The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 26.09.10 12:47

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE CASE - 1

Dr Kate McCann said Dr David Payne knocked on the door at about 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May, while she had just come out of the shower. She says he was there outside on the veranda for about 30 seconds before she sent him away.

Dr David Payne says he walked through the open patio door, that Dr Kate McCann was dressed, that he saw all the children being put to bed, that they were mostly dressed in white, and that he stayed for about half-an-hour.

Which one is not telling the truth?

Or are both not telling the truth?
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 26.09.10 12:50

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - 2

On 4 May 2007 the McCanns told police that the twins had been crying the night of 2/3 May.

They later changed their stories to say it was Madeleine and Sean who were crying.

Is the first version true?

Or the second version?

Or neither?
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Guest on 26.09.10 13:04

@Tony Bennett wrote:CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE CASE - 1

Dr Kate McCann said Dr David Payne knocked on the door at about 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May, while she had just come out of the shower. She says he was there outside on the veranda for about 30 seconds before she sent him away.

Dr David Payne says he walked through the open patio door, that Dr Kate McCann was dressed, that he saw all the children being put to bed, that they were mostly dressed in white, and that he stayed for about half-an-hour.

Which one is not telling the truth?

Or are both not telling the truth?


Tony, this is an extract from David Payne's rogatory interview from mccannfiles - part 2 of 3, it's towards the bottom of the page.

http://mccannfiles.com/id251.html


[quote]

1485 ”How many minutes, you said as a matter of minutes and then you went back and then you played tennis.”
Reply ”Mm.”
1485 ”I’m gonna pin you down and ask you how long you think you were in there for. I know you say minutes.”
Reply ”In their apartment, it, it, I’d say three minutes, five maximum.”
1485 ”Three to five?”
Reply ”Yeah.”

Where did you see that he stayed half an hour?

avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 26.09.10 13:18

[quote="candyfloss"]
@Tony Bennett wrote:CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE CASE - 1

Dr Kate McCann said Dr David Payne knocked on the door at about 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May, while she had just come out of the shower. She says he was there outside on the veranda for about 30 seconds before she sent him away.

Dr David Payne says he walked through the open patio door, that Dr Kate McCann was dressed, that he saw all the children being put to bed, that they were mostly dressed in white, and that he stayed for about half-an-hour.

Which one is not telling the truth?

Or are both not telling the truth?


Tony, this is an extract from David Payne's rogatory interview from mccannfiles - part 2 of 3, it's towards the bottom of the page.

http://mccannfiles.com/id251.html




1485 ”How many minutes, you said as a matter of minutes and then you went back and then you played tennis.”
Reply ”Mm.”
1485 ”I’m gonna pin you down and ask you how long you think you were in there for. I know you say minutes.”
Reply ”In their apartment, it, it, I’d say three minutes, five maximum.”
1485 ”Three to five?”
Reply ”Yeah.”

Where did you see that he stayed half an hour?
True, he says that on this occasion.

The 'half-an-hour' comes from previous statements made by Dr David Payne and the McCanns, which put David Payne going to the apartment at around 6.30pm and returning to the tennis courts at around 7.00pm.

It was obviously firmly set in Goncalo Amaral's mind, as he refers specifically to the '30 seconds vs. 30 minutes' contradiction in one of the chapters of his book, 'The Truth About A Lie'.

Remember that he and the others had had very nearly a whole year to think about what they were going to say by the time the 'rogatory' interviews came about.

I will try to turn up the specific references for you later to Payne being there for up to half-an-hour.
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Guest on 26.09.10 13:23

This is the part that gets me in the interview, He seems to be over-egging the pudding so to speak. Why all that. Wouldn't you just say you went into the apartment and Kate and the children were there, and she was getting them ready for bed

[quote] David Payne's rogatory interview part 2/3 - mccannfiles - link as above post

err and I went into their apartment through the patio doors. The three children were all you know dressed you know in their pyjamas, you know they looked immaculate, you know they were just like angels, they all looked so happy and well looked after and content and I said to Kate, you know it’s a bit early for the you know, for the three of them to be going to bed, she said ah they’ve had such a great time, they’re really tired and you know err so I say, you know I can’t remember exactly what, what you know the night attire, what the children were wearing but white was the predominant err colour, but you know just to reinforce they were just so happy, you know seeing you know obviously Gerry wasn’t there but they were just all, just so at peace and you know they looked like a family who’d had such a fantastic time and err yeah then I left there, went and got my stuff,


then later on in the same interview

1485 ”Did you open the door, slid door? Or was it already open? Or…”
Reply ”Err I think it was already open, I think it was already open. Err you know, as I say, I walked up there, Kate was you know I say looking very relaxed and err I say a comment to her I said well crikey it’s early, early for them to be getting ready you know for bed, as I say she said ah no, I’ve had such a good, you know such a good day and afternoon err so you know, and Gerry’s just obviously finishing off playing tennis and err so you know hopefully try and get them down and as I say we were just, you know I, I know, it does sound bizarre but I just looked at the three of them and I couldn’t, you know they were just so well presented and so clean and immaculate it was, you know I was, and you know they just looked such healthy children, err you know, there’s, there’s you know nothing that normally…”

