems, the PJ’s work is impressive, innovative and very detailed. For example, there is a brilliant analysis (which unfortunately led nowhere) based on the hypothesis of two abductors each working with mobiles in the Ocean Club area immediately before Madeleine was reported missing. There is another excellent piece of work which tracks down a misrouted call, from Swansea, to Kate McCann at 11.21 on Wednesday 2nd May 2007.

However, there are potentially serious omissions:

* The most important records were not available when Mr and Mrs McCann attended their “Arguido interviews” on 6th and 7th September 2007 and it is doubtful that they were ever reviewed by the very experienced analysts from the Leicestershire Police, whose team left the Algarve soon after the McCann’s return to the UK in September 2007
* There are no detailed call records from the mobile operators for Kate McCann, Russell O’Brien, Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner
* When the PJ obtained the McCann’s mobiles they do not appear to have retrieved deleted data or to extract their contact lists
* None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered
* The details of over 50 UK subscribers contacted by the Tapas 9 in the critical period, as well as their onward local and international call records, was included in the Rogatory Letter request in December 2007. If this information was provided, it is not in the CD
* A critical link chart (Anexo 37) for Tuesday 1st May 2007 is missing from Inspector Dias’s report

These omissions make interpretation of the data difficult but what is available provides an interesting picture. First, it is obvious that the memories in the McCanns mobiles were incomplete and, in Kate McCann’s case, selectively deleted.

Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea “wrong number”), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been “whoosh-clunked” from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night? A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything? It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.

The first call found in Gerald’s mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wife’s handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.

If the deletions were deliberate (and it is an “if”) it implies the McCann’s were both “forensically aware” and crafty and wanted to hide something from the PJ. For this reason, it is important to explore the call record data and to match it against other evidence.

On Saturday 28th April 2007, after their arrival in Luz, Kate McCann’s mobile triggered the antenna 9 times. It is not possible to say, from the available records, whether these were incoming or outgoing calls or SMSs or for how long they lasted. The last activations were at 20.55 and 20.59 when (based on their statements) the Tapas 9 returned for an early night after eating at the Millennium Restaurant with their children. All of these records were erased from the memory of Kate McCann’s mobile. Gerald McCann’s mobile did not activate any of the Luz antennae that day.

On Sunday 29th April 2007, the first activation of Kate McCann’s mobile was at 9.23, but again there are no Vodafone logs or time bars to provide further detail. However, by internally matching the antenna records it appears that she called her husband at 12.26 and 17.02.

The crèche records indicate that he collected Madeleine at 12.15. He also picked up the twins around 17.00 but mistakenly recorded the time as “12.30”. Chances are that the calls from Kate McCann were to check that he had picked up the kids. At 10.13 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx3899. The last activation by Kate McCann’s mobile was at 19.30 and Gerald’s at 17.02.

A pattern on this sheet (and it applies to all of the Tapas 9) is that no activations took place at any time during the week while they were at dinner. So maybe Clarence Mitchell was right, after all, and that they were so “into each other” that they didn’t want to be disturbed while sardine munching and left their mobiles in their rooms. They were never specifically asked this question, but it is very important and the point will be addressed later.

On Monday 30th April 2007, neither of the McCann’s 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 crèches. On this afternoon, Madeleine remained in the crèche 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 McCann’s mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the day’s 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 crèche 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.

At around 8.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007, Miss Nejoua Chekeya, the Ocean Club’s busty Aerobics Instructor, held a “Quiz Night” and was later invited, allegedly by Gerald McCann, to join his table which she did sometime between 9.30pm and 9.50pm. She did not say how long she had remained with them, but she is not the sort of woman men would wish see to leave too quickly. Miss Chekeya stated that one dinner setting was unused and that she could not remember seeing Kate McCann.

However, both Jane Tanner and Russell O’Brien have stated that he did not go to the Tapas Bar on the “Quiz Night” (i.e. Tuesday 1st May 2007), but had stayed in their room looking after his sick daughter. Jane Tanner took his dinner to the room; thus explaining the unused plate setting. Russell O’Brien was not asked by either the Policia Judiciaria or Leicestershire Police whether he had heard Madeleine crying!

Kate McCann’s mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the “Tapas 9”.

The evidence from the call logs gives the strongest clue that the “Tapas 9” left their telephones in their rooms when they went to dinner. Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s spokesperson, confirmed this. In an interview, reported on 6th April 2008 by Ned Temko of “The Guardian”, Mr Mitchell said: “You had nine people in a bar without watches on, without mobile phones and absolute panic set in when they realised what had happened…. We would say that, if the police had a perfect time line across nine people, that would be a damn sight more suspicious than the fractured, illogical, composite statements they might have got”

Mrs Fenn, the McCann’s neighbour, reported that Madeleine had cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45. The evidence shows that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A 14 minutes before Madeleine started crying. Tuesday 1st May 2007 is the only night (except, of course, for Thursday 3rd May 2007) that either of the McCanns or any of their friends made calls after dinner.

Mrs McCann volunteered to the PJ that on the night of Wednesday 2nd May 2007, she had slept in the spare bed in her children’s room because her husband had not paid her enough attention over dinner. Or put another way, does she mean the amorous Scot was paying someone else (like Miss Chekeya) too much attention, causing her to stomp out of the Tapas Bar before him: ultimately leading to the spare bed in a strop? Gerald McCann said he thought the reason his wife had slept in the children’s bedroom was because of his snoring and that he did not even bother asking her the following morning what the problem was.

Could it be that their timings are wrong by 24 hours and that Kate McCann’s nocturnal shenanigans took place on the night of Tuesday 1st May 2007? It would fit, but why be untruthful about it? A possible reason is that they wanted to conceal both Kate McCann’s state of mind and the fact that she had returned to Apartment 5A, just before Madeleine’s cries for help.

On Wednesday 2nd May 2007, Kate McCann called her friend “Amanda” at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning: so Kate McCann was “up with the larks”. Amanda returned the calls at 7.50. There is no record of how long any of these calls lasted or whether they were SMSs. They were all deleted from memory.

At 8.07 Gerald McCann received a call from the SMS message centre (447818520047), but does not appear to have responded. At 8.50 Kate McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx27010 and returned it at 8.53, before going to play tennis. Gerald McCann received a series of calls from his SMS message centre between 9.10 and 10.47, again without response.

At 11.21 Kate received a call from what appears to be a landline in Swansea ( xxxxx0023). The report by Inspector Dias researched this call in detail (Page 21 in his report of 9th November 2007) and discovered that it had not activated any of the Luz antennae. But digging deeper, he found that another UK mobile (xxxxx 1583) had triggered the Luz antenna when connecting to the same Swansea number at 14.01. He dug even deeper, tracked all of the calls made from Luz by xxxx1583 and established it had no connection whatsoever with any of the “Tapas 9”. The Swansea call to Kate McCann was simply a “wrong number”, misrouted and thus not logged by the Luz antennae.

