"What's the evidence that Madeleine died on Sunday 29 April?"

Crusader

Is it possible that Kate may have made up the crying incident to add credibility to her abduction on May 3rd claims?

If Mrs Fenn did hear a child cry for 75 minutes that contradicts the McCanns claims to checking every 15-30 minutes.  

If Mrs Fenn did hear crying, can we be certain that it was Madeleine that she heard?

Also, have you read and analysed, Carole Tranmers' statement and Rogatory interview.  Their quite bizarre really.  In fact it looks as if Mrs Tramner was in PDL much later than the statement suggests.

Look at the location of Mrs Fenn's apartment and how it is accessed.  Can we really believe that a burglar choose this apartment, entered it, and the got away from a woman in her 80s by diving through her window where she caught him by the ankles?

Snipped from Sharon's post ^^^

Is it possible that Kate may have made up the crying incident to add credibility to her abduction on May 3rd claims?

If Mrs Fenn did hear a child cry for 75 minutes that contradicts the McCanns claims to checking every 15-30 minutes.  

If Mrs Fenn did hear crying, can we be certain that it was Madeleine that she heard?






We cannot be sure who it was Mrs Fenn heard crying, Kate was in 5a making a phonecall the same night as Mrs Fenn said she heard crying.
It could have been Kate that disturbed Madeleine.
Mrs Fenn also said the crying stopped when the parents arrived home,




Mrs Fenn, the McCanns 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 fenn never said in her police statement she caught a burgular by the ankles, I believe this to be the media again making up stories.
I have read Carol Tranmers statement many times and I believe the officer who interviewed her was a disgrace.
Ivor Messiah made out she was senile, in fact I had to verify her age on more than 1 occasion.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
The Video is over 4 hours long. Can you give a Timestamp for the relevant point(s) you wish to make please?

Personally I do not think Madeleine died on Thursday night.

Sunday night or Tuesday night seem the most likely to me for the following reasons:

1. Chekaya was hired to do Quiz nights on Sunday and Tuesday night in the Tapas bar.
2. Members of the Tapas 7 claimed the Tapas bar was not open on Sunday.
3. Press reports claim that they went to the Millennium for the first two nights. Sat Sun.
4. The Crying incident could well be a planted story as Tony suspects, in order to counter the PJ report that it was Kate alone who was in the Apartment at that time. 
If however it is true, because Gerry was not there at the time, why else would she be screaming for her Daddy? Did Kate returning in a State accidentally wake her up? Did Kate tell Maddie something that upset her?
5. Kate’s bruises would be consistent with her wanting to beat Gerry for his amorous attention to Chekaya, and Gerry restraining her. Her later comments on her breasts point to some form of jealousy.
6. The sounds of a heated argument might also have woken Madeleine up? Maybe she got in a panic and that is when the Accident happened?

I know, we know, and God knows - Kate McCann.

Which members of the tapas 7 said the tapas didn't open on Sunday Silentscope.
Why would Kate need verification she was alone in the apartment? Mrs Fenn made her statement to the police in August 2007 long before the phone records were made available to the public. 
The only thing the phone records prove is somebody made a call from 5a, (or the vacinity thereabouts) from Kates phone on Tuesday 1st May.

crusader wrote:Snipped from Sharon's post ^^^

Is it possible that Kate may have made up the crying incident to add credibility to her abduction on May 3rd claims?

If Mrs Fenn did hear a child cry for 75 minutes that contradicts the McCanns claims to checking every 15-30 minutes.  

If Mrs Fenn did hear crying, can we be certain that it was Madeleine that she heard?

We cannot be sure who it was Mrs Fenn heard crying, Kate was in 5a making a phonecall the same night as Mrs Fenn said she heard crying.
It could have been Kate that disturbed Madeleine.
Mrs Fenn also said the crying stopped when the parents arrived home,

Mrs Fenn, the McCanns 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 Fenn's evidence is contrary to reason in so many respects.

1. Does a child cry louder and louder for 75 minutes?

2. Can anyone distinguish between the sound of a crying child who is more or less than two years old?

3. Did Mrs Fenn only ring a friend on the Isle of Man and no-one else?

4. Her friend told her to 'forget it'?

5. She didn't phone Ocean Club reception nor the police?

6. She kept quiet about hearing Madeleine crying from 3 May to 20 August (date she made a statement to police) - a period of 112 days?

7. Details of what she was supposed to have heard were printed in the British media two days *before* she made her statement?

8. Mrs Fenn when confronted by a TV crew said her statement was "all rubbish"?

I wish we could use our common sense about Mrs Fenn's evidence and remember that a veritable mountain of fabrications in this case have smothered the truth about when Mafeleine died

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
Which members of the tapas 7 said the tapas didn't open on Sunday Silentscope?

I found that in a Newspaper, (I will try and present it asap) and believe it to be Media spin. I am working on the basis that the Tapas was open as usual, as Chekaya said in her Statement (Tanslated by Murat) She was recruited to give aerobic classes, however she was also asked to carry out a Quiz (game) twice a week (Tuesdays and Sundays) in the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant.

Kate did not need confirmation that she was alone in the Flat. 
This is something she needs to disprove, which adds weight to Tony’s theory as Fenn says that the Child was screaming until the Parents returned. Parents mean Kate and Gerry together. So who was using the phone?

The PJ believe that Kate had left her Mobile in the Apartment, and had returned before the Screaming incident started and used it. As you rightly point out, Kate could not have known at that time that her call would become public. Nor could Mrs Fenn know. But someone did.