Why on earth go into such strange detail. As if you would think all that to yourself when you had just popped in for 3 minutes.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Judge Mental on 26.09.10 13:31

This is what happens when people get caught with their pants down, because they panic and go into overdrive.

Payne said, ''Kate was you know I say looking very relaxed.''

This has to be a first. Kate McCann has never looked relaxed in all the time we have known her.
avatar
Judge Mental

Posts : 2763
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 80
Location : Chambers

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Guest on 26.09.10 13:35

Following on - just a bit further down, he's at it again

Reply ”But err certainly enough time just to see, you know, certainly the apartment, there was nothing that was untoward, that was you know err the children all looked extremely happy, there was no, you know signs of any problems with err you know Kate, you know or indeed the relationship that Kate had got with any of the three children. None of the children had been told off, none of the children looked like they were you know in trouble for anything, you know they were err still all talking and playing around. Err so you know it was just a very err transient you know that I’d gone in there, but as I say it just struck me how well they all looked.”

None of the children had been told off, none of the children looked like they were you know in trouble for anything,

How did he know this if he was only there for 3 minutes. How does he know what happened previously
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Judge Mental on 26.09.10 14:13

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23407950-madeleine-and-the-missing-hour-how-often-did-the-mccanns-check-on-their-children.do

One does not know where to post this, but one finds it quite horrifying to discover that the Praia da Luz holiday may not have been the first week that Madeleine had been a babysitter for her siblings after all.

''Recently they all went to Mark Warner's in Greece where they had devised a plan of leaving their children to sleep while they had dinner nearby.''

Have we ever ascertained when this holiday in Greece took place?


avatar
Judge Mental

Posts : 2763
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 80
Location : Chambers

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 26.09.10 14:40

candyfloss,

On the subject of Dr Payne's visit to Dr Kate McCann, I am wondering if a statement somewhere along the line has been withheld by the PJ?

Take a look at this part of Dr Gerald McCann's 'arguido' interview which took place on my 60th birthday [7 September 2007]:

QUOTE

Regarding the episode where he spoke to David on the 3rd of May, he says that he was playing tennis at 18h30 when David appeared near the tennis court and asked him through the net if he was going to continue playing. The deponent said he didn’t know because Kate might be needing help to look after the three children, even more so because they intended to bring them to the recreation area after their showers. He thinks that David offered to check if Kate needed help, which he did, and returned minutes later. Concerning his previous statement, where he states that David returned half an hour later, at around 19h00, he says that he returned to the tennis court after half an hour, as this time frame refers to the second time he returned to the tennis court, after dressing up for the game.

UNQUOTE

Was this yet another change of story?
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Guest on 26.09.10 14:56

This was posted on MM............. .... and imo opinion deserves thumbsup clapping1

The rogatories were an embarrassment to law enforcement. You have people who aided and abetted something, a child is missing and presumed, 97% likely to be dead, and they are allowed to choose whether to cooperate - reconstruction should have been mandatory, it should have been filmed, and it should ahve been used to pressure them in further questioning since it can't have happened like they said. To have them not do that was such a blow and then the fall back position is the @ss kissing interviews by UK LE - here, read each other's statements first, etc. The cops were making excuses for them or seemed to be helping them, working extra hard to accept what they were trying to say and make it fit or ignore it if it did not fit.

When Jane is saying I don't really know Gerry, he's not my cup of tea, not that I'm intimidated by him, but he's more of a man's man, but Kate is lovely - I am thinking, okay, this is news, this is an in. she used the word intimidating and distances herself from the guy, and the interviewer doesn't seem inclined to follow that up. In what way a man's man? A bit aggressive? Loud? Sporty? Did he seem to have much to do with the children or did he leave that to Kate? did he press Kate into doing things his way, and she acquiesced? Did you ever hear them disagree about the children's safety or child minding? Did she complain about his lack of availability to her, the kids, to his attentions to tennis, other women etc. Kate says they rowed the night of the 2nd and slept apart, here is her statement, were you aware of the nature of her upset feelings the 3rd or did she keep that a secret? She went off on her own that day, didn't she? Kate was worried about the children's safety the night of the 3rd, seemingly for the first time. Do you recall her saying that at the table?