What Inspector Dias did not realise was that the Swansea call had become so special to Kate McCann that, when deleting all of the other Portuguese call records from memory, she decided to leave this one intact.

Gerald received five further calls from the SMS message centre and at 15.50 called 91121, probably to collect his messages. He received further calls from the centre at 17.49 and 19.49. The records provided by Vodafone show these calls but that they originate from a different mobile number (0xxxx014310)

At 20.08 Kate McCann received two calls from a UK mobile xxxx7624 and six minutes later Gerald McCann called 91121: again to collect messages before he left for the Tapas Bar. This was the last activation of the day by either of the McCanns; probably confirming that their mobiles remained in Apartment 5A when they went to dinner.

On Thursday 3rd May 2007 (the critical day) at 8.23 and 8.24 Kate McCann’s mobile activated the antenna to call xxxx7624. There is nothing in file to indicate the owner of this mobile but it does not appear to be any of the McCann family or friends.

At 12.24 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK Mobile xxxx1746. Again there is no clue in the file to the subscriber’s name. At 12.31 Kate McCann received a call (or SMS) from her mother’s mobile and responded an hour later.

Neither of the McCanns appears to have had any further activity on their telephones until after Madeleine was reported missing when Gerald McCann called his wife four times between 23.14 and 23.52. At 23.40 he called his sister – Trish Cameron and at 23.52 -Janet Kennedy.

The batch of SMS messages received by Gerald McCann on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 seems to have caused him some anxiety. Although the number “07818520047” is in a block allocated to Vodafone, the company has no record of the subscriber’s name. When the number is dialed, connection is made to a recorded message which explains that changes have been made to the way customers can access their mailboxes and that they can now dial “121” from their handset or “07836121121” from any other telephone.

Thus the number appears to be a message box for Gerald McCann that sends him an SMS when his mobile is unable to accept a call (because it is out of range or turned off). However, when he was asked by “Expresso TV” on 6th September 2008 about the “sixteen SMS messages” received, he flustered:

“No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there [were] 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got…” Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted; “Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken”. Gerald McCann continued: “so you know that it is actually rubbish”.

Their McCanns’ denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous - because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after.

There were 16 SMS messages, in total, so why prevaricate and deny an allegation that was never made. The question was about received messages, not those sent, and on the day before not on 3rd May 2007 or the day after! In the field of forensic linguistics you must always concentrate on the precise wording of denials and especially on those of allegations not made. The denials made by the McCanns are suspicious. However, Mrs McCann’s statement about her husband not sending SMS messages, until after Madeleine’s disappearance, is confirmed by Vodafone’s records.

Mr and Mrs McCann were never closely questioned by the PJ about the detail of their calls, but Gerald McCann excused the deletions by saying that his telephone’s memory only retained details of the last ten calls made. This obvious inaccuracy (It already had retained details of 17 calls) does not appear to have been challenged by the PJ and it does not in any way explain the selective deletions from his wife’s handset.

So the bottom line is that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A when Madeleine cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45 on Tuesday 1st May 2007, leading to a unique flurry of late night calls and to unique calls very early the following morning. A forensic examination of the records of Madeleine’s attendance at the “Lobsters” crèche on Wednesday 2nd and Thursday 3rd May 2007 is critically important because if they have been falsified, to establish she was there when she was not, this case takes on an entirely new dimension and sets different search parameters.

Secondly, if the memories of the mobile telephones were deleted in way suspected, a level of cunning is implied that would be capable of conceiving plan to deliberately delay reporting Madeleine’s “disappearance”; if for no other reason than to disassociate it from the crying incident on Tuesday 1st May 2007.

Of course, this is speculation and it is entirely possible that further investigation and the much awaited transparency by Mr and Mrs McCann will totally exonerate them. But why don’t they simply produce the SMS messages and explain why call details were deleted?

By Paulo Reis and associates

(*) This report is a result of cooperation with a leading international investigative firm that is in the closing stages of an 18 month intensive investigation that is expected to reopen the case in Portugal and to start new proceedings in the UK.

Publicada por Paulo Reis em [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.16 0:03

There may be questions as to whether Mrs Fenn heard the crying on Tuesday night or not, but it does not detract from the sequence of events... Keep in mind that Gerry claimed that Amelie cried that night.

Mrs Fenn;s hairdresser seems to have been told... (of course we don't know for sure) :)

There were phone calls on Kate's phone (5) between 10.17 and 10.27pm

I recall Paulo Reis claiming they were from the apartment but I don't believe there was any definitive triangulation to pinpoint exactly.

This was while she was 'supposedly at the tapas, but according to Najoua, she was not seen at the tapas during the time she was there (9.00pm - 9.50pm)Najoua does not know for sure if David Payne was there.

Kate called her friend Amanda at 7.36am Wednesday Morning... which was unusually early...

The first of the messages started arriving approx 8am.

These were the messages that the Prosecutor tried to get information on in May 2008 (just before the shelving) but was refused by the judge...

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

by sallypelt 25.01.16 0:23

There also seems to be a lot of missing information for 1 May 2007. This was the day that Robert Murat hastily arrived in Portugal.

Snipped from the link below:

The PJ used a program, called the “Analyst’s Notebook” as well as “Excel” to handle what were very large datasets. Inspector Dias pointed out that “Excel” was far from ideal, because of its limited capacity and it seems that much of the data provided was paper based and had to be rekeyed. Also the main focus of the research was limited to the evening of Thursday 3rd May 2007. But, despite the problems, the PJ’s work is impressive, innovative and very detailed. For example, there is a brilliant analysis (which unfortunately led nowhere) based on the hypothesis of two abductors each working with mobiles in the Ocean Club area immediately before Madeleine was reported missing. There is another excellent piece of work which tracks down a misrouted call, from Swansea, to Kate McCann at 11.21 on Wednesday 2nd May 2007.

However, there are potentially serious omissions:

* The most important records were not available when Mr and Mrs McCann attended their “Arguido interviews” on 6th and 7th September 2007 and it is doubtful that they were ever reviewed by the very experienced analysts from the Leicestershire Police, whose team left the Algarve soon after the McCann’s return to the UK in September 2007
* There are no detailed call records from the mobile operators for Kate McCann, Russell O’Brien, Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner
* When the PJ obtained the McCann’s mobiles they do not appear to have retrieved deleted data or to extract their contact lists
* None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered
* The details of over 50 UK subscribers contacted by the Tapas 9 in the critical period, as well as their onward local and international call records, was included in the Rogatory Letter request in December 2007. If this information was provided, it is not in the CD
* A critical link chart (Anexo 37) for Tuesday 1st May 2007 is missing from Inspector Dias’s report

On Tuesday 1st May 2007, Gerald McCann’s handset was silent all day. Kate McCann’s mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the day’s 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 crèche 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.

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

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 0:38

HiDeHo wrote:There may be questions as to whether Mrs Fenn heard the crying on Tuesday night or not, but it does not detract from the sequence of events... Keep in mind that Gerry claimed that Amelie cried that night.

