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

by polyenne 24.01.18 12:11

Here's another possible scenario to fit the crèche records (if they're to be believed)

On Monday 30/4, Madeleine is the only child signed out after a 15 minute slot. Notwithstanding other signing anomalies that afternoon (Alexander and Ella signed in late and then not signed out), can I suggest that Kate took Madeleine to the session, signed her in but, as the session had been cancelled for some reason, she chatted for 15 minutes and then signed her back out. That afternoon was scheduled for sand painting and garden adventure so was poor weather a factor ??

On Tuesday 01/5, at 12.20 Gerry signs Madeleine out but also takes Ella (as Rob is "occupied"). At 2.30 he brings them both back. At 5.30, Russell returns the favour (maybe Gerry is now "occupied") by picking both Ella & Madeleine up.

On Wednesday 02/5, at 12.30 Russell collects both Ella & Madeleine as Gerry and/or Kate were "occupied".

Is it possible anyone can place Russell or Gerry either windsurfing (Russell) or playing tennis (Gerry) to coincide with this theory as I cannot easily find any record of their movements on those days.

by Phoebe 24.01.18 12:20

@ HiDeHo. You mention above that Cat met with the McCanns before giving her May 6th statement to the P.J. Now that IMO is noteworthy. I do believe that she was "persuaded" by them regarding what to say to the police. Cat was twenty, almost half their age. She was a young, seasonal, childcare worker, while they were, respectively, a mature, respected consultant and a doctor. Gerry, like many, was the child of Irish economic emigrants - part of what we call here "The Diaspora". Kate's maiden name was Healy, her mother's Kennedy (I believe). Both names strongly suggest Irish heritage as does their Catholicism. Cat too was a youngster from a strongly Irish background. Her mother's family hails from Ireland, her uncle is married and living in Ireland and she has many relatives here and a strong bond. I don't believe Cat actually knew the McCanns prior to May 07 but the Irish abroad are famously clannish and anyone from "the old sod" tends to be immediately given the "Hail, well met" treatment. I suspect Cat swallowed whatever tale the poor, nice McCanns told her and went out of her way to do what she could for them when they were being bullied and wrongly suspected (as they claimed) by the lazy, useless Portuguese police who were trying to defend their own reputation, and that of the Algarve, by pinning the disappearance on the tourists themselves instead of looking for the abductor and his victim.

by polyenne 24.01.18 12:36

Stacey Portz
• As part of her work she frequently takes the children for swimming, walks on the beach and to the garden [play area] next to the tennis courts.
• Knew the McCann family since 29th of April as they would drop off their toddlers—Sean and Amelie—in the Toddler Club;
• From 29 April until 3 May she was with those children every day
• She also knew Madeleine as she would frequently come talk to her brother and sister when picked up by her parents;
•She never had Madeleine in her care.
• From what she was able to observe, Madeleine was an active and sociable child and that when with her siblings [at collection time] she was excited and happy to see them

Really ? I'm not sure that, by reviewing the signing in/out records, that Madeleine was ever picked up first, and certainly not "frequently" such that she would "come to talk to her brother and sister"

by NickE 24.01.18 13:20

polyenne wrote:
Stacey Portz
• As part of her work she frequently takes the children for swimming, walks on the beach and to the garden [play area] next to the tennis courts.
• Knew the McCann family since 29th of April as they would drop off their toddlers—Sean and Amelie—in the Toddler Club;
• From 29 April until 3 May she was with those children every day
• She also knew Madeleine as she would frequently come talk to her brother and sister when picked up by her parents;
•She never had Madeleine in her care.
• From what she was able to observe, Madeleine was an active and sociable child and that when with her siblings [at collection time] she was excited and happy to see them
Really ? I'm not sure that, by reviewing the signing in/out records, that Madeleine was ever picked up first, and certainly not "frequently" such that she would "come to talk to her brother and

1:Stacey Portz was lying.
2:Stacey Portz didn't lie, there was another girl with them when they picked up the twins, that she believed to be Madeleine, but who was it?

Confused.

by **HiDeHo** 24.01.18 15:47

NickE wrote:
polyenne wrote:
Stacey Portz
• As part of her work she frequently takes the children for swimming, walks on the beach and to the garden [play area] next to the tennis courts.
• Knew the McCann family since 29th of April as they would drop off their toddlers—Sean and Amelie—in the Toddler Club;
• From 29 April until 3 May she was with those children every day
• She also knew Madeleine as she would frequently come talk to her brother and sister when picked up by her parents;
•She never had Madeleine in her care.
• From what she was able to observe, Madeleine was an active and sociable child and that when with her siblings [at collection time] she was excited and happy to see them

Really ? I'm not sure that, by reviewing the signing in/out records, that Madeleine was ever picked up first, and certainly not "frequently" such that she would "come to talk to her brother and

1:Stacey Portz was lying.
2:Stacey Portz didn't lie, there was another girl with them when they picked up the twins, that she believed to be Madeleine, but who was it?

Confused.

This is the reason I compiled an easier to read 'creche records, so we can see exactly the drop off and pick up times and whether the statements coincide.

