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

by **Jill Havern** 24.03.18 11:21

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! thumbsup

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

by Ruffian 24.03.18 11:25

[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

by Phoebe 24.03.18 11:49

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!

by polyenne 24.03.18 12:03

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

by **Jill Havern** 24.03.18 12:04

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.

by Phoebe 24.03.18 12:21

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.

by polyenne 24.03.18 12:43

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.

by **Jill Havern** 24.03.18 12:56

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 link.]
Does she look bovvered?

by polyenne 24.03.18 12:58

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

The snarl of a woman scorned

by Phoebe 24.03.18 13:10

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!)

by **HiDeHo** 24.03.18 13:13

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.

by polyenne 24.03.18 13:21

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

Because it was leaking ?

by Crackfox 24.03.18 15:49

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.

by Phoebe 24.03.18 17:03

@ 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.

by polyenne 24.03.18 17:11

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.

by NickE 24.03.18 21:05

polyenne wrote: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

Because it was leaking ?

Shouldn't it be enough odour for a well trained cadaver dog to alarm if a bag with clothes from a desceased person had been placed on the floor behind the sofa for example?

by JohnyT 24.03.18 23:11

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!

.............or even gone sailing in a boat, child falls overboard.............

by **Jill Havern** 24.03.18 23:31

Whatever we may think of the McCanns I don't believe they would be callous enough to just dispose of Madeleine without a proper burial/cremation.

I believe Madeleine had to be 'taken care of' because they couldn't risk her having an autopsy, so a boating accident or concealment on a beach /disappearance from a beach could have led to her body being found and an autopsy carried out. I also believe they wanted to take possession of her body so they knew where she was.

Maybe an autopsy would have revealed historical sexual abuse/drug abuse (sedation) that couldn't be blamed on an abductor so they had no choice but to deal with Madeleine's body themselves.

Hence the elaborate fake abduction nonsense which needed planning over a few days. I believe Madeleine had been taken care of well before abduction night and that her body will never be found.

I certainly don't believe Gerry McCann was carrying his daughter's corpse around the streets that night.

by Baggy 25.03.18 3:05

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.

Thank you Polyenne.

As a newcomer to the forum I should perhaps say that, whilst I have much to learn, my own theories have run along similar lines. i have speculated that part of what is being covered up here is the failure to deliver an injured or dangerously sedated Madeleine to the hospital at an appropriate time. The other medical professionals amongst the Tapas group were either implicated in the initial injury or in the subsequent decision to not look for outside medical help but to deal with the issue themselves.

The reason for not releasing an injured Madeleine to the hospital could be the same as Getemgoncalo has suggested above for the need to avoid an autopsy.

I have wondered to what extent, following the Sunday, the McCanns were ever both absent from the apartment at the same time. The changed breakfast and lunch arrangements would enable them to remain at the apartment. They could be reasonably secure that hotel staff were unlikely to enter the apartment during the evening meal, although even there it appears a member of the group was always unable through sickness to attend the dinner. Was one of them always there to stand guard?

It was stated in a post above that the cleaner was in the apartment on Wednesday morning. GM and KM looked initially as though they intended to remain on the balcony, but then moved on. I wonder if GM had the blue bag with him.

by polyenne 25.03.18 7:43

GEG [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
That exactly mirrors my own thoughts. Having the keys to the church is a huge red flag.

I too believe she will never be found. Coupled with the high level protection being afforded them, is why they have such arrogance.

by **Cammerigal** 25.03.18 8:12

Well done to HideHo in deconstructing the PJ files to provide a means of breaking Gerry McCann’s brilliant piece of subterfuge at the crèche. By presenting himself with O’Brien plus their daughter Ella, he presented a mental linkage for the nannies between himself and a small blonde girl “Maddie”. He then supported this link with an old picture, to support the abduction search of a young 3year old Maddie.
Gerry thought he had created a robust evidence trail with the nanny witness statements plus the crèche records to puport her presence on the day of the abduction. unfortunately, the nannies described a small blond shy girl and HideHo has correlated timelines, witness statements and exposed the fraudulence of the reception signatory records.
clapping

by Tennison 25.03.18 9:11

When did Russell and Jane leave Praia da Luz because if any of the nannies saw Ella around the Ocean Club after Madeleine was reported missing, and recognised her as the little blonde girl from the crèche, wouldn't that put a proverbial spanner in the works?

by NickE 25.03.18 9:35

Tennison wrote:When did Russell and Jane leave Praia da Luz because if any of the nannies saw Ella around the Ocean Club after Madeleine was reported missing, and recognised her as the little blonde girl from the crèche, wouldn't that put a proverbial spanner in the works?

According to this confusing document from Faro airport they left Portugal around May 17.
But I don't know for sure if they stayed at the OC during the period May 5 to when they left for the UK???
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **HiDeHo** 25.03.18 13:03

Cammerigal wrote:Well done to HideHo in deconstructing the PJ files to provide a means of breaking Gerry McCann’s brilliant piece of subterfuge at the crèche. By presenting himself with O’Brien plus their daughter Ella, he presented a mental linkage for the nannies between himself and a small blonde girl “Maddie”. He then supported this link with an old picture, to support the abduction search of a young 3year old Maddie.
Gerry thought he had created a robust evidence trail with the nanny witness statements plus the crèche records to puport her presence on the day of the abduction. unfortunately, the nannies described a small blond shy girl and HideHo has correlated timelines, witness statements and exposed the fraudulence of the reception signatory records.

