The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by whodunit on 03.04.16 18:30

canada12 wrote:If you reduce this to the simplest elements, we have:

1. Creche records which show that Madeleine was in the creche, signed in and out, each day.
2. Nannies who looked after the children in the creche.

If this went to court, and the nannies were questioned under oath, the questioning might go something like this:

Prosecutor: "We have here the creche records. (Nanny name), do you recall seeing Madeleine in the creche on (named) day?"

Nanny: "I do not recall seeing Madeleine in the creche on that (named) day."

Prosecutor: "What can then be the reason why Madeleine is noted on this creche register as being signed in and signed out?"

Nanny: "I don't know. I wasn't monitoring the creche register. It was only used for emergency purposes, in case we had to contact the parents."

Prosecutor: "Is it therefore possible that Madeleine could have been signed in and out of the creche by her parents, or by others, even though she was never there physically?"

Nanny: "Yes, it is possible, because we didn't monitor the creche records and had no need to consult them unless there was an emergency."

Prosecutor: "No further questions."

If this were Cat Nanny being questioned, a good prosecutor would also ask: "If you weren't monitoring the register how did you know Ella needed signing in on May 1st?" And for the purposes of this thread: How is it possible that Cat noticed Ella was physically present and needed signing in but failed to notice that a child who had been signed in was not physically present?
avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by JRP on 03.04.16 18:52

whodunit wrote:
canada12 wrote:If you reduce this to the simplest elements, we have:

1. Creche records which show that Madeleine was in the creche, signed in and out, each day.
2. Nannies who looked after the children in the creche.

If this went to court, and the nannies were questioned under oath, the questioning might go something like this:

Prosecutor: "We have here the creche records. (Nanny name), do you recall seeing Madeleine in the creche on (named) day?"

Nanny: "I do not recall seeing Madeleine in the creche on that (named) day."

Prosecutor: "What can then be the reason why Madeleine is noted on this creche register as being signed in and signed out?"

Nanny: "I don't know. I wasn't monitoring the creche register. It was only used for emergency purposes, in case we had to contact the parents."

Prosecutor: "Is it therefore possible that Madeleine could have been signed in and out of the creche by her parents, or by others, even though she was never there physically?"

Nanny: "Yes, it is possible, because we didn't monitor the creche records and had no need to consult them unless there was an emergency."

Prosecutor: "No further questions."

If this were Cat Nanny being questioned, a good prosecutor would also ask: "If you weren't monitoring the register how did you know Ella needed signing in on May 1st?" And for the purposes of this thread: How is it possible that Cat noticed Ella was physically present and needed signing in but failed to notice that a child who had been signed in was not physically present?

Yes as I've written today, and I think you have missed. Nanny being duped isn't feasible.

JRP

Posts : 534
Reputation : 467
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by whodunit on 03.04.16 19:11

@JRP "Yes as I've written today, and I think you have missed. Nanny being duped isn't feasible."

I think it is feasible she was duped but not, as the creche register demonstrates, by a 'phantom' Madeleine, ie a child who was signed in but wasn't actually present. Cat's signature on the register very effectively rules out any phantom children. The only other choices are a substitute Madeleine or Madeleine herself. Given the abundance of evidence that MBM did not make it past April 30, I'll go with the sub. This is where the evidence leads me since the other options are ruled out. [ eliminated the impossible] This remains the case even though I cannot pinpoint who the actual child might have been. I think kikoratton's candidate is very feasible as it would have ruled out the problem of confusing the child with a different name from her own and would also explain why there was a controversy over the Maddie/Not Maddie issue. [some moms, including myself, are very adamant that their child's name not be shortened and hence the child, including my own, can be very emphatic when people do it] However, I have yet to see proof that this particular child was present in PDL at the time. I mean, come on. No matter how improbable it seems, there IS evidence that GM was signing in two children, one of them named 'Madeleine'. Cat Nanny may have been in on it but then why would GM go to the trouble?

avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by Nina on 01.05.16 23:46

I recall that the children in Madeleine's group were practising a dance routine for a show for the parents on the friday. Now that for me means maybe a bit of choreography which would require numbers and set pieces and regular attendance.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.
avatar
Nina

Posts : 2856
Reputation : 331
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 74

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by MayMuse on 02.05.16 4:01

whodunit wrote:@JRP "Yes as I've written today, and I think you have missed. Nanny being duped isn't feasible."

I think it is feasible she was duped but not, as the creche register demonstrates, by a 'phantom' Madeleine, ie a child who was signed in but wasn't actually present. Cat's signature on the register very effectively rules out any phantom children. The only other choices are a substitute Madeleine or Madeleine herself. Given the abundance of evidence that MBM did not make it past April 30, I'll go with the sub. This is where the evidence leads me since the other options are ruled out. [ eliminated the impossible] This remains the case even though I cannot pinpoint who the actual child might have been. I think kikoratton's candidate is very feasible as it would have ruled out the problem of confusing the child with a different name from her own and would also explain why there was a controversy over the Maddie/Not Maddie issue. [some moms, including myself, are very adamant that their child's name not be shortened and hence the child, including my own, can be very emphatic when people do it] However, I have yet to see proof that this particular child was present in PDL at the time. I mean, come on. No matter how improbable it seems, there IS evidence that GM was signing in two children, one of them named 'Madeleine'. Cat Nanny may have been in on it but then why would GM go to the trouble?