Mrs Fenn's hairdresser seems to have been told... (of course we don't know for sure)

@ HideHo

1. I fear you have introduced yet a further complication with this clip form Mrs Fenn's hairdresser. There is a reference on the clip to them all going to Chaplins that evening. Yet search high and low, and there is no corroboration of this alleged trip to Chaplins AFAIK. I am also curious as to who took this film at the hairdressers and why they did so. Do you know?

2. You mention Gerry saying that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night. If so, is he suggesting that Mrs Fenn heard Amelie, not Madeleine, that night? Or that both were crying? How does he know Amelie was crying that night anyway?

3. When did Gerry ever say that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night? AFAIK only on an Irish late night TV show, shown a year or two after Madeleine's disappearance. Why did he never mention this before? - or in his police witness statements?

4. I mentioned 12 points which suggest that Mrs Fenn did not hear any crying on Tuesday 1 May, or any other day. Is there any good answer to those 12 points?

IN SUMMARY, my plea is that we look at the actual facts of the period you want us to look at (Tuesday night and Wednesday) - but WITHOUT the burden of trying to fit Mrs Fenn's alleged '75 minutes of crying' into the mix. It will get us off on the wrong track from the start

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.16 2:08

Tony Bennett wrote:@ HideHo

1. I fear you have introduced yet a further complication with this clip form Mrs Fenn's hairdresser. There is a reference on the clip to them all going to Chaplins that evening. Yet search high and low, and there is no corroboration of this alleged trip to Chaplins AFAIK. I am also curious as to who took this film at the hairdressers and why they did so. Do you know?

2. You mention Gerry saying that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night. If so, is he suggesting that Mrs Fenn heard Amelie, not Madeleine, that night? Or that both were crying? How does he know Amelie was crying that night anyway?

3. When did Gerry ever say that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night? AFAIK only on an Irish late night TV show, shown a year or two after Madeleine's disappearance. Why did he never mention this before? - or in his police witness statements?

4. I mentioned 12 points which suggest that Mrs Fenn did not hear any crying on Tuesday 1 May, or any other day. Is there any good answer to those 12 points?

IN SUMMARY, my plea is that we look at the actual facts of the period you want us to look at (Tuesday night and Wednesday) - but WITHOUT the burden of trying to fit Mrs Fenn's alleged '75 minutes of crying' into the mix. It will get us off on the wrong track from the start

Firstly, I believe we have to look at how much of the investigation is actually recorded in the files...

A LOT of the intelligence is not there so we have no idea what the information from informal statements contain.

It has been suggested in the Portuguese press that Mrs Fenn was spoken to informally before her formal Statement in August. None of us really know what was said during those months...

However, I try to remain with what IS in the files and interviews and quotes. This doesn't mean they are true, and much of the files are based on incorrect information....

I tend to look at Sol articles and CdM reports which have proven to give us fairly factual info prior to the release of the files. I would use quotes from the newspapers but also keep the info in my head to help in case it may be factual.

My belief is that we know a fraction of what happened that week.... Maybe 5-10% regarding the timeline.

My effort is to show the timeline of statements, compare to others and highlight the discrepancies.

I make no attempt to explain my findings except to suggest how the results could impact...

Did Mrs Fenn hear the crying? I have no real idea but although there may be lots of info to suggest she did not hear it, I cannot make that claim.

My effort is not to explain the discrepancies, only to highlight their existence when compared to other statements and allow members to make their own decisions. Maybe occasionally I will have an opinion, but its generally based on what I have read in the files.

I didnt create a possible theory that something happened to Madeleine during the week and try to support that theory... I look for some kind of proof that she was seen during the week and not finding any, drew a conclusion that possibly something happened during the week...

I looked at all the discrepancies and saw they started (from comparing statements) that they started on Tuesday so looked at the possibility that the discrepancies may mean that is when there was an effort to hide 'something'.

I have no idea and have never speculated how Madeleine may have died. It is not for me to look at the statements and draw my own conclusions whether they lied or not unless I can base it on the comparison with other statements...

It is not for me to scrutinise Mrs Fenn's statement and decide if she is telling the truth, I just compare it to all the other statements and leave it to others to decide if they believe it or not.

For this reason I include Mrs Fenn's statement 'as is' recognising it could have been another day, or not at all. I have no idea. I just follow what the files 'say' and give links for others to decide for themselves, or in your case to explain why you dont believe it to be credible.... Thats not part of my effort... I merely show what the files 'claim' and allow others to draw their conclusions or dispute it as you have been able to do effectively.

That being said... as mentioned, I don't know if Mrs Fenn was correct in her statement for that night but it does not alter the timeline of events that exist from the statements in the files.

Tony Bennett wrote:1. I fear you have introduced yet a further complication with this clip form Mrs Fenn's hairdresser. There is a reference on the clip to them all going to Chaplins that evening. Yet search high and low, and there is no corroboration of this alleged trip to Chaplins AFAIK. I am also curious as to who took this film at the hairdressers and why they did so. Do you know?

Regarding the clip from Mrs Fenn's hairdresser it was taken from Informe Especial a Chilean documentary made in August 2007 which also has segments from waiters at the tapas etc.

We don't know if any of the info is true, only that it has been quoted. We have no idea if they went to Chaplins or not so important to not claim as fact, but keep it in mind.

Although this documentary is not translated its a very worthwhile watch

Tony Bennett wrote:2. You mention Gerry saying that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night. If so, is he suggesting that Mrs Fenn heard Amelie, not Madeleine, that night? Or that both were crying? How does he know Amelie was crying that night anyway?

3. When did Gerry ever say that Amelie was crying on the Tuesday night? AFAIK only on an Irish late night TV show, shown a year or two after Madeleine's disappearance. Why did he never mention this before? - or in his police witness statements?

I have no idea why he did not mention it before. There were three crying incidents. They attempted to justify one with suggestions Amelie was crying Monday or Tuesday. They claimed Maddie came to them regarding crying on Wednesday night but that in itself raises questions as their May 4th statement claims she told them it was the twins and later changed it to Sean and Madeleine...

Jane and Fiona claim Kate told them on 3rd it was Madeleine and Sean and yet the following morning they had told the police it was TWINS...so did Jane and Fiona find out about the crying 'after' they changed it? One has to wonder.

Tony Bennett wrote:4. I mentioned 12 points which suggest that Mrs Fenn did not hear any crying on Tuesday 1 May, or any other day. Is there any good answer to those 12 points?

Tony, you have offered a very effective explanation regarding Mrs Fenn's statement and whether it is valid. I only base my timelines on what is available in the files and have to leave it to the 'reader' to decide whther Ms Fenns statement is correct, another day or whether it didn't exist.

I cannot change what the files show me. I prepare the files info so researchers like yourself can base YOUR research and opinions which is usually in far more depth than I would have time for.

