Do you believe something happened earlier than May 3rd ? If so, how did the McCanns manage to deceive everyone at the creche?

Mark Willis wrote:Their crooked tendrils thread through Government and the MSM.

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

Mark Willis wrote:However, we know there is a terrible extant injustice that obtains, therefore, it is that, at least, that compels us to never give up on Madeleine

AMEN !!!

The very octopus, Mr Verdi. 

A graphic compiled from the 'Discrepancies' thread to explain the possible method of deceit

Great stuff Lizzy

“If this is what happened it was a very cunning plan”.

It was indeed a cunning plan and, if true, a cunning plan seemingly conceived within a few days of them arriving on a group holiday without any prior knowledge of the tragic accident that was to befall poor Madeleine.

Almost too unbelievable

joyce1938,      Can we really go by most of what they wanted us to ,and its still going on ,with a muddle made by those clever ones .Its kept us all so busy ,yet might just lead us up garden path .joyce1938

There are statements in the PJFiles that confirm Madeleine was seen during the week, including the 3rd

GA was in no doubt she attended the creche on the 3rd

As for the creche sheets, there are odd entries, BLANKS, children not signed out and Cat signing out children over the various sheets

Get'emGonçalo wrote:Great stuff Lizzy

Thanks Jill.  To be honest I am still blown away by this.

I always wondered why witnesses seemed to be identifying the personality of  Ella.

I always wondered how they managed to deceive everyone into thinking Maddie was at the creche.

I always wondered why the creche records  for both girls were not complete and often showed one signed in and one signed out and the compilation of the creche graphic showed it was a possibility.

Initially I could see it mainly for Tuesday but didn't know how it would fit with the rest of the week.

As you know, I started to post on the 'Discrepancies' thread with NO IDEA of what I would find...

CLICK HERE to see screenshot of 'research post on 'Discrepancies' thread:

It shocked me to see that not only did it all 'fit' for the week, it also became apparent HOW it was achieved!

This was not something I had previously figured out... I literally realised it as I was compiling the post!

Once I realised that Gerry and/or Kate almost always arrived at the same time as Russell (odd because they didnt spend time together during the day...which I have only just thought of) and to imagine that only Ella was sent into the creche or picked up (she would see her dad) but just SUPPOSE that Gerry took the time to speak with nannies.  It is VERY LIKELY that they would consider the child as being Gerry's child.

When asked for their statements after the disappearance, had he MADE SURE that they would remember him and relate the child that arrived or left at that time was Maddie?

A simple concept/possibility. Very contrived!

They would arrive (without their child) at the same time as Russell who signs his daughter in or out and GERRY contrively speaks with the nannies!  They will remember him with ELLA!

Another 'discovery' was on Wednesday, when it rained, Dianne Webster claimed they were at the Millenium, but doesnt know if they took breakfast.

That has always been a curiosity for me.....until now!

They dropped the twins off earlier than usual (at 9.10) but didnt drop 'Maddie' off until 20 minutes later, even though it was a 10 minute walk.

It then occurred to me that they MAY have gone to the Millenium first so they could walk to the creche with RUSSELL!.

It was NO coincidence that they both arrived at exactly the same time even though they 'supposedly' had breakfast in their apartment and shouldn't have known when Russell would have arrived at the creche!


It all seems too amazing to be possible.... but I can think of no other reason why it would all fit together so easily!

What spoils the idea of a Sunday-Monday death for me is what would have to happen afterward. Why on earth would they go down the complicated and terribly risky route of having to keep up the pretence that Madeleine was attending creche, tea and the play-area until Thursday night, then arrange for Madeleine to be "kidnapped" from a room with two other children in it while her criminally negligent parents and their friends dined elsewhere. Surely it would have been much less risky, much more credible and much less damaging to all their reputations to have taken a sight-seeing trip to a lonely beach and have Madeleine vanish there. No need to involve others such as the nannies in this conspiracy, no need for simulating an abduction in the apartment, no dodgy questions about the tiny window of opportunity, no remarks re how odd that the twins were left unscathed, no potential witnesses to cock it up, no need to brand themselves lousy parents and above all, no need to doctor the creche records, running the enormous risk that someone would notice or remember that Madeleine had not been around during the week.

Phoebe wrote:What spoils the idea of a Sunday-Monday death for me is what would have to happen afterward. Why on earth would they go down the complicated and terribly risky route of having to keep up the pretence that Madeleine was attending creche, tea and the play-area until Thursday night, then arrange for Madeleine to be "kidnapped" from a room with two other children in it while her criminally negligent parents and their friends dined elsewhere. Surely it would have been much less risky, much more credible and much less damaging to all their reputations to have taken a sight-seeing trip to a lonely beach and have Madeleine vanish there. No need to involve others such as the nannies in this conspiracy, no need for simulating an abduction in the apartment, no dodgy questions about the tiny window of opportunity, no remarks re how odd that the twins were left unscathed, no potential witnesses to cock it up, no need to brand themselves lousy parents and above all, no need to doctor the creche records, run the enormous risk that someone would notice or remember that Madeleine had not been around during the week.