They had information they needed to do a good job on those interviews including stopping the interviewees when they talked about what they normally did and get them back to May 3rd. you normally did all have children's tea but on the 3rd, McCanns only had that tea and the rest of you went elsewhere. Why? How did that come about? I'm less interested in the routine than in what happened the 3rd. Didn't you call Kate to invite them to come? She was upset later everyone wen to the the beach and said Madeleine would have enjoyed that, she seemed miffed not to have been included, who made that decision or how did it come about that after lunch all the others went to the beach without McCanns?

Russell, you've got Maddie at Tennis the afternoon but yet we see tennis wasn't her group activity, she had boating and your wife saw her there. Are you telling me in all this time, you've never discussed with the missus, having seen Maddie at tennis that day, the last time you claim to have seen her alive?
They totally dropped the ball - any real investigation would have asked more questions and tougher. It seemed like a 'putting this to bed' interview. I've had tougher grillings on job interviews..

avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Cherry on 26.09.10 15:46

Normally when there are any discrepancies in statements the Police haul you back in again and again to get to the bottom of why they say one thing, then contradict it and why some of their statements contradict the friends statements. We were also told that someone was going back to kate and Gerry with inside information what was going on in Portugal with the PJ investigation - was that a Leicestershire officer? Was it a Leicestershire officer who was wearing one of their ribbons? It was reported before that when a poster rang LP they were told Kate and Gerry have done nothing wrong!! LP linked to the fund.

The whole role of LP needs to be looked into here, also the reason why Baggott got the N.Ireland job!
avatar
Cherry

Posts : 2163
Reputation : 76
Join date : 2009-12-01

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 26.09.10 16:34

candyfloss,

Yes, that poster on MM crystallised my own thoughts about the rogatories.

There is such a thing as a police interview designed to look like a probative interview, but which in fact is anything but.

Such an event happened in the Lee Balkwell case.

Either Lee died in that cement mixer at 1.00am by accident, or he was put there and murdered (as everything now indicates) .

The lead suspect for this clearly suspicious death was S.B.

There was only ever one interview under caution in that case.

The Police Officer began the interview - three weeks after the incident - saying: 'S, I want you to understand that the police view of this incident is that it was a tragic accident'.

S.B. must have thought that Christmas had come 4 months early.
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Easily discernible contradictions

Post by Tony Bennett on 28.09.10 16:20

Here by the way is how Goncalo Amaral treats and discusses all the discrepancies between the McCanns' account of Dr David Payne's alleged visit to Apartment 5A at about 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May and Dr Payne's account...and he covers a few more discrepancies as well.

I think it's in Chapter 10, and of course a hat-tip to AnnaEsse for the translation:

This comes from AnnaEsse's translation of Goncalo Amaral's book: 'The Truth About A Lie':

QUOTE

Apart from the McCanns and Diane Webster, Fiona Payne's mother, the whole group of friends are having something to eat. The children are running and playing on the terrace. Others of Madeleine's age, are coming and going between the restaurant and the beach. Everything is peaceful on this late afternoon. At 6.13pm, the men leave the table and go on foot to the resort. A quarter of an hour later, it's the turn of the women and children to go back. A few minutes go by. David Payne catches up with Madeleine's father, who is playing tennis, and asks him where Kate is. Gerry replies that she has gone back to the apartment with Madeleine and the twins. David goes there immediately.

What did he go there to do? How long did he stay there? How were the children? Did he see them, did he play with them? From that moment on, the witness statements differ. According to Gerald, he stayed in the apartment for 30 minutes; according to Kate, on the other hand, no more than 30 seconds. This difference of opinion is important enough to be taken into consideration. It's not the only one.

David Payne allegedly went to the McCanns' apartment to find out if Madeleine's mother needed anything, if he could help her take the children to the play area. He relates having seen Madeleine and the twins; the image apparently conjured up for him that of three immaculate angels. We note that at 7pm, the last person to see Maddie - apart from her parents - is David Payne.

There is an entirely different version of that late afternoon, that of Fiona Payne. According to her, Gerry was not playing tennis but was in the apartment with Kate and the children. Apparently, she accompanied her husband when he went to the McCanns' apartment. Who is telling the truth?

The photos taken on the terrace of the Paraiso prove that Fiona, her friends and their children left the restaurant 15 minutes after the men's departure - one of them David. What do these easily discernible contradictions signify?