Tony Bennett wrote:IN SUMMARY, my plea is that we look at the actual facts of the period you want us to look at (Tuesday night and Wednesday) - but WITHOUT the burden of trying to fit Mrs Fenn's alleged '75 minutes of crying' into the mix. It will get us off on the wrong track from the start

I must mention again, I try to not provide theories based on opinion or independent research. If I don't have a link in the files, interview or quote then I don't (usually) use it.

It is your prerogative to remove Mrs Fenns statement about the crying incident. It does not minimise the curiosity of the rest of what may have happened during that time period.

We are bound to differ in our opinions because we are all focusing on different aspects of the case and I'm so glad that we respect each others' 'agenda'. For me it is important to link to the files (whether true or not) and recognise there is SO much that happened that week that we have no idea about.

I will leave you to scrutinise the discrepancies but I will happily provide you with any links that you may not be familiar with. It's impossible for any one person to digest everything in the case...

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 7:53

HiDeHo wrote:
I try to remain with what IS in the files and interviews and quotes. This doesn't mean they are true, and much of the files are based on incorrect information...My effort is not to explain the discrepancies, only to highlight their existence...I didn't create a possible theory that something happened to Madeleine during the week and try to support that theory... It is not for me to scrutinise Mrs Fenn's statement and decide if she is telling the truth...

REPLY: Many thanks for your detailed, full - and speedy - reply, this is always very helpful.

It is a recognised investigative method to analyse the credibility and truthfulness of every witness. Witness statements cannot be given equal weight. For example, in your analysis of the alleged 'sighting' of Madeleine after Sunday, you quite rightly drew attention to the very detailed statement of a cleaner who saw the McCanns going to lunch with the Paynes on Sunday lunchtime, about 1.00pm. You observed, correctly, that her statement had a high degree of credibility. Now if we apply similar criteria to certain other statements, their credibility is much less, or even zero. Indeed, your method of analysing the alleged 'sightings' of Madeleine that week was to go through their statements, one by one, assessing their degree of credibility. Which is precisely what I am doing in the case of Mrs Fenn. And the Smiths.

Examples of statements that in my judgment lack credibility are those of David Payne re his alleged 6.30pm to G5A, Mrs Fenn's statement, and all of the Smiths' statements. If there is any real suspicion that any witness is not a sincere and honest witness of truth, then we have to take everything that witness says with a huge amount of caution.

Regarding the clip from Mrs Fenn's hairdresser it was taken from Informe Especial a Chilean documentary made in August 2007 which also has segments from waiters at the tapas etc. We don't know if any of the info is true, only that it has been quoted. We have no idea if they went to Chaplins or not so important to not claim as fact, but keep it in mind.

REPLY: OK. Thanks for the clip from the Chilean doc. It is in Spanish, yes? Was anything really significant said in it?

I have no idea why he did not mention it before. There were three crying incidents. They attempted to justify one with suggestions Amelie was crying Monday or Tuesday. They claimed Maddie came to them regarding crying on Wednesday night but that in itself raises questions as their May 4th statement claims she told them it was the twins and later changed it to Sean and Madeleine...

Jane and Fiona claim Kate told them on 3rd it was Madeleine and Sean and yet the following morning they had told the police it was TWINS...so did Jane and Fiona find out about the crying 'after' they changed it? One has to wonder.

REPLY: You said: "There were three crying incidents". In the light of all that you say, it would surely be more correct to say "There were three alleged crying incidents". There mustr be serious doubts about whether any of them took place.

Tony, you have offered a very effective explanation regarding Mrs Fenn's statement and whether it is valid. I only base my timelines on what is available in the files and have to leave it to the 'reader' to decide whther Mrs Fenns statement is correct, another day or whether it didn't exist.

REPLY: If I've followed your analysis of sightings of Madeleine after Sunday, I think you are suggesting that Mrs Fenn's statement is the only alleged 'sighting' (or rather 'hearing') that week that has any credibility at all. My own assessment is that her statement has zero credibility

Tony Bennett wrote: IN SUMMARY, my plea is that we look at the actual facts of the period you want us to look at (Tuesday night and Wednesday) - but WITHOUT the burden of trying to fit Mrs Fenn's alleged '75 minutes of crying' into the mix. It will get us off on the wrong track from the start

HideHo replied: It is your prerogative to remove Mrs Fenns' statement about the crying incident. It does not minimise the curiosity of the rest of what may have happened during that time period.

REPLY: True.

by Guest 25.01.16 8:18

About the "deleted" text messages.

Back in the days of 3As I did a long analysis of the messages and the phones.

Although it couldn't be proved, there was the strong possibility that their phones only held the last 10 text messages and as new ones were added the oldest "dropped off".

Nokia phones did this back then and I'm sure Gerry at least had a Nokia.

I still use an old Nokia phone that does this (I'm very old school).

As they received texts on the 4th of May the texts received the previous days were self deleting.

There was more then enough reasonable doubt about the missing text messages.

What the missing messages actually said is another issue.

Although.. I remember some discussion about them being automated texts saying they had voicemail.

by Guest 25.01.16 11:24

BlueBag wrote:About the "deleted" text messages.

Back in the days of 3As I did a long analysis of the messages and the phones.

Although it couldn't be proved, there was the strong possibility that their phones only held the last 10 text messages and as new ones were added the oldest "dropped off".

Nokia phones did this back then and I'm sure Gerry at least had a Nokia.

I still use an old Nokia phone that does this (I'm very old school).

As they received texts on the 4th of May the texts received the previous days were self deleting.

There was more then enough reasonable doubt about the missing text messages.

What the missing messages actually said is another issue.

Although.. I remember some discussion about them being automated texts saying they had voicemail.

Is there anywhere that analysis can be picked up?

For those following the phone trail, Gerry was on Vodafone, Kate was on Optimus. In his Sep 2007 report, Inspector Paulo Dias explains clearly that, if those two handsets made contact in Luz on 3 May, then both operators would record the call, with slight differences in timing etc due simply to the operator set-up.

So the supposed four calls from Gerry to Kate, at 23:14 and 23:17 on 3 May, is actually two calls, both double recorded.

There is some location info in the records, but not triangulation.

by Guest 25.01.16 11:41

3As phone stuff must have been 5-6 years ago.

by Guest 25.01.16 11:44

Also... yes Gerry was on Vodaphone and if I remember correctly, if you were off the network (phone switched off) and you had voicemail they sent you a text reminder every x number of hours.

I honestly thought there wasn't much meat to the deleted text, call register stuff at the end of it.

Kate's activity on Tuesday night and wednesday morning was interesting though.

by sallypelt 25.01.16 12:56

BlueBag wrote:Also... yes Gerry was on Vodaphone and if I remember correctly, if you were off the network (phone switched off) and you had voicemail they sent you a text reminder every x number of hours.

I honestly thought there wasn't much meat to the deleted text, call register stuff at the end of it.

Kate's activity on Tuesday night and wednesday morning was interesting though.

Didn't the PJ find 3 mobile phone sim cards in Robert Murat's home when they searched it? I believe one was a Vodophone sim. Why would someone want 3 different sims, or am I behind the times?

by worriedmum 25.01.16 13:08

I don't agree that Mrs Fenn is not a reliable witness. Some of what she is reported to have said is from newspapers-not necessarily verbatim.

