Re: The Possible Dry Run By The Alleged Abductor That Possibly Caused The Alleged Crying Incident.

by **HiDeHo** 10.06.16 14:45

Verdi wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote: To think for one moment she would not have been informally spoken to, as early as possible on the 4th, would be highly unlikely - she was in the flat above for heavens sake. No police force in the world would ignore such a nearby potential witness in such serious (child missing) circumstances.

Yes, it's too ridiculous to even contemplate - unless you follow the line cast by the UK mainstream media about sardine munching beer swilling bungling disgraced cops.

This is a very important point not to be ignored. If Pamela Fenn was at home on the night of 3rd May and the morning of 4th May, she would most certainly have been questioned by the PJ during their door to door routine. As regards the PJ files, if Mrs Fenn was informally interviewed on that occasion and said she hadn't seen or heard anything then I wouldn't expect her to be mentioned in the PJ files - anymore than all the other scores interviewed from the environs of apartment 5a. If however Mrs Fenn mentioned a crying episode of long duration and maybe an attempted burglary the week prior, then I would most certainly expect her informal interview to be recorded in the PJ files, or at least acknowledged by the investigation as I would expect a follow-up formal interview.

As far as I'm aware this didn't happen which strongly indicates to me that she either wasn't at home on the night of 3rd May and/or the following day when the PJ did their house to house calls or she told them she had not seen or heard anything. The latter being the most likely in my opinion.

I believe it highly likely that she reported the crying incident, but at that time it was an 'abduction' and crying from a child a couple of days before the abduction would not have been overly important... However, once the dogs came in and the McCanns were possibly about to be charged, the incident WOULD have been important... Hence her official statement was made at that time.

by **Tony Bennett** 10.06.16 14:47

pennylane wrote:
Right. So whoever it was who told Pilditch that 'Carol Tranmerman' was a dead ringer for Jane Tanner's Tannerman was an outright, scheming, lying swine.

Probably someone who lies all the time with as many teeth as he has in his mouth.

So, in all honesty, to what extent can we rely on anything else Pilditch says in his report??
I'd say 'an outright scheming swine' is a mega understatement, Tony!

First of all, I apologise.

If you can suggest a better printable alternative, I will happily amend my post

by **Tony Bennett** 10.06.16 14:53

skyrocket wrote:Here's another one to add to the mix - Margaret Hall, the woman employed by MW apparently as a 'baby sitter', in the 2006 season. I'm throwing it in here due to the direct link the Mirror make between 'tannerman' and 'hallman' and the involvement of Metodo 3...When you read the report in the Mirror, dated the 20 August 2008, it states that Hall was leaving 5A 'after baby sitting' - no mention of rats....

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

Very clearly a bogus sighting, especially coming 15 months after the event.

Not only were Metodo 3 involved, the Oakley International Group of criminals - Kevin Halligen and Henri Exton and also Tim Craig-Harvey - were still being employed by Brian Kennedy and the Directors of Madeleine's Fund in August 2008. They were actually dismissed that very week, strangely enough.

I also noted that the Mirror article about Margaret Hall on 20 August 2008 was the one-year anniversary of Mrs Pamela Fenn's controversial statement of 20 August 2007.

by pennylane 10.06.16 15:56

Tony Bennett wrote:
pennylane wrote:
Right. So whoever it was who told Pilditch that 'Carol Tranmerman' was a dead ringer for Jane Tanner's Tannerman was an outright, scheming, lying swine.

Probably someone who lies all the time with as many teeth as he has in his mouth.

So, in all honesty, to what extent can we rely on anything else Pilditch says in his report??
I'd say 'an outright scheming swine' is a mega understatement, Tony!
First of all, I apologise.

If you can suggest a better printable alternative, I will happily amend my post

No need to apologise Tony. It's a really good start, but needs some add on's such as 'contemptuous, morally bankrupt, sleazy TM pimping spin man...' nod

by dottyaussie 10.06.16 16:19

@Tony & Pennylane

by Verdi 10.06.16 16:22

HiDeHo wrote:
Verdi wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote: To think for one moment she would not have been informally spoken to, as early as possible on the 4th, would be highly unlikely - she was in the flat above for heavens sake. No police force in the world would ignore such a nearby potential witness in such serious (child missing) circumstances.

Yes, it's too ridiculous to even contemplate - unless you follow the line cast by the UK mainstream media about sardine munching beer swilling bungling disgraced cops.