A ‘Source close to the Investigation’ perhaps?

Seeing as my comments are devoid of common sense I shall offer no other comment on the subject, except to say, what I think is my own opinion and I am entitled to it, you can no more prove what you are saying is the factual truth any more than I can.

crusader wrote:Seeing as my comments are devoid of common sense I shall offer no other comment on the subject, except to say, what I think is my own opinion and I am entitled to it, you can no more prove what you are saying is the factual truth any more than I can.

Whoa there crusader, don't be locked-out by opposition - your opinion is always worthy of attention, if on isolated occasions you are shown to be slightly wrong you readily admit to your mistakes.  Let's face it, we all get it wrong sometimes.  I know for fact your opinions are always well grounded with the official investigation detail at the fore of your thought processes.

It's the casual observer with little or no knowledge of the case that relies on random media/press reports for theorising that needs to be side-lined, not those who pay particular attention to accuracy, fact and evidence.  Hence the need to lock particular threads.

There is no requirement here on CMOMM to agree with everything presented, I too disagree with a lot of work recorded here on the forum - that includes information from outside sources.  In the absence of clear cut truth sadly we are forced to speculate on so many aspects, that's okay providing speculation is based on known facts and evidence, how frequently fact and evidence are buried by novelistic fantasising through ignorance, laziness and oh too frequently mischief.

How could civilisation progress if not for a difference of opinion - even science isn't established fact, there is always something waiting in the wings to prove past theory to be wrong.

In short, keep it coming - your contribution is greatly valued ....

Silentscope wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The Video is over 4 hours long. Can you give a Timestamp for the relevant point(s) you wish to make please?

Do your own research, watch and listen to the entire video - you might learn something.

Members here have a life to live outside the forum, they are not here at the beck and call of others who can't be bothered to work for themselves.

Halfhearted research, particularly citing media and press reports, is the root of all evil. Thus the need to look at the whole picture, rather than plucking out random meaningless bits and pieces that can only lead to mis/disinformation.

Silentscope wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
The Video is over 4 hours long. Can you give a Timestamp for the relevant point(s) you wish to make please?

Personally I do not think Madeleine died on Thursday night.

Sunday night or Tuesday night seem the most likely to me for the following reasons:

1. Chekaya was hired to do Quiz nights on Sunday and Tuesday night in the Tapas bar.
2. Members of the Tapas 7 claimed the Tapas bar was not open on Sunday.
3. Press reports claim that they went to the Millennium for the first two nights. Sat Sun.
4. The Crying incident could well be a planted story as Tony suspects, in order to counter the PJ report that it was Kate alone who was in the Apartment at that time. 
If however it is true, because Gerry was not there at the time, why else would she be screaming for her Daddy? Did Kate returning in a State accidentally wake her up? Did Kate tell Maddie something that upset her?
5. Kate’s bruises would be consistent with her wanting to beat Gerry for his amorous attention to Chekaya, and Gerry restraining her. Her later comments on her breasts point to some form of jealousy.
6. The sounds of a heated argument might also have woken Madeleine up? Maybe she got in a panic and that is when the Accident happened?

I know, we know, and God knows - Kate McCann.

I don't think that this is the type of film that makes relevant points in isolation.  It works backward from the evening of May 3rd to explain how some of the statements of those who claim to have seen Madeleine had little or no credibility.  Sorry, you would need to watch the film in full.  Maybe watch it in instalments over a period of time.  It is well worth watching, a real eye opener.

crusader wrote:Seeing as my comments are devoid of common sense I shall offer no other comment on the subject, except to say, what I think is my own opinion and I am entitled to it, you can no more prove what you are saying is the factual truth any more than I can.

@ crusader


I re-iterate that to believe that Mrs Fenn was telling the truth, you would need to explain the eight points I listed above, namely:

1. Does a child cry louder and louder for 75 minutes?

2. Can anyone distinguish between the sound of a crying child who is more or less than two years old?

3. Did Mrs Fenn only ring a friend on the Isle of Man and no-one else?

4. Her friend told her to 'forget it'?

5. She didn't phone Ocean Club reception nor the police?

6. She kept quiet about hearing Madeleine crying from 3 May to 20 August (date she made a statement to police) - a period of 112 days?

7. Details of what she was supposed to have heard were printed in the British media two days *before* she made her statement?

8. Mrs Fenn when confronted by a TV crew said her statement was "all rubbish"?  

Most of us came to this forum in the first place because our sense - our common sense - told us that the abduction claim did not make sense. 

It is like that with Mrs Fenn's statement; I, and others, say there is no rhyme nor reason to it - and that's without examining the claim that Mrs Fenn tried to grab hold of the ankles of a burglar just as he leapt to a concrete courtyard 20 feet below - an event that no-one else noticed. 

I would like you, please, to explain exactly why you think Mrs Fenn's statement makes sense. Can you explain her alleged actions? Do you have at least an element of doubt?

sharonl wrote:

I don't think that this is the type of film that makes relevant points in isolation.  It works backward from the evening of May 3rd to explain how some of the statements of those who claim to have seen Madeleine had little or no credibility.  Sorry, you would need to watch the film in full.  Maybe watch it in instalments over a period of time.  It is well worth watching, a real eye opener.

@ Silentscope

sharonl is correct. The film is four hours long because so much needs to be said and proved in order to sustain the 'death on Sunday 29 April' theory.