If a nanny claims to have seen Madeleine at specific times, I needed to know whether the 'logic' of the creche times fited with their statements or whether they could have been mistaken as to which child they saw and thought was Maddie.

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

by Doug D 24.01.18 16:28

O/T as such, but good to see Cat is back doing what she is best at!

Last time I looked she was editor of ‘Posh Kids’ magazine or some such.

Founder and CEO of NYC Elite Nannies,

by **sharonl** 24.01.18 21:45

Who exactly is "everyone" at the crèche?

A lot of people are under the misapprehension that the crèche is one large area with a lot of sstaff and a lot of nannies, maybe even a reception.

There crèche is spread all over the complex with different crèches for each age group.

The nannies are allocated a maximum of seven children each and each nanny has her own room within the crèche. A child is allocated a nanny at the start of the week and that nanny is the childs nanny for the whole week. Also, as we can see from the crèche records the childs nanny is responsible for the crèche records.

So we have, Madeleine allocated to Cat Baker who is her nanny for the week, who signs her in and out of the crèche, and who has a maximum of five children for the week, in a private room within the crèche.

Cat was a friend of Chloe Corner (daughter of Madeleines' godfather) since 2006 and a stayed at the McCanns house in Rothley in 2007.

So apart from McCann friend Cat Baker and four other young children, some of whom belonged to the McCanns friends, who are "all these people at the crèche"?

by Guest 24.01.18 21:47

polyenne wrote:Verdi [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There’s a way of cold-emailing someone, making an introduction, requesting answers to questions and leaving them free to decline to answer if they so desire.

Over the years, I’ve learnt from your sometimes brusque manner, that you would find it difficult to concoct such an email.

With all due respect of course

My reputation precedes me!

Over the years? You've only been a member for 10 months - do I know you from a past life?

Whatever.... a) I would never have the bare faced audacity to email a stranger and ask personal questions and b) you can word a cold email anyway you like - the response from me would be the same.

by polyenne 24.01.18 22:03

Don’t flatter yourself. You don’t have to be a member to view this forum.
Oh, and I never asked “personal” questions

by **sharonl** 24.01.18 22:24

Can we keep this thread on topic please!!

ontopic

by Guest 24.01.18 23:49

sharonl wrote:Who exactly is "everyone" at the crèche?

A lot of people are under the misapprehension that the crèche is one large area with a lot of sstaff and a lot of nannies, maybe even a reception.

There crèche is spread all over the complex with different crèches for each age group.

The nannies are allocated a maximum of seven children each and each nanny has her own room within the crèche. A child is allocated a nanny at the start of the week and that nanny is the childs nanny for the whole week. Also, as we can see from the crèche records the childs nanny is responsible for the crèche records.

So we have, Madeleine allocated to Cat Baker who is her nanny for the week, who signs her in and out of the crèche, and who has a maximum of five children for the week, in a private room within the crèche.

Cat was a friend of Chloe Corner (daughter of Madeleines' godfather) since 2006 and a stayed at the McCanns house in Rothley in 2007.

So apart from McCann friend Cat Baker and four other young children, some of whom belonged to the McCanns friends, who are "all these people at the crèche"?

I wondered who would spot that first! From tiny acorns do mighty oak trees grow - a small intimate area occupied by a care worker and between three and seven children of the same age group has morphed into the euro Disneyland.

Onus back on Catriona Baker - no extenuating circumstances, Catriona Baker was the employee allocated to supervise the Lobster club, she and she alone was accountable for the Lobster club attendees and their activities during that week.

She had a handful of children to supervise but she can't be expected to be able to identify each child? Humbug!

by Phoebe 24.01.18 23:50

"Cat was a friend of Chloe Corner (daughter of Madeleines' godfather) since 2006 and a stayed at the McCanns house in Rothley in 2007"

While there is no doubt that Cat visited the McCanns in Rothley after that holiday I wonder about this "friends with" Chloe Corner. I have often heard it claimed that the two were "friends on Facebook" but have never come across any actual proof of this. Even if it were to prove true, Facebook Friends may have little to do with each other and in some cases have never even met in the flesh. I have a Facebook account but don't use it (it was for work purposes). One of the things I find most disconcerting is the frequent friend requests from total strangers or those who know someone, who knows someone else, who knows me. Ditto for family members who are actually active on Facebook. Some of them have "friends" they have never met!! I cannot imagine that being someone's "Facebook Friend" would lead one to commit perjury in a high profile missing child case. Did Cat and Chloe actually have a real friendship? How? Did they live near each other and socialize together? Were they the same age, at school or college together? Did they have a sport or hobby in common?

by Phoebe 25.01.18 0:23

From Charlotte Pennington's P.J. statement-

"With relation to the facts of the investigation, the witness states that in the course of her work, she came across Madeleine McCann many times, explaining that, even though she [Madeleine] did not belong to her [Pennington's] group, this was normal, as the physical space where the children groups are located is contiguous......The principal space where the children from MiniClub and BabyClub are situated is in the same building as the Ocean Club complex reception and this is why the witness had personal contact with the identified child"