Thank you Cammerigal for a lovely comment but its important to keep in mind that we don't know for sure.

I does seem the most possible explanation however and seemed to fall into place as I posted.

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

{@=4747}Tennison{/@} wrote:id='4747' class='mentiontag' title='Viewing profile: Tennison'>@Tennison wrote:[/mention] wrote:When did Russell and Jane leave Praia da Luz because if any of the nannies saw Ella around the Ocean Club after Madeleine was reported missing, and recognised her as the little blonde girl from the crèche, wouldn't that put a proverbial spanner in the works?

Most of the T7 remained in PdL possibly for the 'Memory of the Future'

Regarding the creche, even if Ella was sent back to the creche, the nannies have a rotating schedule each week so Catriona would not have been back at the same creche and would not be responsible for Ella.

Catriona wrote:
The witness mentions that as a nanny she works at all the above mentioned locations, because like all of her colleagues, she is subject to a rotating schedule, which means that they change the physical location and the age group of the children that they look after, on a weekly basis.

As far as being seen around the complex,I would imagine so much confusion and likelihood of more young children that looked similar.

As we can see from Nannies statements, they did not specifically identify a child

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

by Doug D 25.03.18 14:02

HiDeHo ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]):

‘Most of the T7 remained in PdL possibly for the 'Memory of the Future'

Have we ever seen any evidence that this actually happened? From the May 2007 reports it looked to be more than Brunty’s mere certification of their statements in front of a judge.

‘This week the group are set to appear in court behind closed doors to record their evidence for any future trial before they go back to the UK.

The procedure, known as "memory for the future", is similar to a mock trial in which the friends would give evidence as witnesses now against a future defendant.

Local lawyer Artur Rego said the procedure was used only in exceptional cases such as this where a large group of witnesses are foreign.

"It is recorded by video and kept sealed then released during the hearing," he said.

"If somebody is ever charged then this statement can then be unsealed and disclosed for the judge who is going to hear the case.

"It has the same value as witness statements delivered live in the trial."

But the McCanns themselves are not expected to be asked to take part.’

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

I don't think there was ever any further mention of it.

by Phoebe 25.03.18 14:44

Ella's hair, while apparently similar in colour to Madeleine's, is of a completely different texture being quite thick and bushy (grey scale photos show this and note "Ella with bushy hair"). The photo the MCanns chose to release shows a younger Madeleine with fine, very sleek hair. Would the nannies not have noticed this difference when confronted with a poster of what was meant to be a younger "Ella." We also don't know what Ella's face was like. Unless she bore a marked resemblance to Madeleine I doubt that a younger picture of Madeleine would look very like her. I wonder if the McCanns and Russell would risk Ella being used to impersonate Madeleine (albeit without the child's knowledge). How could they be sure that none of the creche or play activities would involve children being called by name or being asked to draw their families or sign their names on a painting or piece of art. It would be a dreadfully risky strategy unless the nannies were complicit. All it would take was Ella to identify herself once for the whole scheme to be blown out of the water! From Russell's statements he strikes me as a man who puts himself and his family first always. I'm not sure he would agree to his child being the linchpin of a conspiracy to pervert justice.

by Cookiecat 27.07.18 21:16

Sorry to bring up old topic but I find the old posts have a lot of information .. was it ever clarified did Gerry call Madeleine ..Margaret .. if he did imo proves one of Hideho's main theories which I support due to evidence provided .. I just can't find anything on this all goes off on tangent .. so yes or no did he call Madeleine .. Margaret?

by Guest 27.07.18 21:27

Cookiecat wrote:.. was it ever clarified did Gerry call Madeleine ..Margaret .. if he did imo proves one of Hideho's main theories which I support due to evidence provided ..

What HiDeHo main theory does this prove?

by Cookiecat 27.07.18 21:50

That the sign in creche.. parents name .. childs name or lack of .. were due to other child in creche ..under presumption little blonde girl in group today ..parent goes with friend signs register ..yeap his child is there.. and that she was not really signed in.. its all on the original posts about Margaret .. Madeleine hence thats why asking if anything further .. I believe it proves not saying it does.. was hoping for clarification did Gerry call Madeleine.. Margaret !

________________________________________________________________________________________________-

Topics merged. Mod

by nglfi 28.07.18 5:51

With reference to the nannies statements, I think it likely that, as with any missing person presumed dead, those giving statements would wish to downplay the nature of their relationship to the person. I'm not suggesting that any of the nannies were lying as such, but all of their statements do seem very defensive and in a 'not me, I didn't know her' vein. I'm not sure we can draw any conclusions about how recognisable Madeleine was to any of them. It's quite possible they did know her by sight, knew who she was and who her parents were, but didn't want to create the impression of any personal relationship with her in their statements.

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