@whodunit is that snippet a copy of the actual 'signing in' record or  a 'sliced' copy to compare side by side. The reason I ask is why would Robert Naylors name be in the same section as Madeleine's, as isn't that the 'line' for the child's name & then the parent just puts a signatory? 

Wonder if the 'writing' was ever analysed?

MayMuse

Posts : 1692
Reputation : 1206
Join date : 2016-04-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by NickE on 02.05.16 7:01

whodunit wrote:@JRP "Yes as I've written today, and I think you have missed. Nanny being duped isn't feasible."

I think it is feasible she was duped but not, as the creche register demonstrates, by a 'phantom' Madeleine, ie a child who was signed in but wasn't actually present. Cat's signature on the register very effectively rules out any phantom children. The only other choices are a substitute Madeleine or Madeleine herself. Given the abundance of evidence that MBM did not make it past April 30, I'll go with the sub. This is where the evidence leads me since the other options are ruled out. [ eliminated the impossible] This remains the case even though I cannot pinpoint who the actual child might have been. I think kikoratton's candidate is very feasible as it would have ruled out the problem of confusing the child with a different name from her own and would also explain why there was a controversy over the Maddie/Not Maddie issue. [some moms, including myself, are very adamant that their child's name not be shortened and hence the child, including my own, can be very emphatic when people do it] However, I have yet to see proof that this particular child was present in PDL at the time. I mean, come on. No matter how improbable it seems, there IS evidence that GM was signing in two children, one of them named 'Madeleine'. Cat Nanny may have been in on it but then why would GM go to the trouble?

Because both were involved in one way or another maybe?
I suspect, and I said it earlier that a certain nanny may have baby-sat in the apartment on Sunday eve/night and something happened .
This babysitter may have failed and there was a disaster with a girl who maybe had some kind of drugs for sleeping in her system.

MW was in hurry to brief Resonate and the McCanns needed a plan and Monday was so busy that they didn't know what they did this Monday.
Both McCann and a few people at MW could have been in this plan together.
Does anyone knows if some people in the Government had any investments in MW?

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".
avatar
NickE

Posts : 1006
Reputation : 314
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 42

Back to top Go down

A bet amongst themselves?

Post by Latetothecase on 02.05.16 8:59

If I recall, didn't Diane Webster make a comment about how she thought their performance was 'one of their games', and stayed still in the tapas, probably thinking they were on a wind up aimed at her?

For that to be her first conclusion, they may well have previously been on wind ups in her presence that week.

If the men were having bets that the nannies were too incompetent to recognise whose child was whose, and arranged to sign each other's little girls in as an arrogant game, it would answer quite a few questions:

1. Why Naylor didn't deny it when pressed by Kikoratton

2. Why Cat was extra distraught when the penny dropped about what had been happening at her expense - her upset was personal emotional injury, not about a child she hardly knew.

3. Why the nannies were whooshed abroad quickly.

4. Why KM said 'they've taken her' - maybe automatically assuming it was persons disgruntled at a previous gag at their expense getting their own back?

5. All the discrepancies on the creche records like spelling of names, apartments, Healy/McCann - makes sense if the wind up was that none of them were signing in their own kids.

6. Bridget M's subtle reference about how all the little girls looked exactly the same.

There are probably more, that's just off the top of my head.

It just feels like the sort of thing that gang would do to amuse themselves and feel superior. They may have been making fun of staff all week for all we know.

Latetothecase

Posts : 54
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2014-05-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by whodunit on 02.05.16 16:24

MayMuse wrote:
whodunit wrote:@JRP "Yes as I've written today, and I think you have missed. Nanny being duped isn't feasible."

I think it is feasible she was duped but not, as the creche register demonstrates, by a 'phantom' Madeleine, ie a child who was signed in but wasn't actually present. Cat's signature on the register very effectively rules out any phantom children. The only other choices are a substitute Madeleine or Madeleine herself. Given the abundance of evidence that MBM did not make it past April 30, I'll go with the sub. This is where the evidence leads me since the other options are ruled out. [ eliminated the impossible] This remains the case even though I cannot pinpoint who the actual child might have been. I think kikoratton's candidate is very feasible as it would have ruled out the problem of confusing the child with a different name from her own and would also explain why there was a controversy over the Maddie/Not Maddie issue. [some moms, including myself, are very adamant that their child's name not be shortened and hence the child, including my own, can be very emphatic when people do it] However, I have yet to see proof that this particular child was present in PDL at the time. I mean, come on. No matter how improbable it seems, there IS evidence that GM was signing in two children, one of them named 'Madeleine'. Cat Nanny may have been in on it but then why would GM go to the trouble?

@whodunit is that snippet a copy of the actual 'signing in' record or  a 'sliced' copy to compare side by side. The reason I ask is why would Robert Naylors name be in the same section as Madeleine's, as isn't that the 'line' for the child's name & then the parent just puts a signatory? 

Wonder if the 'writing' was ever analysed?

Here is the full copy of the creche record for the date, April 30:

avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine and Ella - Is it possible that ONLY ONE CHILD was attending creche?

Post by MayMuse on 02.05.16 16:34

Thank you, the crèche records have had me in a pickle from day one.so appreciate this thread. This is the first time it's hit me how odd to see the
Parents name listed in the name of the child's section. I do think this is significant, will revisit the crèche records & ponder some more!

MayMuse

Posts : 1692
Reputation : 1206
Join date : 2016-04-15

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum