If the TWINS were not at their creche Thursday morning why did the McCanns LIE and what were they doing between 9am and 12.30PM?

As can be seen in the video below, there were huge discrepancies and/or confusion about who picked up Madeleine...and also the TWINS...


According to the PJ Diagram of \events it appears that the twins only went in the AFTERNOON and not the morning!

This would explain why Kate and Gerry could not get their story straight about picking up the twins...

Many of us also believe that Maddie was not at the creche either so that leaves us wondering, did they LIE about taking and picking up the twins from the tapas creche and IF SO... What were they doing?

This could make a huge difference to what everyone has told us...

Rachael claims that Maddie and twins went to creche..

Jez tells us that two of Gerrys friends were NOT at tennis Thursday morning... (and more)

This has only just come to my attention, as previously I thought the twins creche records were missing from the files, but the diagram of events \'tells us' they weren't needed as the twins were not at the tapas creche!

I may not always agree with you but I do acknowledge and appreciate all your hard work.  Too much for me to read at this time of day - slowly slowly.

Just wanted to say thanks .

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


Copy of the crèche sheets for 2^nd May from Nigels site:
 
Writing before the phone number could just about be ‘Pena’ or many other things, at first glance ‘Room’ jumps out to me.
 
Without seeing the original document and/or interviewing the writer/crèche workers we are never going to know.

Even less clear copy from Pamalam's site:

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

@DougD

Thanks for posting the relevant sheet. 

You may well be right. As always, your opinion is as equally valid as mine or anyone's. We don't seem to agree on any of the handwritten records! 

Anyway, the suggestion I made is out there for others to mull over. .

A little better?




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

Looks like Room to me also.
So would that fit if it was wet and tennis rearranged for the afternoon?
Enjoy how your brain works [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 

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

Firstly - thanks very much. Much better!

Secondly - flippin heck! At low mag I'm still seeing 'PeNA'; at high mag, still 'PeNA' (although admittedly not as clearly and it looks like overwriting may have taken place). BUT, bizarrely, I can now see the outline (no fill) of an uppercase, printed 'M' between the final letter and the zero of the mobile number!

I genuinely can't see 'Room' at low or high mag - but that might just be my brain.

Unfortunately, when Maria the cleaner gives her statement about G & K being on their own and just leaving 5A on Wed 2 May, she doesn't give a time.

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

Might (was going to say 'must' but I'm a bit stubborn) just be me then!

Least you've all learnt a bit about an Algarve beauty spot.

Why does Kate alternate between McCann & Healy?

MayMuse wrote:Looks like Room to me also.
So would that fit if it was wet and tennis rearranged for the afternoon?
Enjoy how your brain works [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 

Hi - it was transcribed by the police as room and I think it says room May 2 and Tennis/Room May 3 as I blew it up and it definitely looks like room but your idea is way more interesting. I noticed that May 3 Gerry signs Maddie in at 9.10 but Kate takes sole responsibility (it seems) collecting Maddie, returning Maddie and taking the twins and collecting them. Where was Gerry?

Philip Anders wrote:Why does Kate alternate between McCann & Healy?

Maybe somebody didn't know she used the name Healy, and presumed when signing on her behalf she'd use McCann?

Looks like "Pena" to me also, and would that be the reason they wrote BOTH their mobile numbers down as they were going off site?

JRP wrote:

Philip Anders wrote:Why does Kate alternate between McCann & Healy?

Maybe somebody didn't know she used the name Healy, and presumed when signing on her behalf she'd use McCann?

I think the opposite - the day she signs in as Healy is not her handwriting - a friend (the person who also signed in Ella) has signed Maddie in, not knowing that she's used McCann previously for the sake of clarity. The PJ knew something was wrong here and brought in a handwriting expert for analysis. We do not know (I think) what the findings were in detail but we are told in the case file that "Our suspicions were confirmed." 

I want to know more about the supposed boat trip - was the weather suitable to take a group of pre-schoolers who presumably couldn't swim out if the sea was choppy?

It was following some interesting comments made by ‘Phoebe’ on another crèche thread here, which sparked me to have a closer look at the crèche nanny statements.
From PJ Files Nanny’s crèche – Kids Club Staff Interviews - (my brackets and italics)
*STACEY P.* (Friday 4^th May 2007)
In informal conversation with Stacey P., (Portz) she stated:
1. That it is she and her colleague, Shinead, who usually cares for the twins;
2. That yesterday, it was the informant who cared for the twins, her colleague was on her day off;
3. That the children were dropped off by their parents at 9.30 and that the mother picked them up at 12.30;
4. That it was the father who dropped them off at 14.30 and that it was the mother who came to fetch them at 17.30;
5. That she saw no-one strange in the surrounding area;
6. That the behaviour of the parents was always perfectly normal;
7. That she arrived in Portugal on March 18th and that she returns to the UK on November 7th 2007.


According to this, the twins did attend the Tapas Jellyfish crèche on Thursday morning. (There is no record of this Thursday morning crèche sheet on file)
 
Stacey seems to have rounded off the times to the half-hour-for example on the afternoon Jellyfish crèche sheet (which is on file), the twins were signed in by Kate at 14.45, and out at the Tapas High tea area by Kate at 17.25. 
Shinead V usually took care of the twins, but that day (Thursday) Stacey stood in for her as Shinead was ‘on her day off’.
We are told that all the nannies have Saturday off – except for two nannies who offer a ‘support service for any eventual need’-Jacqueline MW-8-5-07
Did all the nannies also have a day off during the week, or was it perhaps just the two who had worked the Saturday ‘support service’?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. In their statements some of the nannies even mention how "flexible" their job was. Indeed, we know for a fact that it was SO flexible that it was Stacey P, not Sinead (the assigned nanny) who was looking after the twins on that Thursday while Charlotte P. (who should have been minding infants (with the lowest minder/child ratio) somehow found time to leave her charges and read Madeleine a story - this despite the fact that Madeleine's group had only six children for the a.m. session and four for the p.m session (three after Ella O'Brien left an hour early) and they already had their own nanny Cat.
As a student, I had experience of working during the Summer hols in a similar role and if my experience is common (and I believe it is) I firmly believe that the nannies had their own system of covering for each other, changing rosters unofficially, and giving each other time off. We did it regularly, especially of numbers were small and two groups could be combined. Indeed, management often requested it as it freed us up to take on other tasks. For this reason I have always believed that Cat. Baker was not minding Madeleine on Thurs but had instead gone off with Sinead and that this fact has been hushed up. Perhaps whoever had Madeleine's group cannot say for certain if she was present and in any case, I believe they were unwilling to draw attention to the change of nanny for Madeleine's group that day. Given that the child was "abducted" that very night any change in routine regarding her might attract suspicion and awkward questions. I believe the nannies in question rationalized that whatever allegedly happened that night could have nothing to do with a swapped roster and decided to avoid trouble by pretending it was just business as usual in Madeleine's group that day.

A very elaborate unsubstantiated theory but how does this fit in with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

If the assumption has reverted to Madeleine 'disappearance' on the night of Thursday 3rd May, how would the daytime creche arrangements have any bearing?  If the McCann version is to be believed (incidentally, I don't believe), Madeleine disappeared between approx. 8:00 and 10:00 pm - when she was left alone with her siblings, whilst they went off on the hit and miss

Alternatively, if, as many attentive case observers now believe, Madeleine 'disappeared' earlier in the week (from evidenced material, most likely 29th/30th April), there is even less reason to assume that the creche staffing arrangements were concealed in order to "avoid trouble" - covering themselves for Thursday 3rd May.

This is not making any sense.

@ Verdi.  It only makes no sense if one holds the belief that Madeleine was dead as early as the Monday of that week, that the nannies were aware of this and willingly went along for days with the deception because Cat. Baker was somehow friendly with the McCanns. IMO that is not the case. Personally I put Madeleine's death later, on either Wednesday night or she was found dead early on Thursday morning. (Unless statements from the sailing instructors not yet released prove this wrong) I find it too difficult to believe that the McCanns had a dead body on their hands from Sunday/Monday and waited til Thursday night to act. The risk of premature discovery would have been too great IMO. Their story fell apart so quickly that I think planning the "abduction" on the Thursday night was a rushed, panicked response rather than one with days of careful planning behind it. I believe the shambolic creche records were filled retrospectively and that Cat. was not in creche on May 3rd. Her lying was to save herself first and foremost. I appreciate others may have a different view but this is where the evidence points for me.

@ Pheobe.  Fair enough but you've evaded the question, I repeat..

"If the assumption has reverted to Madeleine 'disappearance' on the night of Thursday 3rd May, how would the daytime creche arrangements have any bearing?"

Then you say, I quote ... " I appreciate others may have a different view but this is where the evidence points for me."

What evidence are you referring to?  So far all I see is unsubstantiated theorizing.  For example - what evidence do you have that leads you to think that Catriona Baker was not working on Thursday 3rd May?

What evidence do you have that leads you to think Madeleine perhaps died on the Wednesday or Thursday morning?

What evidence do you have that leads you to think the beach sailing instructors were interviewed by the PJ either formally or informally?

The child daycare staff would have been interviewed to establish Madeleine's general demeanour, whether she appeared mentally and physically healthy and how she responded to her parents.  They would not have been interviewed for any other reason at that stage of the investigation - why would they be?   I repeat, Madeleine was reported to have disappeared (been abducted) between 8:00 and 10:00 pm on Thursday 3rd May - there can be no reason for anybody, least of all the PJ, to think the child carers were in any way involved with Madeleine's alleged disappearance.

It is apparent from the childcarers witness statements that they were all asked the same questions, as one would expect under the circumstances - routine policing.  I don't doubt they were briefed by their employer beforehand for their response to accord with company policy but I can't see any reason to suppose the child carers fabricated their testimonies during the interview process.

Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington however, have their own stories to tell in the aftermath.

Do you readily dismiss all the compelling evidence presented on CMoMM, that there was no evidence of Madeleine being seen in or around the Ocean Club complex after lunchtime on Sunday 29th April? 

Do you readily dismiss the recent compelling evidence posted up by Get'emGoncalo and many other pointers expressed on CMoMM over the past months,  that it would have been impossible for the McCanns and their group of friends to stage such an elaborate cover-up in such a short period of time?

Have you considered the possibility that the yarn concocted for launch at approx. 10:00 pm on Thursday 3rd May 2007, the scribbled timeline etc, might just have been a ruse to appear panicky and naive?

I leave you to ponder.

@ Verdi. I cannot imagine how you could think that I am "reverting to Madeleine disappearing" or even dying on the evening of May 3rd. I thought I had made clear my belief that she was dead by May 3rd.
Why would the police be interested in the nannies accounts of Madeleine's time in creche? Well it is evident that they were from the interviews. They were interested in the demeanour of Madeleine, her parents, as witnessed by the nannies, as well as asking if them if they had noticed anything untoward around the creche or on outings. I imagine that if a nanny admitted that she was not minding Madeleine on her "last day alive" as rostered to, but had arranged a swap without informing her employers, then suspicions would have been raised. Common sense indicated the likelihood of any abduction being an inside job, as evidenced by the trouble the P.J. went to to interview O.C. staff from cleaners to maintenance men. A nanny unofficially and secretly absenting herself on the very day her charge gets abducted would have attracted interest.
What evidence do I have to make me feel Cat did not mind Madeleine's group on May 3rd? Her first statement to the police is a generalized waffle about her role as nanny. She erroneously claims Kate and Gerry accompanied Madeleine's group on creche outings. She only mentions the mini-sail eight months later in her rogatory statement, describing children being taken out to the open sea to get into their yellow boats and returning to port, when in reality the small children board these boats in ankle deep water on the beach and are then pushed about by the instructors in knee to waist deep water. She cannot recall who collected Madeleine for lunch on the 3rd. She also corrects an earlier statement (not in the files) wherein it was recorded that she stated Madeleine preferred the company of boys. I suspect it was not only the 3rd on which Cat. skived off.

You state that you "Can't see any reason to suppose why the child-carers fabricated their testimonies during the interview process" yet they must have if you believe Madeleine died on the Sunday/Monday as at least 3 of them claim to have seen and interacted with Madeleine on the 3rd.
What evidence have I that the sailing instructors Alice Stanley and Chris Unsworth were interviewed by the P.J.? The files list them as having given statements but they are not among those published.
Do I discount evidence suggesting that Madeleine was not seen after Sunday? As HiDeHo pointed out she was looking for evidence that she was seen rather than that she wasn't. Until we hear from those who took her on that sail where she allegedly cried and was frightened, I reserve judgement. 
I do believe it was possible for them to plan what they did in a day or a day and a half. I see a scramble rather than a smooth operation which would have come with time and outside assistance in the immediate aftermath. They had adequate time to have hidden the body, cleaned up if necessary and sent for help. Many successful killers, even acting alone have covered up in a hurry and never been convicted. As for them grieving - given that they were capable of sleeping, enjoying meals, jogging and smiling within such a short time I think grieving took a back seat to saving their miserable skins and reputations! I don't apply normal standards of human emotion to this lot.

Where was Cat B on Wednesday afternoon approx. 4.30pm after the trip to the beach with Emma Wilding and all the Mini club children?  (My brackets and italics)
Emma W 7.5.07 (snipped)- When questioned, she states that on Wednesday May 2, her group and Madeleine's group went to the beach, but she is not sure if Madeleine was in the group or not,…… (3.30 – 4.30pm)
Kirsty Louise Maryan 7.5.07 (worked with children in the Junior group-6-10 year olds)
. relative to the facts of the investigation the witness clarifies that in her daily schedule mentioned she only, on one occasion, had contact with Madeleine McCann, for about 30 minutes 'who was treated as Maddie' in that she had to substitute for her colleague, who, at that time, was responsible for the group whose name is Emma, as she had to go to the Tapas to take care of the refreshments of Madeleine's group. For this, the deponent had the charge of accompanying that group towards the beach until the MiniClub where they stayed for a few minutes, and from where they left for the restaurant, mentioned above, in order to have dinner. She clarifies that when Madeleine ate her food, her parents were close and accompanied her; 
I believe that Kirsty is referring to the beach trip on Wednesday 2^nd that Emma refers to. Emma mentions no other joint venture to the beach with Cat’s group - Cat does not mention it at all.
From Kirsty’s statement I take it that Emma W was on the beach alone with the children of both Mini club groups at the end of their beach activities, but that Emma had to leave to take care of the Tapas High tea food for Cat B’s group -4 children according to the crèche sheets, and Kirsty was asked to walk with the children from the beach to the Mini club.
(Possibly Emma was in a hurry to the Tapas as this had to be done before a certain time each day)
Kirsty and the children, after a brief stop at the Mini club, then proceeded to the Tapas area for High tea at approx 5pm.
 

Where was Cat? Did Cat stay down at the beach area? What was so important that Cat could not do her own duties?  Was Cat not with her group at the Tapas High tea area?
ETA -If Emma W (Mini club staff) was not sure that Madeleine was in the group that day or not, then I do not believe that during that 30 minutes or so, Kirsty (Junior club staff) could positively identify Madeleine out of the two groups of children.
I note also that Emma does not specifically mention Cat being there -just that the two groups went to the beach.
We are just left to presume that Cat was there.

 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]        From the statement of Steve Carpenter-


" I**** was in the group for children between three and four years old, her crèche worker was Emma and it was only after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann that I realised that she was in the same group as I**** "

IMO this is further evidence that, due to the small number of children in the O.C. at the time (before peak season) two groups were often put together for activities and the nannies took turns in minding the whole lot.
Charlotte P also claims that it was her habit, when the infants were sleeping, to go to the mini group and "help out" by playing with and reading stories to the older group.
Kirsty (as you point out) also claims to have minded Madeleine for Emma (not Cat) in order for Emma to make the arrangements for the serving of high tea.
This would mirror my own experience. As I stated earlier, we used to double up and swap quite regularly when there were small numbers of children.

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

I cannot imagine how you could think that I am "reverting to Madeleine disappearing" or even dying on the evening of May 3rd. I thought I had made clear my belief that she was dead by May 3rd.

Yes, I'm aware of your original words, I quote ... "Personally I put Madeleine's death later, on either Wednesday night or she was found dead early on Thursday morning" ... and I was careful to repeat them in my reply.  My question following was ... "If the assumption has reverted to Madeleine 'disappearance' on the night of Thursday 3rd May, how would the daytime creche arrangements have any bearing?"

The reference to the night of Thursday 3rd May was a generalisation, not specifically aimed at you - there are many people who still believe the McCanns version of events, despite compelling evidence to the contrary.  My question however remains the same - how can the daytime creche arrangement have any bearing on Madeleine's 'disappearance'?  More importantly where is the evidence?

Why would the police be interested in the nannies accounts of Madeleine's time in creche? Well it is evident that they were from the interviews.

Routine policing, as I think I made clear.

What evidence do I have to make me feel Cat did not mind Madeleine's group on May 3rd? Her first statement to the police is a generalized waffle about her role as nanny.

Catriona Baker, as well as all the other child carers, would have been asked a set of routine questions - that is clear.  Routine policing.  I also added that Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington had their own stories to tell as time progressed - that is a an entirely different entity.  Where is the evidence to support your supposition?

She only mentions the mini-sail eight months later in her rogatory statement,

Catriona Baker's trip to the beach was covered extensively by the PJ in May 2007, only a week after Madeleine's alleged disappearance.  Regard..


04-Processos, volume IV . Pgs. 870 to 873

















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

What evidence have I that the sailing instructors Alice Stanley and Chris Unsworth were interviewed by the P.J.? The files list them as having given statements but they are not among those published.

The absence of formal statement in the PJ files does not mean that statements were given but withheld from released documentation.  It means they didn't exist as an official document.  Regard..

112 OC workers were questioned, amongst them some of English nationality and with the use of interpreters.

In addition, formal questioning was made of English employees most involved, from the MW company -?15 child care workers and two tennis instructors. Also eleven informal questionings with employees who carry out other types of activity. In total, 28 persons. Due to their absence, three individuals were not questioned, Euan Crosby, Steven Jackson and Emma Knights respectively.

Total of individuals questioned was 143, 15 of which were names corresponding to child care workers or "nannies".
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

No formal statements from the following in the DVD:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Euan Crosby OC Beach Manager
Nathan Daniel Francis Scarll [or Scarf] Waterfront Manager [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Robert Cook Driver/Maintenance
Stephen Steve] Edward Carruthers Dual Qualified Instructor [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Claire Louise Bennet Dual Qualified Instructor
Sebastian  Bollen  Godsmark   Dual Qualified Instructor [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Clare Hicks Dual Qualified Instructor
Lauren Hilder-Darling Dual Qualified Instructor [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Steven Jackson Dual Qualified Instructor
Elizabeth Miles Ocean Club nanny
Fraser Calum Nixon [or Nickson] Dual Qualified Instructor [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Mark Shult Ocean Club nanny
Sarah Jane Tily Ocean Club nanny
Benjamin Wilkins Dinghy Instructor  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Alice_Louise_Stanley  Assistant Instructor [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Chris Unsworth Windsurf Instructor  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Robert Ragone OC Kids Chef
Jackie McConnel OC nanny

(Note the last two only began work at the OC on 7th June 2007)

Some of the above are mentioned in this service note with details of informal conversations with certain OC staff members.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

As HiDeHo pointed out she was looking for evidence that she was seen rather than that she wasn't. Until we hear from those who took her on that sail where she allegedly cried and was frightened, I reserve judgement.

Firstly, HiDeHo's methodology has no bearing on the subject matter.  How she prefers to work and/or express herself makes no difference to the fact that there is not one single independent witness who has stated beyond reasonable doubt that they saw Madeleine alive and well after lunchtime on Sunday 29th April 2007.

The beach workers named are unlikely to be able to confirm Madeleine's presence at the boat trip even if they were formally interviewed.  One of a string of children met for a few minutes in a season - their questioning (no doubt they were questioned informally) counts for little or nothing.  If there were any significance their statements would be in the PJ files.  It's worth noting here that Chris Unsworth is listed as a windsurf instructor - no doubt that's where his passion lies!

In the words of Gerry McCann 'no evidence no evidence no evidence' - and that's an emphatic no!

NB:  I agree that the creche records were a shambles, the staff probably did have their own private arrangements on occasions but I can't see any reason to suspect foul play only to cover their backsides because one of them was nursing a hangover or whatever else - if however Madeleine 'disappeared' early in the week then I can see every reason why.  This jiggery-pokery only needed one participant, with the aid of a fantasist to lead the investigation astray.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Given that the P.J investigation believed that whatever befell Madeleine happened on Thursday eve/night why then do they bother checking the parents/ tapas 7s day to day routines for that week at all? What relevance could this have had to a disappearance on Thurs night? Obviously they were searching for anything that occurred that week which might be linked to Madeleine's "disappearance." I believe the nannies who spent more time with Madeleine than her parents or their group were also regarded as potentially valuable sources of such information.

I imagine that if the Thursday mini-sail actually had occurred as described by Cat then Madeleine would certainly have been remembered by the instructors. She was described as crying and expressing fear and reluctance as she clung to Cat's lap. I cannot imagine her fear would have instantly have evaporated and would expect the sail instructors to have noticed or been told that one of their young sailors was terrified and needed reassurance during the sail.
Excuse the mistake re rogatory. I meant second statement of course.
It is interesting that you posit that witnesses were asked the same questions in a formulaic style. I agree. I have always regarded this as being responsible for the "didn't look like a tourist" repetitions. The latter were often preceded by the information "urged", which leads me to believe that the police themselves asked this question rather than it being offered by the witnesses.