This is a very important point not to be ignored. If Pamela Fenn was at home on the night of 3rd May and the morning of 4th May, she would most certainly have been questioned by the PJ during their door to door routine. As regards the PJ files, if Mrs Fenn was informally interviewed on that occasion and said she hadn't seen or heard anything then I wouldn't expect her to be mentioned in the PJ files - anymore than all the other scores interviewed from the environs of apartment 5a. If however Mrs Fenn mentioned a crying episode of long duration and maybe an attempted burglary the week prior, then I would most certainly expect her informal interview to be recorded in the PJ files, or at least acknowledged by the investigation as I would expect a follow-up formal interview.

As far as I'm aware this didn't happen which strongly indicates to me that she either wasn't at home on the night of 3rd May and/or the following day when the PJ did their house to house calls or she told them she had not seen or heard anything. The latter being the most likely in my opinion.

I believe it highly likely that she reported the crying incident, but at that time it was an 'abduction' and crying from a child a couple of days before the abduction would not have been overly important... However, once the dogs came in and the McCanns were possibly about to be charged, the incident WOULD have been important... Hence her official statement was made at that time.

I disagree. With all the stories about pre-planned abduction, casing the joint, strangers lurking in the vicinity, Carol Tanmer's mystery man fiddling about with the gate leading to apartment 5a (later admittedly) - I would have thought a child crying for a long period of time, alegedly within apartment 5a, prior to Madeleine's abduction, might be of considerable interest to the investigation.

by Verdi 10.06.16 16:56

dottyaussie wrote:What was so interesting in Carole Tranmer's first statement on 8th May, photo of Sun 29th April and Photo-fit that they haven't been released ?

You have to wonder at the nature of the statement of 8th May 2007. Snipped from Carole Tranmer's rogatory interview..

Carol Tranmer: After arriving home, Sunday [6th May] morning we woke and read the Times Sunday paper. There we saw my aunt's apartment and the notice about the missing child. I did not want to believe it and for this reason telephoned her and said: 'Did you see'' to which she responded 'It was been an inferno, terrible since both of you left'. After this I spoke with my cousin, whose son is at Sandhurst and told her 'What do you think we should do, do you think'' because at this time I remembered that I had seen something. It did not come to me right away but afterwards I told my husband 'Well, I saw that funny situation, you know'that type of behavior of the individual, with a sneaky aspect' to which he responded, 'Well you should talk to the police', and I said 'Yes, but it is likely that it has nothing to do with it'. After, we thought a bit more about it and I telephoned my cousin who is at Sandhurst and he told me that I should call the police and tell them. I did exactly this. I telephoned the Windsor police and told them, more or less, what I had told him and to my family. They told me that they would give me a number to call the Leicester police. We passed by the Windsor squadron but it is clear that no one was there so I called the Leciester police and told them basically what I had seen. They told me, well'thank you, we are going to get in touch with you, and after that everything happened. This is what happened, more or less.

So far a telephone conversation. She goes onto say..

CT'Thus, this was when I called them, that is when you, sir, called me.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'After that, you booked a meeting time so that someone could come and speak with me

DC1485'Yes.

CT'And I was working temporarily (inaudible) for the Royal Borough of Maidenhead.

DC1485'Did they visit you at work'

CT'Yes, they came to the office as they asked me what would be easier and I told them that it would be easier if they could come to me so that I would not miss too much work and'

DC1485'Yes.

CT'Then, I arranged a room and they came to visit.

DC1485'Wonderful.

CT'Mmm

DC1485'Were they at all unaccommodating'

CT'No.

DC1485'The fact that they came to visit you.

CT'No, no, truthfully, I am only trying to help.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'An after having spoken to them, I received a call from someone in Reading asking me to help in trying to create what they called an 'identi-kit'.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'They asked me 'if it was possible' and I responded 'yes, of course' and they came from Reading. I reserved another room for them and it was in this way that everything happened, and'
----------

Something here just doesn't add up. Firstly she phones a cousin whose relative is at at Sandhurst to ask advice on what to do. She then tells her husband who suggests she call the police which at that stage she didn't do. Apparently after further thought, she phoned a cousin who is at Sandhurst to ask advice on what to do, he told her to call the police - which she did! At some unspecified time/date she calls Windsor police who give her a telephone number for Leicester police who she later calls etc etc.

Now is starts to get weird. The questions asked by DC1485 seem to me to be probing - as if there was some doubt as to the authenticity of this alleged interview. There is no indication as to whom conducted the May 2007 interview. I doubt if it was an officer from Leicester police because it's about a two hour drive between Leicester and Mrs Tranmer's place of work so one can only conclude that Leicester made arrangments for a local constabulary to send an officer over to interview her, although there is no evidence to suggest this happened.

Now it gets really weird. From my experience (feel free to correct me), I have never known the police to take an official statement, connected to a crime, outside of a police station. Yet here we have the witness arranging for the police to go to her place of work to conduct an interview because it was more convenient for her? To top it all, later there is another meeting arranged for her place of work for her to draw up what she refers to as an identi-kit.

Something's not right here. No statement in PJ files and no identi-kit in PJ files - could have been of major importance to the investigation ?

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:02

Verdi wrote:I can't understand why the consensus of opinion is favourable towards Pamela Fenn just because she was an octogenarian - does that automatically make her a paragon of virtue? I've noticed in the past whenever an individual is brought into play by a negative light, most people jump to their defence making all sorts of excuses for the individual to explain something they know nothing about. I did not know Mrs Fenn, how then can I assess the type of person she was - haven't got the vaguest idea about her moral values or any other aspect of her character but I can try to assess how she may have been embroiled in this case by witness statements, her location at the time, the circles she moved in etc. - not forgetting the part her niece, Carol Tranmer, played.

A near relative of mine worked with the elderly for London social services for many years - and my the stories she could tell about these dear sweet old people. She did so much to try and help improve their lives, some in her own time unpaid but were they appreciative? Were they hell! Face to face they couldn't be sweeter but behind the facade evil was lurking. One occasion a small group of them got together and wrote an anonymous letter to the director of social services, accusing her of the most horrendous acts (all untrue) which led to an internal inquiry. Another occasion an anonymous letter was sent asking that she be sacked because she was a chain smoking hippy !?! Just how nasty can it get?

Whether one agrees with Tony Bennett or not is neither here nor there, fact remains that he puts a heck of a lot of work into this forum, he always takes great pains to explain why he reaches a conclusion, he listens to what other have to say and includes different views in his evaluation of any given subject. He invites alternative views to counteract his own vision of a subject so every member has the opportunity to speak out. So far, rather than presenting good reason to counteract Tony's work, all I read are attempts to excuse Mrs Fenn by ifs buts and maybes without a scrap of evidence to back it up and all because what? Mrs Fenn was an elderly woman, an upright law abiding citizen by all accounts, and elderly upright law abiding citizens just don't do things like that. It's grossly unreasonable to fault Tony Bennett's presentation when there is nothing to substantiate objection.

Up-thread, @aquilla made an excellent point about a day in the life of an ex-pat. It's worth reading again if you have any further doubts about local communities and how they thrive on local gossip and scandal.

There is something to be considered here - and it comes from experience as an expat.

I learned that elderly expats have nothing much to talk about but gossip is good, gossip is great, gossip is what keeps them going. Everyone is everyone's friend and no-one's. It's due to lack of cultural distraction mostly and the realisation that living in the sun in a foreign country ain't all it's cracked up to be. I watched these people (men are just as bad) vying for something new and interesting to talk about. It's the NORM. I loathed it with a passion.

So indulge me if you will with a little imaginative scenario that a lonely person in Portugal whose relatives don't visit them much, call them much, speak to them much hear that aunty has been broken into and has grabbed the robber by the ankle whilst he was trying to make his escape from the third floor? How credible does that sound?

There was no mention from the niece about her concern for her dear aunt who'd been broken into and had fearlessly tackled a burly burglar. It's nonsense surely.

This is something imo, not only blown out of all proportion but is the norm for gossip mongering elderly British expats who wish to make themselves interesting. What started out as maybe a bit of nonsensical gossip had to be proven - and it wasn't.

by Nina 10.06.16 17:16

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the 15 years we were expats living in Spain we avoided the expat groups like the plague. For all the reasons you mention above but also many more too.

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:19

by skyrocket 10.06.16 17:21

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - I'm not disputing anything you say above other than the point about statements being taken outside of a police station - I've given several witness statements in my home and a couple in my place of work (both UK). I've given far more under these circumstances than in an actual police station - probably about 4:1.

by pennylane 10.06.16 17:28

aquila wrote:
Verdi wrote:I can't understand why the consensus of opinion is favourable towards Pamela Fenn just because she was an octogenarian - does that automatically make her a paragon of virtue? I've noticed in the past whenever an individual is brought into play by a negative light, most people jump to their defence making all sorts of excuses for the individual to explain something they know nothing about. I did not know Mrs Fenn, how then can I assess the type of person she was - haven't got the vaguest idea about her moral values or any other aspect of her character but I can try to assess how she may have been embroiled in this case by witness statements, her location at the time, the circles she moved in etc. - not forgetting the part her niece, Carol Tranmer, played.

A near relative of mine worked with the elderly for London social services for many years - and my the stories she could tell about these dear sweet old people. She did so much to try and help improve their lives, some in her own time unpaid but were they appreciative? Were they hell! Face to face they couldn't be sweeter but behind the facade evil was lurking. One occasion a small group of them got together and wrote an anonymous letter to the director of social services, accusing her of the most horrendous acts (all untrue) which led to an internal inquiry. Another occasion an anonymous letter was sent asking that she be sacked because she was a chain smoking hippy !?! Just how nasty can it get?

Whether one agrees with Tony Bennett or not is neither here nor there, fact remains that he puts a heck of a lot of work into this forum, he always takes great pains to explain why he reaches a conclusion, he listens to what other have to say and includes different views in his evaluation of any given subject. He invites alternative views to counteract his own vision of a subject so every member has the opportunity to speak out. So far, rather than presenting good reason to counteract Tony's work, all I read are attempts to excuse Mrs Fenn by ifs buts and maybes without a scrap of evidence to back it up and all because what? Mrs Fenn was an elderly woman, an upright law abiding citizen by all accounts, and elderly upright law abiding citizens just don't do things like that. It's grossly unreasonable to fault Tony Bennett's presentation when there is nothing to substantiate objection.

Up-thread, @aquilla made an excellent point about a day in the life of an ex-pat. It's worth reading again if you have any further doubts about local communities and how they thrive on local gossip and scandal.
There is something to be considered here - and it comes from experience as an expat.

I learned that elderly expats have nothing much to talk about but gossip is good, gossip is great, gossip is what keeps them going. Everyone is everyone's friend and no-one's. It's due to lack of cultural distraction mostly and the realisation that living in the sun in a foreign country ain't all it's cracked up to be. I watched these people (men are just as bad) vying for something new and interesting to talk about. It's the NORM. I loathed it with a passion.

So indulge me if you will with a little imaginative scenario that a lonely person in Portugal whose relatives don't visit them much, call them much, speak to them much hear that aunty has been broken into and has grabbed the robber by the ankle whilst he was trying to make his escape from the third floor? How credible does that sound?

There was no mention from the niece about her concern for her dear aunt who'd been broken into and had fearlessly tackled a burly burglar. It's nonsense surely.

This is something imo, not only blown out of all proportion but is the norm for gossip mongering elderly British expats who wish to make themselves interesting. What started out as maybe a bit of nonsensical gossip had to be proven - and it wasn't.

I got the opposite impression Aquila. Just going from memory I thought Carol Tranmer sounded very kind and caring towards her aunt, Mrs Fenn. She mentioned that she lost her twin brother at the same time as her aunt lost her husband and sounded concerned about her well being. She said that most of the relatives stayed with her Aunt when they visited her, which she felt was too much for her at her age, which is why they always stayed at a hotel when visiting. Carol also said they always go to her Aunt's favorite restaurant which serves fish, because Mrs Fenn loves it there. All in all, I thought Mrs Fenn seemed much loved, and that she had quite a few visitors. As I said just my recollection, but it stuck in my mind when reading it how dear Mrs Fenn was to her.

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:32

That sounds like visiting elderly expat relative shite to me.

by pennylane 10.06.16 17:34

It was a police statement, and I thought it came across as caring.

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:36

Caring and factual are two different things.

by dottyaussie 10.06.16 17:39

@ Verdi

DC1485'Okay Carole. I have read your statement from the 8th of May, 2007, more or less one week after you saw the individual. It would be easier if you read the statement yourself and tell me if there is anything you want to add.

Also

During the interview, Carole TRANMER provided the following evidence:
CT/10 ' Outline of Ocean Club apartment block
CT/11 ' Outline of the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz
CT/12 ' A photograph taken from the terrace of apartment 5G on Sunday, the 29th of April, 2007
At 11h10 of this same day I collected three pieces of evidence from Carole Tranmer. This statement was made by me and is truthful in accordance with my belief and understanding.

As I was asking before where is this first statement and evidence CT/10, 11 and 12 ?

by pennylane 10.06.16 17:40

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it's another one of those things we'll never know for sure, but it stuck in my mind for the reasons I mentioned.

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:45

So a couple of comments about a well loved aunt is good enough to prove anything?

by **Tony Bennett** 10.06.16 17:47

pennylane wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
pennylane wrote:
Right. So whoever it was who told Pilditch that 'Carol Tranmerman' was a dead ringer for Jane Tanner's Tannerman was an outright, scheming, lying swine.

Probably someone who lies all the time with as many teeth as he has in his mouth.

So, in all honesty, to what extent can we rely on anything else Pilditch says in his report??
I'd say 'an outright scheming swine' is a mega understatement, Tony!
First of all, I apologise.

If you can suggest a better printable alternative, I will happily amend my post
No need to apologise Tony. It's a really good start, but needs some add on's such as 'contemptuous, morally bankrupt, sleazy TM pimping spin man...'

OK, let us agree for now that that he is an outright scheming, lying, contemptuous, morally bankrupt, sleazy TM-pimping swine. Or let's just say 'Serial Liar' for short.

The fact remains that this Serial Liar (or possibly another similar member of Team McCann) caused this blatantly false statement to appear in the Daily Express on Saturday 18 August 2007:

In a second development Mrs Fenn’s niece reported seeing a man who matched the description of a suspect peering into the McCanns’ holiday apartment around the time Madeleine went missing.

I think therefore that I have proved my point already that this Serial Liar was behind this clear lie in the Express. This lie includes the contentious claim by Carole Tranmer that she saw anyone at all, and Verdi's posting of part of Tranmer's evidence alone gives further doubt about her statement. That in turn raises questions IMO about the totality of the evidence of Carole Tranmer and Mrs Fenn put together. Moreover it raises the question of just how much of that article Pilditch copied and pasted from whatever the Serial Liar gave him.

But @ HideHo I will return here ASAP with a full answer to all your points, and hypothesis - still thinking about it all and half-way through a reply - but now there's more info on the thread to consider. This continues to be a good thread IMO with many useful bits of info and insight being added.

Be back when I can

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 17:49

Nina wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the 15 years we were expats living in Spain we avoided the expat groups like the plague. For all the reasons you mention above but also many more too.

I don't need to imagine the other reasons Nina. It's well-known that expats abroad who offer to do your garden, offer to do jobs around the house, offer to translate stuff, offer to help you out of whatever are the dodgiest people. Does this sound familiar?

by pennylane 10.06.16 17:57

aquila wrote:
pennylane wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it's another one of those things we'll never know for sure, but it stuck in my mind for the reasons I mentioned.
So a couple of comments about a well loved aunt is good enough to prove anything?

But you used the words "lonely person in Portugal whose relatives don't visit much, call much, or speak to" and there is absolutely zero proof to confirm that is the case. I at least pointed to statements that seem as if she had quite a few visitors and was cared for.

by dottyaussie 10.06.16 18:01

And further to my previous post

DC1485'I would like to analyse a few parts of your statement with you, if you allow me, and to stimulate your memory to see if you remember anything else in relation to your stay.

and

DC1485'I would like to clarify in your statement'-your statement 'On the 28th of May, 2008'my husband and I, Chris TRANMER, caught a flight to Portugal to spend a week of holidays in the eastern Algarve' and in addition, to look for properties to buy. 'We stayed in a location called'"

Dc1485'Quarteira, is that so'

by Liz Eagles 10.06.16 18:03

pennylane wrote:
aquila wrote:
pennylane wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it's another one of those things we'll never know for sure, but it stuck in my mind for the reasons I mentioned.
So a couple of comments about a well loved aunt is good enough to prove anything?
But you used the words "lonely person in Portugal whose relatives don't visit much, call much, or speak to" and there is absolutely zero proof to confirm that is the case. I at least pointed to statements that seem as if she had quite a few visitors and was cared for.

Without being patronising Pennylane, you really are doing a 'free Nelson Mandela' here. Without experiencing expat living you are just thinking 'aww, lovely family' and 'aww, they loved her' and 'aww their statement sounded so nice'.

I place no credence in Pamela Fenn's statement.

by Roxyroo 10.06.16 18:27

aquila wrote:
Verdi wrote:I can't understand why the consensus of opinion is favourable towards Pamela Fenn just because she was an octogenarian - does that automatically make her a paragon of virtue? I've noticed in the past whenever an individual is brought into play by a negative light, most people jump to their defence making all sorts of excuses for the individual to explain something they know nothing about. I did not know Mrs Fenn, how then can I assess the type of person she was - haven't got the vaguest idea about her moral values or any other aspect of her character but I can try to assess how she may have been embroiled in this case by witness statements, her location at the time, the circles she moved in etc. - not forgetting the part her niece, Carol Tranmer, played.

A near relative of mine worked with the elderly for London social services for many years - and my the stories she could tell about these dear sweet old people. She did so much to try and help improve their lives, some in her own time unpaid but were they appreciative? Were they hell! Face to face they couldn't be sweeter but behind the facade evil was lurking. One occasion a small group of them got together and wrote an anonymous letter to the director of social services, accusing her of the most horrendous acts (all untrue) which led to an internal inquiry. Another occasion an anonymous letter was sent asking that she be sacked because she was a chain smoking hippy !?! Just how nasty can it get?

Whether one agrees with Tony Bennett or not is neither here nor there, fact remains that he puts a heck of a lot of work into this forum, he always takes great pains to explain why he reaches a conclusion, he listens to what other have to say and includes different views in his evaluation of any given subject. He invites alternative views to counteract his own vision of a subject so every member has the opportunity to speak out. So far, rather than presenting good reason to counteract Tony's work, all I read are attempts to excuse Mrs Fenn by ifs buts and maybes without a scrap of evidence to back it up and all because what? Mrs Fenn was an elderly woman, an upright law abiding citizen by all accounts, and elderly upright law abiding citizens just don't do things like that. It's grossly unreasonable to fault Tony Bennett's presentation when there is nothing to substantiate objection.

Up-thread, @aquilla made an excellent point about a day in the life of an ex-pat. It's worth reading again if you have any further doubts about local communities and how they thrive on local gossip and scandal.
There is something to be considered here - and it comes from experience as an expat.

I learned that elderly expats have nothing much to talk about but gossip is good, gossip is great, gossip is what keeps them going. Everyone is everyone's friend and no-one's. It's due to lack of cultural distraction mostly and the realisation that living in the sun in a foreign country ain't all it's cracked up to be. I watched these people (men are just as bad) vying for something new and interesting to talk about. It's the NORM. I loathed it with a passion.

So indulge me if you will with a little imaginative scenario that a lonely person in Portugal whose relatives don't visit them much, call them much, speak to them much hear that aunty has been broken into and has grabbed the robber by the ankle whilst he was trying to make his escape from the third floor? How credible does that sound?

There was no mention from the niece about her concern for her dear aunt who'd been broken into and had fearlessly tackled a burly burglar. It's nonsense surely.

This is something imo, not only blown out of all proportion but is the norm for gossip mongering elderly British expats who wish to make themselves interesting. What started out as maybe a bit of nonsensical gossip had to be proven - and it wasn't.

I totally agree! It sounds like exactly that, a bit of juicy gossip that's had arms and legs (and burglar's ankles) added on, and at the end of the day when it came down to the facts it couldn't be proven! we will never know for sure unfortunately!

by Nina 10.06.16 18:48

aquila wrote:
Nina wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the 15 years we were expats living in Spain we avoided the expat groups like the plague. For all the reasons you mention above but also many more too.
I don't need to imagine the other reasons Nina. It's well-known that expats abroad who offer to do your garden, offer to do jobs around the house, offer to translate stuff, offer to help you out of whatever are the dodgiest people. Does this sound familiar?

Certainly does [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. The only genuine friendship and help we ever received, and there was a terrible time of extreme bad health and hospitalizations, was from our Spanish neighbors.
And we were not on the coast where everything was tourist Spain.
Each to his own though.We didn't move to Spain for sun,sea and to speak English.
Incidentally, we are now living back in the UK and still remain the non-clique types, so obviously it is us,not them flag

Re the visitors Mrs Fenn had. I can understand them wanting to stay in an hotel. On our visits back to the UK during our 15 years of being expats, to visit family and friends, we always, without exception stayed in an hotel. So much easier and less hassle for all concerned.

The Possible Dry Run By The Alleged Abductor That Possibly Caused The Alleged Crying Incident.