UNQUOTE
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 28.09.10 20:30

In a belated to reply to candyfloss:

Here is I think the source of the 'Payne was there for half-an-hour' claim.

It actually comes from the statement of Dr Gerald McCann himself, who on 10 May 2007 told the police this:


This is verbatim from Dr Gerald McCann's statement to the Portuguese Police on 10 May 2007:

"During the afternoon of that day, the rest of the group, including the children, were at the beach, having returned at 18H30, the time at which he saw DAVID PAYNE next to the tennis court.

DAVID went to visit KATE and the children and returned close to 19H00,

...trying to convince the deponent to continue to play tennis, which he refused, as he had already been plying for about an hour and had to go back to his wife. Nevertheless, RUSSEL, DAVID and MATHEW stayed to play".


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At the same time I'd like to bring over a post from the 'ChaosRaptors' site, where one poster, username 'honestbroker' has made a genuine attempt to explain the five key discrepancies that arise from the differences between the statements of the McCanns and Dr David Payne:

First, my challenge:

Now that I've answered you question about the LENGTH of his visit, please help me with your best explanation for the following discrepancies which remain:

1. KMcC: Payne was only there for 30 seconds vs. PAYNE: Gerald McCann says he was there for up to half-an-hour; Payne says he was there 'minutes'

2. KMcC: He was on the balcony vs. PAYNE: I was inside the apartment

3. KMcC: I was only in a towel vs. PAYNE: Kate was dressed

4. KMcC: He came to the front door and rang the bell vs. PAYNE: I strolled through the open patio door

5. KMcC: He did not see the children vs. PAYNE: I did see the children.

Second, the reply from 'honestbroker':

I know you put these questions to someone else, but I have already answered them. I am nothing if not patient and am willing to do so again.

The apparent anomalies arise from fragmentary and incomplete notes (in reported speech) taken at Kate's rogatory interview,

The best explanation is that DP called on Kate while she was taking a shower, Kate asked DP to give her a few minutes to dress (which he did), then DP returned to the apartment.

The story is not continued in Kate's account because the snapshot of those events from Kate's perspective ends at the point where she asked DP to return. There are many gaps in the records of arguido/a interviews of both Kate and Gerry, and that was one.

DP did not mention that Kate was in the shower when he dropped by because he didn't see it as relevant (which it isn't!)

Put like that, everything dovetails together.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

TB: Is it that simple? Now that 'honestbroker' has spoken, does everything 'dovetail together'?
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Rainbow on 28.09.10 21:15

So there is nothing that states he was with Kate for the entire time? He could have gone for a walk,a fag or the loo or anything really.
avatar
Rainbow

Posts : 472
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence

Back to top Go down

Too many discrepancies

Post by Tony Bennett on 28.09.10 21:28

@Rainbow wrote:So there is nothing that states he was with Kate for the entire time? He could have gone for a walk, a fag or the loo or anything really.
Let us assume just for a moment that Dr David Payne really did visit Apartment 5A as is claimed - quite a big assumption to make when we look at all the contradictions about this event, which might lead some to conclude that no-one was telling the truth about it.

Let us also remember that according to the McCanns and Payne - though there are even different versions about this - Payne's mission was either to 'see if Kate was all right' (one version) or 'see if she and the children were coming down to watch the tennis' (another version).

On either view, why would he 'go for a walk', 'have a fag' or spend a long time on the loo before reporting back straightaway to Gerald McCann and telling him whether Kate did or did not want to come down to play tennis?

And why do none of them mention any of this in their statements?
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Irish Eyes on 28.09.10 21:45

Amaral made a statement that said something like: Dr Payne might like to explain when he bathed the children and for how long.

Do you think he was referring to this visit?
avatar
Irish Eyes

Posts : 101
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-04-12

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Tony Bennett on 28.09.10 22:27

@Irish Eyes wrote:Amaral made a statement that said something like: Dr Payne might like to explain when he bathed the children and for how long.

Do you think he was referring to this visit?
I thought he was, but I am not sure.

Amaral makes quite a few enigmatic statements.

This was one of them.
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Judge Mental on 28.09.10 22:33

@Rainbow wrote:So there is nothing that states he was with Kate for the entire time? He could have gone for a walk,a fag or the loo or anything really.

Now, there is an old-fashioned expression which one has not heard since one slept in the school dormitory.

One thought that 'fag' was now a banned word that should not be used due to its political incorrectness.
avatar
Judge Mental

Posts : 2763
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 80
Location : Chambers

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by sharonl on 28.09.10 22:33

This may be worth watching again -











Panorama - the transcript http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron
avatar
sharonl


Posts : 4000
Reputation : 682
Join date : 2009-12-29

http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Judge Mental on 28.09.10 22:39

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Irish Eyes wrote:Amaral made a statement that said something like: Dr Payne might like to explain when he bathed the children and for how long.

Do you think he was referring to this visit?
I thought he was, but I am not sure.

Amaral makes quite a few enigmatic statements.

This was one of them.

Perhaps we should have a thread purely devoted enigmatic statements that have been made previously or that we make ourselves. Rainbow regularly makes the odd enigmatic post here and there. It would be quite delightful to see them sat side by side some time.
avatar
Judge Mental

Posts : 2763
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 80
Location : Chambers

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Rainbow on 29.09.10 0:25

That would be a no then would it?
avatar
Rainbow

Posts : 472
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by Judge Mental on 29.09.10 1:35

@Rainbow wrote:That would be a no then would it?

Do forgive me dear. What would be a no?
avatar
Judge Mental

Posts : 2763
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 80
Location : Chambers

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by aiyoyo on 29.09.10 2:51

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Rainbow wrote:So there is nothing that states he was with Kate for the entire time? He could have gone for a walk, a fag or the loo or anything really.
Let us assume just for a moment that Dr David Payne really did visit Apartment 5A as is claimed - quite a big assumption to make when we look at all the contradictions about this event, which might lead some to conclude that no-one was telling the truth about it.

Let us also remember that according to the McCanns and Payne - though there are even different versions about this - Payne's mission was either to 'see if Kate was all right' (one version) or 'see if she and the children were coming down to watch the tennis' (another version).

On either view, why would he 'go for a walk', 'have a fag' or spend a long time on the loo before reporting back straightaway to Gerald McCann and telling him whether Kate did or did not want to come down to play tennis?

And why do none of them mention any of this in their statements?

On top of that, going on the version that DP was sent to check with KM whether the children were going to play tennis or (going to play at the playground according to one version IIRC), then surely a couple would have prearranged that. Why then did KM bath the children and got them ready for bed?

Why wasnt she surprised to see DP?
Well, she didnt state it anywhere that she was caught surprised by DP even though she was in bath robe! Was it a norm that he checked on them? If not, why the 3rd May?
She obviously wasnt expecting DP, else would she be in bathrobe? Again, was it a norm (tongue in cheek)?

Notice that DP didnt mention what the children, or for that matter what Kate was doing during the duration he was inside the apt ,1/2 hour apparently according to him. Neither did say why he didnt tell KM the purpose GM sent him round ie to see whether the children were coming out to play.

What's interest of note is that: throughout the few of his testimonies given at different time, all he'd mentioned was in fact the condition he'd found the children in, or rather his opinion of how they all looked; as if this (condition of children and that of Kate was more important than what they were doing at that time.
As in did the children greet him, sat and watch tv, were playing, snacking or generaly musing around.....no, nothing of that at all. All he said was they looked clean, immaculate, healthy, not in trouble (meaning KM didnt give them a hard time) content, happy, not told off (meaning not naughty), in other words, the children (and Kate) looked picture perfect.
He even mentioned the absence of GM and KM relationship with her children when providing his statements regarding that visit. - plenty subsconscious revelation.

It was as if he was sent to check on their condition rather than to find out whether they were coming out to play.
On the other hand, if on the version of 'to see whether KM was OK', why was it necessary for him to do that? Was it a norm he checks on them every evening? If not, what had happened on May3rd to render it different that KM needed to be checked on?

Again on that version (check to see KM is alright),
If GM was worried about KM, why didnt he check himself?
Say, if DP were to find KM not coping, was he expecting to chip in and help? To do what?
Otherwise what was the point of sending him, it would be pointless isnt it, if the purpose was only for him to verify then revert back to GM.
Wouldnt it have been much simplier and quicker if GM were to sms or even phone KM and if she'd needed help he would know right away?

Or was the visit to set up alibi for mccanns as last person (apart from her parents) to have seen Maddie, as well as to confirm finalisation of plan.

eta:
People are divided over when Maddie died - was it earlier?
Judging by their statements and DP description of the condition of Kate (relaxed) and children (healthy, not in trouble, ready for bed) would it seem that a trauma had already happened and he was there as part of the plan -- alibi and to ensure all is going according to plan.

avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Re: CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Post by aiyoyo on 29.09.10 4:14

@Rainbow wrote:So there is nothing that states he was with Kate for the entire time? He could have gone for a walk,a fag or the loo or anything really.

There was nothing that states he wasnt there the whole time either?

Wasnt he supposed to give a correct version to police?
They were supposed to be cooperating with the police.
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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