Great posts from you, too, Phoebe which all serve to make us think more about this complete mystery!

You've even got me thinking more about the Smithman sighting! Well done, and thank you

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  In order to make your opinion work you have had to dismiss witness statements and the anomalies across the creche sheet entries for other children

Fancy graphics look nice but the information within them is misleading
You cannot judge how a child will react in different situations with any certainty. Especially when that child is a stranger to you. Its all speculation on your part in am attempt  to fit the files around your opinion, cherry picking what you believe and dismiss

Thank you GeG. Please forgive my tendency to play devil's advocate it's just my nature! I find it difficult to believe that the McCanns would have chosen such an awkward, risky method of concealing what was going on if they had days to work on it. The simple thing to do would have been to copy what had happened to the German boy who had vanished from a beach a few years previously in the Algarve. No trace ever found. It would have led credence to the notion of Algarve paedophiles preying on children and let the Tapas 9 off the negligence hook. The McCs still could have set up their heroic fighting fund - heck, there would have been even more sympathy when they weren't under suspicion of negligence or involvement. They still could have become advocates and ambassadors for missing children's organisations. All this could have been theirs, with their hands "clean". The McCanns problems all sprang from the ridiculous notion that an abductor would enter an apartment that was constantly being checked, running the risk of being seen, and leave two children behind while making off with the eldest. I can't believe the whole Tapas group could be so stupid and unimaginative over several days that the best they could come up with was to risk pretending that Madeleine was around when she wasn't. They had to fool nannies, tennis and sailing instructors, other children and their parents - so terribly risky. All it would have taken to achieve the same end (abduction) would be for the T9 to have hired a couple of cars and explored the lovely Portuguese beaches. Madeleine disappears in the blink of an eye. Job done. No reputational damage, no more blame put on the parents than was put on Denise Bolger (who genuinely lost her boy in mere minutes of taking her eye off him) The British gov. and police force could have come to assist without raising suspicions of unwarranted involvement. So straight-forward!

You’re assuming Madeleine DIED earlier in the week. I theorise that something non-fatal happened early in the week and she died some days later

Phoebe wrote:Thank you GeG. Please forgive my tendency to play devil's advocate it's just my nature! I find it difficult to believe that the McCanns would have chosen such an awkward, risky method of concealing what was going on if they had days to work on it. The simple thing to do would have been to copy what had happened to the German boy who had vanished from a beach a few years previously in the Algarve. No trace ever found. It would have led credence to the notion of Algarve paedophiles preying on children and let the Tapas 9 off the negligence hook. The McCs still could have set up their heroic fighting fund - heck, there would have been even more sympathy when they weren't under suspicion of negligence or involvement. They still could have become advocates and ambassadors for missing children's organisations. All this could have been theirs, with their hands "clean". The McCanns problems all sprang from the ridiculous notion that an abductor would enter an apartment that was constantly being checked, running the risk of being seen, and leave two children behind while making off with the eldest. I can't believe the whole Tapas group could be so stupid and unimaginative over several days that the best they could come up with was to risk pretending that Madeleine was around when she wasn't. They had to fool nannies, tennis and sailing instructors, other children and their parents - so terribly risky. All it would have taken to achieve the same end (abduction) would be for the T9 to have hired a couple of cars and explored the lovely Portuguese beaches. Madeleine disappears in the blink of an eye. Job done. No reputational damage, no more blame put on the parents than was put on Denise Bolger (who genuinely lost her boy in mere minutes of taking her eye off him) The British gov. and police force could have come to assist without raising suspicions of unwarranted involvement. So straight-forward!

Nothing at all to forgive Phoebe, it's good that people like you put alternative theories into the mix. That's what gets us all thinking and debating the issues.

I understand your points and I bet the McCanns have been kicking themselves for nearly eleven years for not keeping it simple! But Gerry went down the 'confusion is good' road and boy did it work in their favour!

Even the MET's finest police force and DCI Nicola "I nick 'em so quick they're nicked before they know they've been nicked" Wall have taken an extraordinary amount of time and money to come up with....erm, er...absolutely nothing.

polyenne wrote:You’re assuming Madeleine DIED earlier in the week. I theorise that something non-fatal happened early in the week and she died some days later

Yes. I see where you're coming from Polyenne, and it would make more sense IMO. However, it raises questions too. If Madeleine was seriously injured and did not die immediately, where on earth did they keep her hidden during her illness and why did they then move her corpse or anything which had contained it back into 5A. If she was securely hidden from cleaners and other prying eyes during her illness, what was to be achieved by bringing her body back to the McCanns apartment. Why not dispose of the body from where it had been so successfully concealed. If the cadaver odour in 5A was achieved through cross contamination via a bag or something her body had been placed in, why bring the bag or whatever it was back to 5A. There's thrift and there's thrift, but the idea of hanging onto a bag or something after it had been in contact with their child's corpse and then placing said item in various locations in and around 5A is defies logic.