As for coming forward, I think that a lot of people don't want to get involved /trust that the police have got it sorted.

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 13:32

worriedmum wrote:I don't agree that Mrs Fenn is not a reliable witness. Some of what she is reported to have said is from newspapers - not necessarily verbatim.

@ worriedmum   Did you appreciate the point (see also below) that most of these quotes from Mrs Fenn about the burglary (one week before, no two weeks before, no three weeks, no several weeks before) were printed in the British mainstream press two days BEFORE she gave her statement to the PJ on 20 August? No doubt based on stories given to them (by Clarence Mitchell) at least a day or two before. Can you see how very directly that points to collusion of some kind between Mitchell & the McCann Team and Mrs Fenn? SAnd speaking of the alleged burglary, can you honestly say you believe all the weird and wonderful and contradictory claims made about this burglary?

As for coming forward, I think that a lot of people don't want to get involved /trust that the police have got it sorted.

REPLY: People made exactly the same excuse for the Smiths - for delaying 13 days before even reporting the incident, then Martin Smith waiting 11 days before reporting his claim (which he has since revoked) that he thought the abductor was Gerry McCann based on seeing him walk off a plane. Mrs Fenn (a) waited 111 days before reporting her lurid claims about burglars and 75 minutes of sobbing and (b) clearly only did so following prompting from the McCann Team. And then she said what she said was 'rubbish'!

@ worriedmum - I really want to understand why people still believe that Mrs Fenn is telling the truth, when there are so many indications to the contrary.

So I can I please invite you - or anyone else who believes that Mrs Fenn is telling the plain unvarnished truth - to give at least some kind of answer to each of the 12 points below?

Thanks!

These are at least TWELVE reasons for disregarding Mrs Fenn's account:

1. She didn't make her statement until 111 days after the date Madeleine was reported missing.

2. She only made this statement after being prompted by members of the McCann Team or those working for them.

3. Two days before she made her statement, there was a flurry of major articles in the British mainstream press, all forecasting precisely what she was going to say before she made her statement (clear breach of the fabled Portuguese judicial secrecy rules, by the way).

4. She made a convoluted statement explaining that the crying was not of a child 'two years or under'. Howe exactly could she tell the difference between the crying of a 2-year-old and a 3-year-old? It's nonsense, isn't it? It looks like it was contrived to suggest this was Madeleine.

5. Only one child crying for 75 minutes? What about the other two?

6. Mrs Fenn says she 'phoned her friend Mrs Glyn about the crying at about 11.00pm. The only thing Mrs Fenn reports is Mrs Glyn saying: "I'm not surprised". How credible is it that these two women would allow a child to be heard sobbing for a continuous 75 minutes and yet not pick up the 'phone to someone?

7. Mrs Fenn claimed she had a 'burglary' attempt. She gave four different dates for this burglary attempt: one week before, two weeks, three weeks, and finally 'several weeks'.

8. She gave different versions of the incident: 'He climbed in through a window' or 'He broke in' or 'He entered with a key.

9. She gave several different versions of whether she contacted the police, including: "So shocked she 'phoned the police immediately" and "Nothing was stolen so I didn't bother reporting it".

10. She gave a highly unlikely account of what actually happened: "Tried to grab his ankle as he jumped out of the window" [this was a first-floor window and the concrete floor below was a 12' to 15' drop].

11. Afterwards, she told journalists to "ignore what I'm supposed to have said", adding: "It's all rubbish".

12. Not one other resident, holidaymaker or staff member head this crying during a period of 75 minutes - so there is no corroboration of it.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.16 13:41

Thanks for your fast reply Tony :)

I don't have time to offer much detail in response but I will try...

Regarding the credibility issue...

For the most part I offer the timelines based on statements and highlight the discrepancies that I find. I leave it to the reader to use that information however they wish.

As far as the 'Who saw Madeleine?' that was a direct attempt by myself to establish credibility in itself. ANY statement that I felt showed specific sighting that I felt had proof and credibility that it was Madeleine would then give me an idea of the day that something may have happened.

It was not contrived. I had no idea what the research would tell me. The discrepancies had started on Tuesday so if a CREDIBLE/PROOF sighting of Madeleine after Tuesday, it would suggest to me that the discrepancies were related to another issue and not a cover up of something happening to Madeleine.

As it happened I could not find one after Sunday, so the discrepancies starting Tuesday morning could still have been related to something happening to Madeleine.

If Fatima had seen Maddie on Wednesday and all her work times checked out then I would not be looking at something happening earlier. It can always be said that maybe it wasn't Maddie with the twins etc (if I wanted a theory to fit) , but I take what I am am 'told' in the files and accept that unless another statement negates it. I don't look to make any theory fit.

Most witnesses have good intentions about whether they saw Maddie and may have just been mistaken about the child they were asked to remember, as it was a younger child on the poster so they would understandably try to recollect a child that looked like the poster pic.

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

I am not sure why you have thought that I use Mrs Fenn's statement as a sighting/hearing. It is not close to any proof.

I have no idea if Mrs Fenn heard Maddie or another child.

If she heard only one child then its possible that the child was in the cot that was seen in the parent's bedroom and the other children were not around, or they were 'sedated'

It's possible it came from the Oldfield's apartment which was also directly under Mrs Fenns apartment and although they only had a year old child, Rachael did tell us that the older child of Jane Tanner's was bathed in their apartment so was it Ella that Mrs Fenn heard.

As mentioned, could she have been wrong about the night?

I have made no effort to establish the credibility of her statement and have never presumed it was Maddie she heard.

In assessing the 'Who saw Madeleine?' statements, I was not out to scrutinise to assess their credibility only to decide if I felt it was (relative) PROOF and if the person were questionable in their credibility (ie Charlotte and Catriona because we know she visited the McCanns in November) then I could not give their statement credibility as 'proof'.

So, what I am saying is that I did not assess their credibility, as many MAY have seen Maddie, I was not trying to prove they DIDN'T see Maddie, only that I did not see proof they DID see her.

The Chilean documentary had lots of interesting moments and I uploaded many of them as 'McMinutes' (Press a button, Waiters recorded in tapas, Chat with Mrs Murat, etc etc)

I must keep trying to explain what my research has done.... it is NOT to be used as examples of statements' credibility in themselves. It is ONLY to show how they compare with other statements and how it highlights discrepancies...

It is basically the groundwork for others to use to scrutinise individual topics and to add their own opinions. I only highlight what exists and, as mentioned, rarely offer an opinion unless that opinion is based on what is in the files.

Regarding the 'Who saw Madeleine' research... I found no proof after Sunday lunchtime of Maddie being seen... I estblished the discrepancies as starting Tuesday morning, so both are compatible with the possibility of something happening to Maddie after Sunday and before Tuesday morning...

However, it is still compatible with the possibility that something did not happen until Thursday, though I would be curious to ask anyone that thinks it was not until Thursday, how they explain the discrepancies and what were they trying to hide before Thursday?