The photographic evidence that the 'Last Photo' was taken on Sunday needs patient explanation. Was the Tennis Balls photo taken later in the week? Again, it takes time to discuss that.

Then. there are several claimed sightings of Madeleine after Sunday - by her parents, by the Tapas 7, by creche workers and other Ocean Club staff etc.

All of that need careful and patient analysis. 

It is a very important film.

Please view it all at your convenience and come back and let us have your thoughts on it.

@ Tony Bennett.

Ther is no reason to examine the claim Mrs Fenn grabbed the burglar by the ankles because it's not true.
I go by what she actually said in her statement to the PJ and not by the main stream media reports.
You ask if I have any element of doubt, If it can be proven the British press printed details of Pamela Fenn's statement 2 day's before she made it, as stated by Richard D Hall, then yes I will have serious doubts about Mrs Fenn.

Mrs Fenn was advancing in years, indeed events were not clarified before her death.

There could be any number of reasons why she 'apparently' withheld vital information, starting with the simple reason she had no vital information to impart.

So sad a pensioner close to death has to become a victim of conspiracy, a victim of presumed guilt.

Look at the size of her, her mobility problems, does she look like someone who could grab an intruder by the ankle as it flew through the window?

The press and media have so much to explain.

I have in the past expressed doubt as to about every aspect of this mystery (and many others) but there comes a time when too much insistence starts to raise doubt.

I am not a hypocrite but I do become very suspicious when attempted indoctrination plays a hand, it forces me to view things from a different angle.

In short, brainwashing sometimes has the reverse effect.

Pamela Fenn is deceased - she can't speak for herself nor answer questions .... rest in peace.

crusader wrote:@ Tony Bennett.

There is no reason to examine the claim Mrs Fenn grabbed the burglar by the ankles because it's not true.
I go by what she actually said in her statement to the PJ and not by the mainstream media reports.
You ask if I have any element of doubt, If it can be proven the British press printed details of Pamela Fenn's statement 2 day's before she made it, as stated by Richard D Hall, then yes I will have serious doubts about Mrs Fenn.

Good morning crusader, thank you for your response.

I dealt with this in my article on this forum:

10 REASONS WHICH SUGGEST THAT PAMELA FENN DID NOT HEAR ANY CHILD CRYING ON TUESDAY 1 MAY 2007

....where I wrote...
 
1. On her own admission, she did not report the crying incident to the police at the time, or later

2. She appears to have been prompted into making her statement by the McCann Team
 
[BRIEF EXPLANATION: In early August, the McCann Team were reeling from Martin Grime’s visit to Praia da Luz, and from a stream of lurid headlines about blood, a corpse, DNA etc.
Then suddenly, on Saturday 18 August 2007, a spate of stories about Madeleine appeared in the British mainstream press. These stories spoke of three events: (i) a burglary (either 1, 2, 3 or ‘several’ weeks before the week of 28 April to 5 May), (ii) a suspicious blond man allegedly seen quietly opening and closing the gate to the McCanns’ apartment garden, and (iii) Madeleine crying for 75 minutes on the night of Tuesday 1 May.
These stories show clear evidence of having been planted by the McCann Team.
These stories contained correct information about when Mrs Fenn was going to be interviewed and exactly what she was going to say – two days before she was interviewed.
This is suggestive at least of co-operation between the McCann Team and Mrs Fenn.
Her story fed the public with images of burglars and suspicious men, confirmed that Madeleine was alive on 1^st May, and corroborated the McCanns’ account of the McCanns leaving their children in the apartment for periods whilst they dined out]


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


I believe that elsewhere on CMOMM I have provided 'chapter and verse' i.e.I named the papers that carried this story.


***Edited to add:


I found these three articles this this morning on Pamalam's site:

[color:25ca=000000][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.]

[color:25ca=000000]HOW PARENTS TOLD TWINS: 'Madeleine has gone missing. Mummy and Daddy are looking for her...' [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (paper version reproduced here) By Martin Fricker in Praia da Luz Aug 18, 2007 KATE and Gerry McCann have told their two-year-old twins for the first time that big sister Madeleine has vanished. Taking little Sean and Amelie aside, Kate gently broke the news: "Madeleine has gone missing. Mummy and daddy are looking for her." The children, who for weeks have been fed the story that Madeleine is away on a "trip", now understand she is lost and that mum and dad are desperately worried. But in their innocence they still play happily as their parents try to make home life as normal as possible. As the hunt for Madeleine entered its 106th day, friends disclosed yesterday that Kate and Gerry thought "long and hard" before deciding to come clean. One said: "They took advice from child and trauma experts on how to approach such a delicate issue and what to say. "At the start, they told the children that Madeleine was on a little holiday. "But, as time has gone on, they've changed the language they use. It wasn't an easy thing. The last thing they want is to upset them. "It's very difficult trying to explain to a two-year-old what has happened, especially when it's your big sister who's missing. "The twins understand it's more serious than a missing toy. They realise their sister has disappeared and they miss her." Sean and Amelie hero-worshipped four-year-old Madeleine who, in turn, "absolutely adored" them. The friend added: "They had a really good relationship. "The twins were so excited when they came on the holiday because they were sleeping in the same room as Madeleine. Every night they were thrilled about going to bed." Since telling Sean and Amelie the truth, Kate and Gerry have strived to make life as routine as possible for them. Heart specialist Gerry, 39, of Rothley, Leics, said: "Child psychologists say it's very important for their coping. They're happy but they know that Madeleine isn't here." Kate said: "The kids are very happy. The two of them play together all the time. "But when we all wake in the morning it's another reminder that Madeleine isn't there. Sean and Amelie may have crept into the bed next to us. I say a quick prayer." In a new development, a British expat has come forward with dramatic new evidence. Pamela Fenn said a man broke into her flat above the McCanns' holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, on the Algarve, just weeks before Madeleine disappeared. There was no sign of a break-in and it is thought the intruder may have had a key. Mrs Fenn, who is in her 70s, found the man scrambling out of the window and tried to grab his ankle. But he escaped. She reported the incident to Portuguese police but they did not question her again. The information only resurfaced after British police reviewed the case two weeks ago. Mrs Fenn will now be formally interviewed for the first time on Monday. Mrs Fenn's niece has said she spotted a suspicious man near the McCanns' apartment around the time Madeleine disappeared. She said he matched the description of a suspect seen by one of the McCanns' friends. Evidence taken from the McCanns' hire car is reportedly being analysed in the UK. The couple only rented the car five weeks after Madeleine vanished. Police said they have "never, ever" been suspects.