She never left 5A while she was injured and until she died. They KNEW it to be fatal and she died on the night of the crying episode. Her body was then concealed in 5A (in a bag in the wardrobe) until being transported somewhere “temporary” via an unknown vehicle. During the body’s removal from 5A, as a “holding point” the bag/body was in the shrubbery.

polyenne wrote:She never left 5A while she was injured and until she died. They KNEW it to be fatal and she died on the night of the crying episode. Her body was then concealed in 5A (in a bag in the wardrobe) until being transported somewhere “temporary” via an unknown vehicle. During the body’s removal from 5A, as a “holding point” the bag/body was in the shrubbery.

And here's Kate McCann recounting the crying episode:

"And then she moved on, she moved on."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Does she look bovvered?

“Why oh why keep bringing that up ? If it’s not the crying it’s the dogs”

The snarl of a woman scorned

polyenne wrote:She never left 5A while she was injured and until she died. They KNEW it to be fatal and she died on the night of the crying episode. Her body was then concealed in 5A (in a bag in the wardrobe) until being transported somewhere “temporary” via an unknown vehicle. During the body’s removal from 5A, as a “holding point” the bag/body was in the shrubbery.

What about the cadaver odour behind the couch - they would either have had to place her body there after she died or else have moved the bag there after it had been contaminated. Why bother moving the bag out of the cupboard where it was secure.
(sorry, keyboard had a run-in with a cup of coffee and question mark key has died!)

Ruffian wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  In order to make your opinion work you have had to dismiss witness statements and the anomalies across the creche sheet entries for other children

Fancy graphics look nice but the information within them is misleading
You cannot judge how a child will react in different situations with any certainty. Especially when that child is a stranger to you. Its all speculation on your part in am attempt  to fit the files around your opinion, cherry picking what you believe and dismiss

Ruffian... Please understand I am not claiming anything based on opinion.

All that I discuss is based on what I see in the files.

I have studied the witness statements for 8 years and so far have not found ONE (after Sunday afternoon) that gives me any indication that the child they are describing is likely Maddie.

Please show me one if you feel I am wrong.  I welcome ANYONE to show me a witness statement that identifies Maddie specifically.

'Fancy Graphics'?   Please explain ANY of the information being misleading?

I don't use speculation to fit the files around my opinion.

As most can see, its the FILES that direct me to what I discover!

However, its understandable, and your prerogative, to have your own opinion, particularly if you haven't looked at the research over the last 10 years.

Phoebe wrote:What spoils the idea of a Sunday-Monday death for me is what would have to happen afterward. Why on earth would they go down the complicated and terribly risky route of having to keep up the pretence that Madeleine was attending creche, tea and the play-area until Thursday night, then arrange for Madeleine to be "kidnapped" from a room with two other children in it while her criminally negligent parents and their friends dined elsewhere. Surely it would have been much less risky, much more credible and much less damaging to all their reputations to have taken a sight-seeing trip to a lonely beach and have Madeleine vanish there. No need to involve others such as the nannies in this conspiracy, no need for simulating an abduction in the apartment, no dodgy questions about the tiny window of opportunity, no remarks re how odd that the twins were left unscathed, no potential witnesses to cock it up, no need to brand themselves lousy parents and above all, no need to doctor the creche records, running the enormous risk that someone would notice or remember that Madeleine had not been around during the week.

Hyperthetically speaking, I can see advantages to Thursday being chosen for staging after an earlier tragedy on say Monday. Friday was out because of the tennis supper and Saturday was change over day. By postponing until Thursday you will have many guests preparing to return home on Friday/Saturday and I think there are advantages to this. Establishing a routine and careful planning enables a forensic precision which I think is key. I don't think all the friends were complicit, in fact I think Rachel threw a spanner in the works by contacting Sky, a decision that had enduring consequenses IMO. The flaw was over confidence IMO.

@ Polyenne. I'm not sure what the hypothetical bag might have been leaking. Purge fluid - possibly, but this would have occurred in tandem with a dreadful stench which the cleaner and anyone nearby would have noticed on Wednesday. Blood - possibly, but surely the sensible location in which to place a leaking bag would be the bath, not on the floor behind a sofa. By placing a leaking bag behind the sofa they created two sites of "leakage " instead of one, doubling the evidence risk. What advantage lay in moving the leaking bag. Better to just have it leak in one location and put a towel or something under it!
@ Crackfox - by having Madeleine disappear from somewhere other than the Ocean Club there would be no need to worry about when guests were to depart. The guests and staff would probably not even have been questioned at all if Madeleine had been "snatched" from  a distant beach. There would also have been no need to establish a routine or worry about forensic evidence.

Hi Phoebe
I take on board your thoughts. We have had over 10 years to consider what might or might not have happened, sometimes aided by the PJ Files.
They were thinking in their feet, some things they could have had a plan for, others not......and any plans could have been thrown into chaos for any number of reasons requiring a quick alternative.