I can see I wasn't very concise in this post :) but it's so important to me to let everyone know that I am not creating theories and asking others to believe them...

I am laying the groundwork from the files for everyone to look at and make their own decisions and opinions...based on the info from the files.

I can give a link to the files from anything that I post (or quotes or interviews)

I don't know how Maddie died, I don't know how involved the other tapas 7 were involved, I don't know why they found it necessary to hide her body, i dont know if the twins were sedated, I don't know what portions of their statements are true, I don't know if witnesses were mistaken.

I try to stay with the simplicity of detailing what the files 'tell' me and pass that info on to others... (and hope it's of some use) smilie

by NickE 25.01.16 14:04

sallypelt wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Also... yes Gerry was on Vodaphone and if I remember correctly, if you were off the network (phone switched off) and you had voicemail they sent you a text reminder every x number of hours.

I honestly thought there wasn't much meat to the deleted text, call register stuff at the end of it.

Kate's activity on Tuesday night and wednesday morning was interesting though.

Didn't the PJ find 3 mobile phone sim cards in Robert Murat's home when they searched it? I believe one was a Vodophone sim. Why would someone want 3 different sims, or am I behind the times?

Kiko:
"I Always said RobertMurat's texting at 2200 on 1/5 was directly connected with K Mccann's which started 2 mins after Murat's had finished.
Here's another funny thing: Murat pairs of SMS 2200 1/5 separated by: 1 min, 3 mins, 6 mins. KM's at 2216 by 1 min, 3 mins, 7 mins.Connect!" .

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.16 14:11

BlueBag wrote:Also... yes Gerry was on Vodaphone and if I remember correctly, if you were off the network (phone switched off) and you had voicemail they sent you a text reminder every x number of hours.

I honestly thought there wasn't much meat to the deleted text, call register stuff at the end of it.

Kate's activity on Tuesday night and wednesday morning was interesting though.

It appears to have been important enough to appeal to the court to have info on the text messages revealed (just prior to the shelving)

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

Madeleine McCann's Parents Investigated for Neglect (deleted)

The Times May 29, 2008
by David Brown

embedded within this article is an edited version of the judgment from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora in the investigation of Madeleine McCann:

Madeleine McCann went missing in the Algarve
Judge: Ribeiro Cardoso

1. In the case files pending in the Public Prosecution Services in which they are investigating the disappearance of M.M. and the eventual carrying out of the crimes of abduction, homicide, exposure or abandonment of a child and concealment of a corpse, the prosecutor in charge of the case under investigation

The Penal Procedural Code, promoted, amongst other operations, a request of the 3 national mobile telephone operators (TMN, Vodafone and Optimus) for digital support (CD or DVD) of the complete listings of telephone traffic to calls received and made in the period of time between April 28 2007 until September 9 2007, including cellular location and trace-back, as well as all calls on roaming and SMS and MMS messages and their respective content, for the following telephone numbers: (Ten telephone numbers follow)

- Telephone number as yet unidentified which during May 2 2007 sent 14 written SMS messages to G.M. and another 4 on the day following M.M.’s disappearance.

- The request from mobile telephone operator TMN, the dispatch on digital support (CD or DVD), the complete listing of telephone traffic referring to the calls received and carried out in the period of time between 20H00M of May 3 2007 and 12H00M of May 4 2007, including cellular location and trace-back, as also all calls on roaming and SMS and MMS messages and their respective content, of the following mobile numbers:

2. However, the Instructional Judge, by ruling of 24.09.2007, did not authorise the dispatch on digital support (CD or DVD) of the content of any message sent or received by SMS or MMS pertinent to all the above referred telephone numbers, as he concluded, such would mean attaining knowledge of the content of telephone conversation or communication already carried out, without the previous judicial authorization ruling, and because there is no legal support for such a request.

3. Refusing to accept this ruling, the prosecutor interposed the present appeal:

“i) – We present our dissent to Criminal Instructional Judge’s ruling - namely the part in which he did not authorise “the dispatch on digital support (CD or DVD) of the content of any message sent or received by SMS or MMS.

ii) – There is no reason to distinguish, as the judge did, between the two types of communication – content of SMS and MMS messages and listings of telephone traffic pertinent to the calls received and carried out. Where the law does not distinguish, nobody else may.

iii) – The right to protection against the invasion of privacy or intimacy runs no bigger risk or being violated by the access to the content of SMS and MMS messages than the knowledge of the precise circumstances of time, place, method and frequency of the calls received and made.

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

[url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Madeleine-Gerry-McCann-Denies-He-Received-String-Of-Mystery-Texts/Article/20080541317466?lid=ARTICLE_1317466_Madeleine: Gerry McCann Denies He Received String Of Mystery texts&lpos=searchresults]Sky[/url]

Gerry Denies Receiving Mystery Texts

9:02am UK, Thursday May 29, 2008

Gerry McCann has denied he received a string of mystery texts the day before his daughter disappeared in the Algarve.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Madeleine went missing last year

According to court documents issued by Portugal's supreme court, police applied to seize his phone records after learning of the alleged messages.

Investigators claim 18 text messages were sent to Mr McCann from an unidentified number around the time Madeleine vanished in Praia da Luz on May 3 last year.

It is alleged that 14 messages were texted on May 2 and four more on May 4.

But the McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell said Gerry had no knowledge of the texts and received a handful of calls on his mobile in the days before his daughter disappeared.

The documents reveal that public prosecutor Magalhaes e Meneses also sought access to text and phone messages from 10 mobile telephones thought to belong to the McCanns and seven of their friends.

He also asked for a full list of all the calls made between the group from when they arrived in Portugal on April 28 and when the McCanns left on September 9.

But the supreme court issued a detailed ruling rejecting the application.

by whatsupdoc 25.01.16 14:20

I've not fully read all your posts, HiDeHo but what I have read I fully agree with. bravo

Tony, I get the feeling from briefly reading some of your posts that you are trying to steer us away from thinking that some of the Tapas group went to Chaplins on the Tuesday night and also whether Mrs. Fenn's statement re a child crying was true. I did get some flak on Twitter when I mentioned Chaplins some time ago so I wondered if I had hit a nerve. I was told it was "A big IF" that the Tapas group went there on the Tuesday. So, not such a small deal whether they went or not.
I think some of the Tapas group went to Chaplins on the Tuesday night and I also think Mrs. Fenn did hear a child crying for over an hour on the Tuesday night. I did read that there was a witness who saw the group at Chaplins.
Once the Press get involved you can kiss goodbye to any truth so it goes straight in the trash can.
Because we are trying to solve this mystery with very little real evidence and get Justice for Madeleine, I think you are straying into Fantasy land trying to award crediblity ratings to testimonies. I think you have to hear the person giving the evidence. Just because Mrs. Fenn is allegedly supposed to have said "It's all rubbish" doesn't mean anything. It could have been a remark to get away from the Press, or maybe someone told her not to talk about it. She may not have even said it. Who believes the Press or TV any more?
Who is to say any of the 12 points are true? I think that building an overall picture is more important.