[color:25ca=000000][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.]

[color:25ca=000000]Widow with vital clues was never questioned Daily Express (no longer available online) BRAVERY: Mrs Fenn challenged intruder By David Pilditch in Praia da Luz Saturday August 18,2007 A British widow has come forward with new information which could help Portuguese detectives solve the mystery of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, the Daily Express can reveal. Ex-pat Pamela Fenn, who is in her 70’s, has told police she has three "bombshell" clues she believes could be vital to the inquiry. In the weeks before Madeleine disappeared Mrs Fenn scared off an intruder who had apparently let himself into her apartment with a key. It was one of a series of similar crimes reported to Portuguese police. 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. And she revealed vital details of the movements of Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry, and their holiday friends in the run up to the night of May 3 - when Madeleine vanished. Even though she lives in the apartment directly upstairs the police had never tried to get in touch with her. Incredibly Mrs Fenn, who lives in the apartment directly above the flat the McCanns were staying in, was never interviewed by Portuguese police, it was claimed yesterday. It was only when a team of British officers were called in to help carry out a major review of the case that the information was acted on. Now Mrs Fenn will be formally interviewed for the first time by Portuguese detectives at police headquarters in Portimao on Monday morning. Her niece, who has not been named, will also give a sworn testimony next week, after she was asked to fly to Portugal from Britain. The Daily Express can reveal they are among a series of witnesses will be called in to give statements in the light of new evidence which has emerged. Detectives are preparing to swoop on new suspects after a breakthrough in a major new line of inquiry. Investigators are now working on the theory Madeleine, four, died inside the holiday apartment where her family were staying. A police source told The Daily Express: "Next week we will be taking statements from several witnesses. "We want to clarify details which may be relevant to the new line of inquiry in the light of the facts we have found." Mrs Fenn has told police how she scared off an intruder she found in her apartment in the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz in the weeks leading up to Madeleine's disappearance. There was no sign of a break-in and police believe he may have used a key to get in through the front door. The terrified mother was watching TV in the evening and went to investigate a noise coming from her bedroom. Mrs Fenn, who has lived in Praia da Luz for a number of years, discovered a man scrambling out of the window. She tried to grab his ankle but he escaped. She reported the incident to police but did not believe anything was taken. Mrs Fenn told how she had a niece from Britain staying with her in the week the McCanns were on holiday there. Her niece, who has now been interviewed by detectives in Britain, spotted a suspicious looking man hanging around the McCanns' apartment around the time Madeleine disappeared. She told the officer the man matched the description of a suspect seen by Jane Tanner one of the McCanns' holiday friends. Miss Tanner reported seeing the man rushing away from the apartment with a child wrapped in a blanket under his arm. A second witness spotted the man minutes later rushing past the church in the resort and heading to the sea front. The dark-haired man was wearing white trousers and a dark jacket. Mrs Fenn also told police that two nights before Madeleine disappeared she heard a child crying in the McCanns' apartment. Her screams carried on from around 10.30pm to 11.45pm until family members returned from a night out. A friend of Mrs Fenn told The Daily Express last night: "She is an elderly lady who is quite nervous and was very shaken up after the break-in. "She was surprised that neither the police nor the McCanns had approached her for information before. "Even though she lives in the apartment directly upstairs the police had never tried to get in touch with her to ask her if she saw or heard anything the night Madeleine disappeared. "The first time a police officer spoke to her was when the British officers with sniffer dogs knocked on her door and searched her apartment. "She told an officer what she knew and now she has been asked to make a formal statement. "Portuguese officers have told her they will pick her up at 10am on Monday and drive her to police headquarters in Portimao. "On the night she found an intruder she was sitting at home watching TV when she heard a noise in her bedroom. "She went to investigate. The man must have heard her coming and was scrambling out of the window. She just saw the back of his head and arm and she tried to push him out of the window. "She was shaking with fear and called the police. There was no sign of a break in and she thought he must have somehow come in through the front door. "She now thinks the information may prove significant in the investigation. "Her niece who lives in England was staying with her when the McCanns were on holiday. "When details of a suspect were released a few weeks later the niece remembered she had seen a man fitting the description hanging around in the street outside the McCanns' apartment. "He was acting suspiciously and appeared to be looking into the window of the apartment. She has given a statement to police in Britain. "Mrs Fenn says that two nights before Madeleine disappeared one of the children in the apartment was constantly screaming from around 10.30pm to 11.45pm. "She was crying out for her dad and nobody answered until somebody returned. "She remembers the times because she was talking to a friend back home on the phone and she was watching the news at 10.30pm. "On the night Madeleine disappeared the first she knew of it was when there was a commotion downstairs. "She looked over the balcony and saw the child's mother. She was in a state of panic. She was repeatedly saying 'We've let her down. We've let her down.' "All the people in their group were running in and out of the apartment. She asked someone if she should call the police and was told it had already been done." Last night Mrs Fenn refused to reveal details of her evidence. Under Portugal's strict secrecy laws witnesses are banned from speaking publicly about details of an on-going investigation. But when she answered the door at her apartment yesterday she said: "I will speak to the police on Monday." Last night a Portuguese police source claimed officers had already been given statements by Mrs Fenn and her neice. A police source said: "We have already spoken to them but they will be re-interviewed because of the new evidence we have. "They are among a number of witnesses who we will talk to next week. They include employees from the Ocean Club." Police in Portugal are still awaiting the results of forensic tests carried out on two samples of blood found in the McCanns' holiday apartment. The source said friends of Madeleine's parents who were on holiday with them when their daughter disappeared could also be questioned. The source said: "It is possible the McCanns friends will be brought in again but not will not happen before we have received the results of the forensic tests. "The results of the blood tests are important but the investigation does not hinge solely on them. "The blood is just another clue that could help us in the investigation. If there are four or five major clues that is stronger than just two or three." Asked why the police had not carried out their weekly update meeting with the McCanns. The couple reportedly asked for urgent showdown talks after reports were leaked to newspapers that police now believe Madeleine is dead. Senior police chiefs later confirmed they are now working on that theory. The source said: "It is not the McCanns who decide when we meet. "We do that only when there is relevant information to tell them." A second holidaymaker told police an intruder used a key to enter her Ocean Club apartment just three weeks before Madeleine went missing. The Scottish woman said that on the first night of her stay in Portugal,she and a friend returned to the flat to find their belongings and £500 worth of foreign money had been taken. The woman said: "It was in the same block as the one where the little girl was taken from. "The police were called that night. They told us that someone with a key had got into the flat. There’s no proof of that, but that was their opinion as there was nothing else disturbed. No broken windows, no forced entry."