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 14:23

NickE wrote:
Quoting Kiko:

"I always said Robert Murat's texting at 2200 on 1/5 was directly connected with K McCann's which started 2 mins after Murat's had finished.

Here's another funny thing: Murat pairs of SMS 2200 1/5 separated by: 1 min, 3 mins, 6 mins. KM's at 2216 by 1 min, 3 mins, 7 mins. Connect!" .

Despite all that I've ever said about Robert Murat, I was never aware of this!

Has this ever been brought here before? - I am not aware of it, during the 6 years and 2 months I've been a member.

What are the statistical chances of two people connecting at the same time (apart from 2 minutes, which could just be the time settings on the respective 'phones AND THEN making/receiving three calls within 7 minutes at exactly the same times?

Put this together with Murat's unexplained rush to Praia da Luz early on May 1, and then Gerry McCann's stony-faced, angry refusal to comment on whether he already knew Murat, and surely we have just had one of the most significant posts ever on CMMOM?!

Thank you very much @ NickE for bringing this here, and - despite my never having been persuaded by his 'substitute Maddie' theory - thank you too @ Kiko for his research of these 'phone records.

by sallypelt 25.01.16 14:37

Tony Bennett wrote:
NickE wrote:
Quoting Kiko:

"I always said Robert Murat's texting at 2200 on 1/5 was directly connected with K McCann's which started 2 mins after Murat's had finished.

Here's another funny thing: Murat pairs of SMS 2200 1/5 separated by: 1 min, 3 mins, 6 mins. KM's at 2216 by 1 min, 3 mins, 7 mins. Connect!" .
Despite all that I've ever said about Robert Murat, I was never aware of this!

Has this ever been brought here before? - I am not aware of it, during the 6 years and 2 months I've been a member.

What are the statistical chances of two people connecting at the same time (apart from 2 minutes, which could just be the time settings on the respective 'phones AND THEN making/receiving three calls within 7 minutes at exactly the same times?

Put this together with Murat's unexplained rush to Praia da Luz early on May 1, and then Gerry McCann's stony-faced, angry refusal to comment on whether he already knew Murat, and surely we have just had one of the most significant posts ever on CMMOM?!

Thank you very much @ NickE for bringing this here, and - despite my never having been persuaded by his 'substitute Maddie' theory - thank you too @ Kiko for his research of these 'phone records.

I am techy illiterate when it comes to the whys and the wherefores of text messages, or even mobile phones in general. However, if, for example, I sent someone a text message, am I correct is saying that it would be logged at the time I press "send"? If the person receiving it takes a few minutes to type a message, then THEY press "send", does that mean the time between the person sending the text, and the person responding to the text will have a few minutes gap between the logging of both messages?

Ok...............I'll get my coat flag

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 14:45

whatsupdoc wrote:Tony, I get the feeling from briefly reading some of your posts that you are trying to steer us away from thinking that some of the Tapas group went to Chaplins on the Tuesday night

REPLY: True. What precisely is the evidence for it?

and also whether Mrs. Fenn's statement re a child crying was true.

REPLY: Yes, and I've given 12 evidential reasons for my belief.

I did get some flak on Twitter when I mentioned Chaplins some time ago so I wondered if I had hit a nerve. I was told it was "A big IF" that the Tapas group went there on the Tuesday. So, not such a small deal whether they went or not.

REPLY: You may have got 'flak' because there is no evidence for it. What is the evidence please?

I think some of the Tapas group went to Chaplins on the Tuesday night

REPLY: Why?

and I also think Mrs. Fenn did hear a child crying for over an hour on the Tuesday night.

REPLY: So what is your answer to each of my 12 evidential points against this please?

I did read that there was a witness who saw the group at Chaplins.

REPLY: Where did you read this? Do you have a link? I am quite willing to believe that some or all of the group went to Chaplins that night if you give me a single piece of good evicdence.

Once the press get involved you can kiss goodbye to any truth so it goes straight in the trash can.

REPLY: My point about the press so far as Mrs Fenn is concerned is that they were clearly briefed by the McCann Team via Clarence Mitchell about what she as going to say BEFORE she said it. So if the stories about her evidence seem contradictory and far-fetched, that's because Clarence Mitchell was the source for them

I think you are straying into fantasy land trying to award crediblity ratings to testimonies.

REPLY: Every police investigation examines the credibility of each witness. So should we.

I think you have to hear the person giving the evidence. Just because Mrs. Fenn is allegedly supposed to have said "It's all rubbish" doesn't mean anything.

REPLY: It is one certain fact which most certainly does mean something. It means a lot more if you look at all the other 11 reasons for doubting her evidence.

It could have been a remark to get away from the press, or maybe someone told her not to talk about it. She may not have even said it.

REPLY: It's recorded on a Portuguese TV news video which is still available! I will try and get you a link later. [P.S. I think I've found it. Here>>> [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Who believes the press or TV any more?

REPLY: I do when I can actually see and hear her say the actual words!

Who is to say any of the 12 points are true?

REPLY: Many of them are covered in Mrs Fenn's statement. Have another look at it.

I think that building an overall picture is more important.

REPLY: Couldn't agree more. So long as it is based on actual evidence.

by worriedmum 25.01.16 15:05

''If she heard only one child then its possible that the child was in the cot that was seen in the parent's bedroom and the other children were not around, or they were 'sedated'' whatsupdoc

I have wondered about this too. Or the 'Maddie, Maddie' not 'Daddy, Daddy'?

Tony if Clarence Mitchell fed this story to the press, what was he trying to achieve and why?

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 15:08

HiDeHo wrote:As far as the 'Who saw Madeleine?' that was a direct attempt by myself to establish credibility in itself. ANY statement that I felt showed specific sighting that I felt had proof and credibility that it was Madeleine would then give me an idea of the day that something may have happened.

REPLY: And what you did (and did really well) was to test each claimed 'sighting' for its degree of credibility. And that's all I've done for Mrs Fenn's statement. Test the credibility of her statement. Some people think we should just accept the testimony of folk like Mrs Fenn and the Smiths without batting an eyelid. (Incidentally, if you are right about something serious possibly having happened to Madeleine on the Sunday/Monday, the Smiths' statements look like they would be, at best, totally irrelevant)

so if a CREDIBLE/PROOF sighting of Madeleine after Tuesday...

REPLY: Again you are quite rightly assessing the degree of credibility attached to a witness statement. GOOD.

If Fatima had seen Maddie on Wednesday and all her work times checked out then I would not be looking at something happening earlier.

REPLY: YES. Her statement is highly credible. And it was on SUNDAY.

I take what I am am 'told' in the files and accept that unless another statement negates it.

REPLY: There may well be other reasons for discarding or doubting a witness statement.

I am not sure why you have thought that I use Mrs Fenn's statement as a sighting/hearing. It is not close to any proof.

REPLY: We are not too far apart on this issue.

I have no idea if Mrs Fenn heard Maddie or another child.

REPLY: Or if she heard a child at all.

I have made no effort to establish the credibility of her statement

REPLY: While I have. Different ways of working.

The Chilean documentary had lots of interesting moments and I uploaded many of them as 'McMinutes' (Press a button, Waiters recorded in tapas, Chat with Mrs Murat, etc etc)

REPLY: Will have a look, thanks!

...my research has done...is NOT to be used as examples of statements' credibility in themselves. It is ONLY to show how they compare with other statements and how it highlights discrepancies...

REPLY: Noted.

I would be curious to ask anyone that thinks it was not until Thursday, how they explain the discrepancies and what were they trying to hide before Thursday?

REPLY: Which is precisely why folk like Goncalo Amaral, Pat Brown and 'Textusa', who are wedded to the Thursday theory, need to back and look at your analysis.

I am laying the groundwork from the files for everyone to look at and make their own decisions and opinions...I am not creating theories and asking others to believe them...

REPLY: But to be fair and frank you are at the very least creating the basis for other theories

I don't know how Maddie died, I don't know how involved the other Tapas 7 were, I don't know why they found it necessary to hide her body, I don't know if the twins were sedated, I don't know what portions of their statements are true, I don't know if witnesses were mistaken. I try to stay with the simplicity of detailing what the files 'tell' me and pass that info on to others... (and hope it's of some use)

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 15:20

worriedmum wrote:Tony if Clarence Mitchell fed this story to the press, what was he trying to achieve and why?

In early August, Martin Grime brought his dogs to Praia da Luz. They alerted to cadaver odour or blood in 17 different locations.

Over the next 2 weeks, there was a stream of lurid press headlines, in Portugal and Britain, about:

* blood
* a corpse
* DNA
* death

etc.

Did the 'team' perhaps respond by suddenly finding a witness who could give evidence about:

1. A burglary
2. A suspicious man on the afternoon of 3 May and
3. Madeleine crying one night?

The public, on the weekend of 18/19 August, were fed the above front-page stories PLUS an article by Lori Campbell in both the Sunday Mirror and the Independent on Sunday in which the McCanns admitted to leaving the children on their own every night, for up to half-an-hour at a time. All of these stories strongly reinforced the abduction narrative after two weeks of terrible headlines suggesting that Madeleine had died in the apartment and the parents had covered it up.

P.S. Are you able to answer my question about the 12 issues which suggest that Mrs Fenn may not be a witness of truth?

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.16 16:18

There is NOTHING in the files to suggest a trip to Chaplins was a fact.

The suggestion originally came from a poster named 'Vera' what was given a certain amount of credibility at the time but I would suggest to NOT believe it as fact unless supported by files evidence.

Interesting to keep in mind though...

[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.]

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

by NickE 25.01.16 16:30

Tony Bennett wrote:
NickE wrote:
Quoting Kiko:

"I always said Robert Murat's texting at 2200 on 1/5 was directly connected with K McCann's which started 2 mins after Murat's had finished.

Here's another funny thing: Murat pairs of SMS 2200 1/5 separated by: 1 min, 3 mins, 6 mins. KM's at 2216 by 1 min, 3 mins, 7 mins. Connect!" .
Despite all that I've ever said about Robert Murat, I was never aware of this!

Has this ever been brought here before? - I am not aware of it, during the 6 years and 2 months I've been a member.

What are the statistical chances of two people connecting at the same time (apart from 2 minutes, which could just be the time settings on the respective 'phones AND THEN making/receiving three calls within 7 minutes at exactly the same times?

Put this together with Murat's unexplained rush to Praia da Luz early on May 1, and then Gerry McCann's stony-faced, angry refusal to comment on whether he already knew Murat, and surely we have just had one of the most significant posts ever on CMMOM?!

Thank you very much @ NickE for bringing this here, and - despite my never having been persuaded by his 'substitute Maddie' theory - thank you too @ Kiko for his research of these 'phone records.

Here is more from "Kiko´s" excellent research on this subject, sorry if this has been posted already.

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

"The only phone records that seem to be public for this day are for DP who had calls at 0846 and 1550".

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

"PJudiciaria withheld Annex 37. So you know the importance of Kate McCann's texts/calls 1/5 2031-37 and 2216-28. Urgent! "Fala"

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

"Kate McCann´s had a frenzy of calls on 1/5. Gerry didn't make a single voice call 1 or 2/5. But his 12 voicemails dovetailed neatly, w/out overlap, with incoming calls fm; Amanda,his Ma, Whetstone woman, Rachel and Jane. Each time 1 of them called, GM was waiting for it."

by NickE 25.01.16 17:46

HiDeHo wrote:There is NOTHING in the files to suggest a trip to Chaplins was a fact.

The suggestion originally came from a poster named 'Vera' what was given a certain amount of credibility at the time but I would suggest to NOT believe it as fact unless supported by files evidence.

Interesting to keep in mind though...

[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.]

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

"They also had a babysitting service where a person who normally worked in the creche by day stayed in the apartment and babysat the children"

I really hope that NSY have asked a nanny who later left for another country if she babysat the children in 5A on Sunday evening and was paid "under the table" or maybe the information and receipts were destroyed?

Did someone in the MW staff called Mr Murat on the "forgotten Monday" after the disaster to hurry down to Pdl?

Just thoughts flag

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

If you know what I mean.

by **Tony Bennett** 25.01.16 18:55

NickE wrote:

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

Did someone in the MW staff call Mr Murat on the ‘forgotten Monday’ after the disaster to hurry down to PdL?
Just thoughts [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If you know what I mean.

I think that as a result of this thread, all members and guests here tonight should be getting a very good idea of exactly what you mean.

Come on, let us all wake up and smell that coffee!

This man is/was the Managing Director of Resonate, a subsidiary of one of the world's most powerful PR agencies, Bell Pottinger, which has and still has h massive influence and control over the press and media:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Michael Frohlich, Managing Director of RESONATE, subsidiary of BELL POTTINGER

So was fellow Resonate Director, Tricia Moon:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Tricia Moon, Fellow Director of RESONATE, subsidiary of BELL POTTINGER

The article clearly informs us (a) that Mark Warner pulled in RESONATE and (b) that they were there in the days before Madeleine was reported missing.

Not only that, but RESONATE was reported as 'liaising with'

* The British consul
* The Portuguese Police
* The Portuguese media and
* The British media.

How very very convenient!

And how much was it that Lord Bell, owner and manager of Bell Pottinger, said the McCanns paid him for 'keeping the McCanns on the front page for a year'?

£500,000. FIVE - HUNDRED - GRAND. Most of it raised from a willing and generous British public.

NIck E reminded us that Robert Murat was hastily despatched from England to Portugal early on Tuesday 1 May.

The magazine above tells us that Mark Warner sent out RESONATE to do some work at Mark Warner and the Ocean Club - in the days before Madeleine was reported missing - to do some 'generic work'?

Pull the other one!