[color:25ca=000000]Madeleine: Portuguese police to re-examine burglaries at resort, 19 August 2007

[color:25ca=000000][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [color:25ca=000000]Madeleine: Portuguese police to re-examine burglaries at resort [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] By FIONA BARTON Last updated at 11:48 19 August 2007 [color:25ca=000000][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]    MADELEINE: Portuguese police to re-examine burglaries at resort  By FIONA BARTON Last updated at 11:48 19 August 2007 The under-fire Portuguese police are preparing to take a fresh look at reports of two earlier break-ins in the apartment block where Madeleine McCann and her family stayed. Both burglaries - one in the apartment directly above the McCann's flat - are understood to have happened two weeks before the family of five arrived at the Mark Warner Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. One was believed to have been committed by someone with a key to the burgled apartment. Scroll down for more ... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] It is also understood that the description given by two witnesses of a man spotted on the night of one of the burglaries is similar to the description given by a friend of the McCanns who said she saw a man carrying a child in his arms the night Madeleine went missing. The police are now set to re-interview a number of witnesses from the Ocean Club, a source close to the Policia Judiciaria said, in order to "clarify details that may be relevant to the new line of inquiry, in the light of facts we have found". [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Among them will be ex-pat Pamela Fenn, a widow in her 70s. She claims she "scared off" an intruder who had broken into her apartment in the days before the McCanns arrived to stay in the holiday flat directly below her. Mrs Fenn has told friends she heard a noise as she watched television and found a man escaping through her bedroom window. Her niece, who was staying with her, also saw the man. The widow reported the incident to police but claims no one contacted her after Madeleine vanished - until two weeks ago, when British detectives called on her. Mrs Fenn's niece is travelling to Portugal from the UK next week to be interviewed by the Policia Judiciaria. Mrs Fenn said: "I will speak to the police on Monday." The alleged break-in is said to have happened within days of a second burglary in the same block. A Scottish holidaymaker said that on the first night of her stay, she and a friend returned to the flat to find their belongings and £500 worth of foreign money had been taken. But there was no sign of forced entry at the second floor apartment and police called to the scene told the middle-aged book-keeper that they believed someone with a key was the most likely suspect, sparking concerns about security at the complex. Detectives are understood to be waiting for the results of DNA tests on blood samples before re-interviewing Kate and Gerry McCann and their party of friends. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[color:25ca=000000]New suspect in Madeleine McCann case, 20 August 2007

[color:25ca=000000]New suspect in Madeleine McCann case [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  By Richard Edwards in Praia da Luz Published: 12:01AM BST 20 Aug 2007 [color:25ca=000000][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[color:25ca=000000]Witness statement of Pamela Fenn, 20 August 2007

[color:25ca=000000]Witness statement of Pamela Fenn [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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

If Mrs Fenn had been co-opted into helping the McCann's to cover up a serious crime, why would she 'leak' information to the newspapers ultimately incriminating herself?
Or if it wasn't Mrs Fenn and it was a member of 'team McCann', why would she stay quiet.
I am still resolute in my opinion Mrs Fenn is innocent of any wrongdoing.
Where is the proof Mrs Fenn's statement was reported in the papers 2 day's before she made it.
I notice Richard D Hall said it was reported in the papers 2 day's before Mr's Fenn made her statement, but he didn't show or read out from which papers he said it was in.

I have just found the following from my notes made many moons ago.

News of Mrs Fenn broke in the SUN newspaper on August 17th 2007 saying about Madeleine crying 2 day's before her PJ statement on 20th August.

The SUN said,
The Portuguese police are again under fire.
The woman living in the flat above McCann's claimed she had not been spoken to by police until the British team arrived 2 weeks ago.
Ex pat Pamela Fenn told them she disturbed a burgular at her flat about 3 weeks before Madeleine vanished.
She is now to give a formal statement to Portuguese officers.

the date on a written statement does not perse tells it was the first contact and only one, usually you have a lot of informal statements, you only keep in your personal notebook, and/or in short notes in the casebook.

also it is very common that not all statements are directly typed out and signed, you usually in 2007 had not that much pc's everywhere, at least we had not on all police offices in the interview rooms, so you would write out a quick statement and let that sign and sign it yourself, and it often happened you still had to type out the full statement, from your own short hand, we had no tapes at the time, and than it was looking for a time the witness was able to read it again and sign it of. 
i have done that many times in very strange places sometimes, but the date and place on the statement must be the date and place of the signing. 

and if in the field, you just write a short declaration, together with the will to partake in a formal interview on a later date in your note book, and that would also be dated, place where you are and signed of by the witness. 

it is very common you decide much later, which you want an written statement of, and the date on a written statement must be the actual date that written statement is made. you can had multiple informal statements of the same people, well before you get it all down, and get down what you need. 

when i did cases only on my own for the government services i was working for, i still had to write all by hand, meaning it could be the witness was not agreeable with a wording, and you had to do it all over, the written first original was supposed to be send to our secretary who would type it out and send it back, only date, place and signing had been blank. but i had already a typewriter at home, so i usually did it myself and got it all ready to go the same day. 

digital was not very well liked at the time. for 2007 the pj was already very advanced. i have used an extra old pc besides my own one, just for work related things, the old floppies where not longer compatible.

in this case this witness mrs. fenn was just available all the time, and maybe only her age and her plans to travel back for some time to her family in the uk that summer, as she was used too in summertime, while she rented out her home, all together would be a good enough reason to make that statement at that time. 

and it is a misunderstanding that the investigation does not have the information already long before a formal statement is made. and it could always work to talk again with a witness, and asking them in for a formal statement is a much used trick to get them willingly taking part in the interview. 

there is often a lot of power in the informal statements, first because you can keep these witnesses out of the hands of the media far better, and the culprits of course, but also because giving a written statement can ask a lot of the witness in his/her social standing. try to escape all attention and get then to a police station. a lot of tips you get are from people who do things against the law themselves, and they do not want to be known as a witness or put their name in writing.

it is quite remarkable when you experience that a lot of inside information in smaller communities make it into an investigation, because a police officer, not even on that case, simply had a granny or a ant in that community. and it means usually you never do truly know who put the information in your ears.

praia da luz and the ocean club, both never have been a virgin in crime. there is always crime around everywhere, there are also a lot of lines that cross over. there are always and everywhere very different layers in every society and place, all going on. 

so always people who like it very much the police does not get in the know about all of that. the madeleine mccann case was just another case in that area at that time. larger or more serious cases have even the result a lot of other crimes simply do not happen. all the extra boots on the ground are of course not welcome, so there often is pretty early a lot of information around from these parts of society. 

it almost never will make it beyond the informal statement, it is not a crowd that you can trust they only do tell the truth. they have other profits, and the only reason to tell is to get you out of their area. it takes a fair chunk of time to check it all, but it is often very helpful to paint the picture around a case. 
most can be used just as background information, like when someone told you in a written statement they have been there and then, but the background does not agree with that. 

and that informal information is what makes it often a different case to look in, it is not in the files, it is not official in the open, and that is the big difference between being just an onlooker in a case and working a case. 

the people in and around praia da luz have never been a blank canvas until that thursday evening of may 3, 2007, or after that, when the world became to know madeleine mccann was missing. so as a result of that, you cannot expect all behaviour and sayings of the people who also have been around are always part to the madeleine mccann case, people always have and could have other reasons too, to do and say what they do.
and it is never easy to truly know if it is part of the madeleine case, or just protection of their own actions and going ons, or that of others they want or need to protect. 

there is often very little black or white in a police investigation. 

and we have the luck of hindsight, how much rubbish is used in the media just to sell stories. mrs. fenn reacted herself in person on video about that rubbish. she did talked to her hairdresser, at least there is a video around of the hairdresser, but we can not know how much is true citation, and how much was just an conclusion of the hairdresser, or even if it was first hand information at all. mrs. fenn said she did not talk to the press, only there is nothing to say if that was true or a lie. the information you need to decide about that is simply not there.

and there are always already other people, old and young, criminals and just nice people around, you cannot say the basic population or even the temporary one has had a need for a little girl going missing from there at all. if they had a habit of getting small children going missing, that would be common knowledge by now. 

and you have to deal with real people, the investigation steps into just a part of a society. so the usual players are to expect to surface. exactly the same that now realtime are living around us. and that is actually still the biggest handicap in this case, most of the audience to a possible crime had absolutely no roots in this setting, not even the mccanns, so a lot of the usual stuff about behaviour that you base the question; 'did they behave normal' on, ends up in no idea. there was no simple daily normal for most of the people. 

only your nightmares or your lecturer in training would give you a case where 90% of possible witnesses would fly out of reach within 48 hours! or doing a house to house call in the prominent block, and all except 2 households are not in a direct relation to the child that is missing. or that within 24 hours other boots would be flying in to step into your investigation. or a lab that says no, we cannot test for that, and still keep on processing the possible evidence. 

i even think that ambassador was brought in, because the portuguese police wanted to do it traditional and keep possible witnesses at hand in portugal, until they had questioning them at least informal. at least that would made the approach fitting with the task of being an ambassador. 

and all these temporary there people was quite a crowd, so you could not expect to handle these before their booked flights home on the saturday, not when you also have a want to search for the child. the child would have priority over that. 

people are also very different, a few are always willing to talk to you, but have hardly anything useful to say, they also see always nasty and ugly men around, wat is missing in this case is the cripple and the stinky one. the majority will not talk by their own action, the not my backyard people, and it is about 50/50 if they talk when asked. usually talking is a bit better present in cases that are about children. still a large part never talk about it at all. 

if mrs. fenn had been the type of the nosy neighbour, that was easy in filling gaps in what she could know from her own fantasies, no one would believed her too. the treatment she got the evening of may 3,2007 was probably enough to put it out of her line of care. 

i still do not see room to incriminate so much people as having a hand in it all, i can see a lot of own backyard caring in organisations, and some people too. but after the facts, not before or during it. 
it would also be a complete farce, if mi 5 and 6 have had a hand in this case before may 3, 2007.  if they had, there never had been a madeleine mccann case at all. 
how simple to arrange a quick recall for the family, and creating a car accident on the trip home in the uk itself. 

i do see a bunch of amateurs, that had help and assistance a lot after the facts, but mostly from 'lets see if we can keep it out of our back yard people'. and some pro's who could not glue it all together in a acceptable story for the pj and the public. 

and mrs. fenn , just an older lady, who had a good life, who liked to live in between people who had fun en could escape when she was overwhelmed with that joy to a stay in the uk with family. who never asked to become part of this case at all. who told the pj her experiences and we do not know when she did that, only that her statement was seen as important enough to made it into a written statement with her signature. 
and it is not up to the witness if and when a statement is made, but the investigation decides that. 

and when we read it, it had nothing to tell about that thursday evening of may 3, 2007, before the alarm was made. still sometimes is no noise or other noticing something that can tell a story. same with the  occupants a floor higher. why are they treated so different, they also told a story of nothing heard, nothing seen, but have been out on the streets that evening, and on their balcony enjoying a drink. i never found their statement and if they had made one at all. paul ans susan moyes from middlwich, cheshire, did speak to the media. and in the media is an interview in nigel's stock that they are never formal interviewed. but they say in the media have written down their statement, so that maybe never made it into a written statement signed even.

onehand wrote:the date on a written statement does not perse tells it was the first contact and only one, usually you have a lot of informal statements, you only keep in your personal notebook, and/or in short notes in the casebook.

Exactly!

This has been raised so many times in the past .... the PJ investigation files are there for all to see but alas, they do not include the hundreds of informal interviews - that includes the McCanns and their group of friends.

Oh to be that fly on the wall!

i always have a bit of a problem when the sun is calling out, what the sun says is having a bit of a reputation, and that is not a good one.

even when people say it in person, you hardly have a way to be sure it is true. 

and with witness statement, their is a cultural barrier too, in portugal it is far more usual that a witness seeks contact to tell what he knows and wants to bring to the knowledge of the police. where in other countries most people are waiting until the police gets around asking questions. 

house to house calls are not even that old. and we still have the same notation in a news covering about a crime, translatable to the police ask your attention, to who it concerns, that he who has any information aout the event to seek contact with, usually followed with the number of the police force who works the case, or your local police, or for about the last 20 years to call to mma meld misdaad anoniem, or translated into tell about crime anonymus. 

and you are burnt if you do them and when you do not. they are very time consuming, with very little effect, but there are cases. like one we had with an abduction and murder of a young girl by the man across the street. the perp waas even a police officer, but at least it became known if they had done a house to house call, in the classic way, as in talking  within the houses the girl would still not been saved. 

and in this case that is in almost all aspects a bit special, a house to house call would hardly matter, i can not remember another case, where almost all occupants of a block of apartments had been interviewed within 24 hours at the police office. 
and it is not the pj did not activated house to house calls, the results are in the files, and much more than only ringing at the door and asking if they had seen somethings odd. they even got access to not occupied living area's. 

there is a lot not in the files. no casebooks, no daily debrief notes, no listing of the house to house calls, no listing of all incoming calls about the case, no list of people who presented themselves at any police office anywhere. no list of informal statements. 
a lot about informal things will never be archived , but are just kept in your personal notebooks, what is to be understood as only there to refresh your memory into detailed information. also not the full forensic files, no listings of goods taken for forensics outside 5a. or later on other places. not even a full list of all the sightings.

so what is presented as the pj files looks very equal to what we would call the file for the cps. the material that can be used in a court case. i do think operation grange got indeed all documents, one standard leitz folder, all others are just equal to that as a standard can hold 500 standard printing papersheets a4, but to keep it usable you keep it under 250. and if you put a lot of other stuff in it, like true photo prints a 100 is even better. you cannot take so much with you in a court case or even try to let a cps read it all. 
even now, when you can use computer files, a lot you get are just only original letters, you can not search them really good. 

and most has no say in the outcome of a case in the end, but never keep back if you think it can mean something, it would not end up in the garbage, all is at least read, looked at and kept until the case is truly done. but you also do not need more than 2 witnesses for everything or nothing. investigations are very fluid, so what is important can be different on different times and stages. it is okay if you have multiple witnesses, but in court one is usually enough, so you do look for someone who is probably can hold itself up in the court, and the rest is reserves. so you would take two written statements, and the rest is listed in the casebooks. 

this case has a high average of people who did see nothing that could be bound to a possible criminal event around 5a, and the witnesses in the files with a written statement about seeing nothing happening are together a nice overview of the evening. enough to agree with kate mccann, when she said it happened differently, she knows because she was there, only problem she did not talked much about that different happening when asked under questioning. but of course later on, on camera she could not tell it twice the same. but both parents would be a disaster if they would be asked to be witnesses for any cps. far to much versions out already. it would be no problem of course if they where the ones in the docks, suspects have in most continental court systems the free choice what version they tell about.

Silentscope wrote:There are a lot of things that point to Tuesday night Tony.

Kate’s book never mentioned the ‘Chekaya incident’ and she claims that it was Gerry, not her that returned to the Apartment.

The PJ Final report writes:

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.


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

The PJ Final Report did not write that ^^^.

It was a summary of information taken from various sources presented by a journalist and written for what was the journalists internet domain.

The same journalist who was for a time in cahoots with another questionable journalist - both of which have long since taken cover.

I just found this on Gerry McCann's blog byPamalam.
In all the newspaper reports on Pamela Fenn, not one states what she put in her PJ statement 2 day's before she made it.

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

I think the thread on Mrs. Fenn should be put to bed now, there is zero proof she was involved in any way.

Rundown for Sunday to Monday


Sunday 13:15 Madeleine seen by a Cleaner.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

McCanns and Entourage go to the Millenium Saturday and Sunday which opens at 19:00 - 19:30. Press reports Madeleine is seen by Staff in the Restaurent.
25 Milllenium Staff are Interviewed by the PJ.

Change of Plan Monday.

Usually around 09:00 Guests would be attempting to Book places at the Tapas Bar.

From Luis Barros Statement:

When asked he says that on a date he cannot remember, the group, just the adults because the children were dining with the nannies, had been too late in making their dinner reservation at the Tapas, and an exception was made, authorised by his boss Steve, as the Tapas only provides for 20 dinners for half board clients as was the case.

He think that this request was made in order to be close to the children who had their meals with the nannies, and to be close to the apartments.

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

Luis had Thursdays free. So it cannot have been Sat, Sunday or Thursday.
Which leaves Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday.

If Fenns Statement is an invention to make us believe that Madeleine was alive, her Death must have occurred BEFORE Tuesday 22:30 possibly on the night of Sunday to Monday morning?

But why did Luis say he spoke to his Boss Steve? 

He was the Catering Manager, based at the Millenium but he oversaw all the on-site restaurants. 

He was absent from Portugal between Sunday 29th April and Wednesday 2nd May, so when was this exception requested and granted?

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

He think that this request was made in order to be close to the children who had their meals with the nannies, and to be close to the apartments.

From “Madeleine” by Kate McCann:
 
"It wasn’t until a year later, when I was combing through the Portuguese police files, that I discovered that the note requesting our block booking was written in a staff message book, which sat on a desk at the pool reception for most of the day. This book was by definition accessible to all staff and, albeit unintentionally, probably to guests and visitors, too. To my horror, I saw that, no doubt in all innocence and simply to explain why she was bending the rules a bit, the receptionist had added the reason for our request: we wanted to eat close to our apartments as we were leaving our young children alone there and checking on them intermittently. "

A Coincidence surely?

From Luis Barros Statement:

When asked he says that on a date he cannot remember, the group, just the adults because the children were dining with the nannies, had been too late in making their dinner reservation at the Tapas, and an exception was made, authorised by his boss Steve, as the Tapas only provides for 20 dinners for half board clients as was the case.



Am I correct in assuming that the only time when all the children were in the Lobster Creche together was the morning of 2nd May?


Could that have been the day Luis means?

I don't understand what you're talking about - what is the source of your information?

Madeleine McCann was booked in every day at the Lobster club, the twins were booked in every day at the Jellyfish Club.

Each day when the children were collected from their respective club's afternoon session by the parent 5/5.30'ish, the children their parents and the nanny would go to the Tapas Bar for the children's high tea.

What are you trying to suggest or establish?

Silentscope wrote:From Luis Barros Statement:

When asked he says that on a date he cannot remember, the group, just the adults because the children were dining with the nannies, had been too late in making their dinner reservation at the Tapas, and an exception was made, authorised by his boss Steve, as the Tapas only provides for 20 dinners for half board clients as was the case.



Am I correct in assuming that the only time when all the children were in the Lobster Creche together was the morning of 2nd May?


Could that have been the day Luis means?

We are unsure as to whether the Creche was open on Sunday, but if was one of Jane Tanners daughters may not have been there due to some issue with her foot.  If Madeleine died on April 29th, she may never had even been in the creche.  The other children may well have all gone to creche from Monday onwards.  However, they would have been in different creches due to their ages.  Where was Dave and Fiona,s baby?

The only time the children were dining together with the nannies was at high tea, sounds like Barros means the group booked then.

crusader wrote:The only time the children were dining together with the nannies was at high tea, sounds like Barros means the group booked then.

That is if high tea actually happened.