According to Emma Wilding's P.J. statement -

"When questioned she states that she knows Madeline's (sic) parents because although Madeleine is not in her group, she frequently speaks to her parents,- When questioned she states that on May 3, 2007 it was the father that took Madeleine, as was customary, between 0900 and 0930; she remembers that she just said 'hello' to him,...... She only noticed Madeleine and not her father,...... With respect to Madeleine, she states that she spent most of her time at the Mini Club. The children began arriving at 0900 until 1230 when their respective parents collected them for lunch, and returned at 1430 until 1645 when the Infants' teachers took the children to eat something appropriate for their age at the Tapas restaurant"

The above statements do not suggest a collection of separate rooms akin to classrooms, with one private room for each nanny and her group, but rather a common area shared by children of a certain age group. This would be normal practice in most creches - a large area equipped for children with a dedicated nanny assigned to a number of children. There would usually be a soft area, a sink and art materials, a sandpit etc. Is anyone seriously suggesting that the Ocean Club had multiple rooms thus kitted out for every single small group and its nanny?

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 0:53

Verdi wrote:
sharonl wrote:Who exactly is "everyone" at the crèche?

A lot of people are under the misapprehension that the crèche is one large area with a lot of sstaff and a lot of nannies, maybe even a reception.

There crèche is spread all over the complex with different crèches for each age group.

The nannies are allocated a maximum of seven children each and each nanny has her own room within the crèche. A child is allocated a nanny at the start of the week and that nanny is the childs nanny for the whole week. Also, as we can see from the crèche records the childs nanny is responsible for the crèche records.

So we have, Madeleine allocated to Cat Baker who is her nanny for the week, who signs her in and out of the crèche, and who has a maximum of five children for the week, in a private room within the crèche.

Cat was a friend of Chloe Corner (daughter of Madeleines' godfather) since 2006 and a stayed at the McCanns house in Rothley in 2007.

So apart from McCann friend Cat Baker and four other young children, some of whom belonged to the McCanns friends, who are "all these people at the crèche"?

I wondered who would spot that first! From tiny acorns do mighty oak trees grow - a small intimate area occupied by a care worker and between three and seven children of the same age group has morphed into the euro Disneyland.

Onus back on Catriona Baker - no extenuating circumstances, Catriona Baker was the employee allocated to supervise the Lobster club, she and she alone was accountable for the Lobster club attendees and their activities during that week.

She had a handful of children to supervise but she can't be expected to be able to identify each child? Humbug!

I'm not sure if the reference about 'everyone' is from something I have said, but if so, it was likely referring to their statements which really has nothing to do with them being in separate locations. Not sure if Ive responded correctly, just let me know.

Cat was allocated 7 children for the LOBSTER group 5 girls 2 boys

Madeleine McCann
Emma O'Brien
Jessica Berry
Tia Patel
Elizabeth Naylor
William Topman
Alexander Mann

+ SHARKS (approx 7)

She shared the room above main reception with the SHARKS (Emma Wilding) and the Baby Club (Charlotte Pennington) so there would have been approximately 13 children mixing together and likely interacting with all the children, as well as possibly sharing the same activities.

It would likely be a room similar to this with approx 13 children and two Nannies looking after them (Catriona and Emma)

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

Bridget O'Donnell wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Bridget O'Donnell (Jez Wilkins partner)

'Our children made friends in the kiddie club and at the drop-off, we would joke about the fact that there were 10 blonde three-year-old girls in the group. They were bound to boss around the two boys.'

Emma Wilding

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

I don't know if Catriona stayed with them but she was certainly with them on November 25th, the day after (what is likely) the Secret Meeting in Rothley

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

by Guest 25.01.18 1:34

Catriona Baker witness statement - 6th May 2007

In answer to our questions, she responds that she has been in Portugal since March 21st of this year and that this is her first visit to the country. Next, she says that she came to Portugal to work as a play leader, having obtained a contract of employment with the "Mark Warner" company. She states that her contract started on March 21st and ends on November 7th 2007, the date on which she will return to her own country. She points out that the company in question, in its turn, has a contract with the "OCEAN CLUB" tourist village to provide a child care service for parents who are clients of the village

She adds that in the tourist village, this type of child care takes place in four different places according to the ages of the children.

For children aged four months to one year it is the "Baby Club" which is close to the OCEAN CLUB's main reception. For children aged one to two years, it is the "Toddler" which is next to the "Tapas" restaurant. For children aged three to five years, it is the "Mini Club" which is also close to the Ocean Club's main reception. And finally, for children aged six to nine years and from ten to thirteen years, it is the "Junior Club" which is close to the "Millenium" restaurant.

Concerning the operating hours, there are four separate services.

* Mornings: 9am-12.30pm
* Afternoons: 2.30-5.30pm

* Dining Out Service 7.30pm-11.30pm (children are watched in a room above the main Ocean Club 24hour reception; there is no extra charge for this service but parents must take and fetch their own children)

* "Baby sitting Service": 7.30pm-1am (children are watched in their own apartments; there is an extra charge for this service)

The informant mentions that the work of the play leaders is the same in all areas specified above and that all colleagues have similar training. Rotations are scheduled, which means that they change places from week to week, changing the age group they have to work with.

She states that as part of her job she has to work out a weekly plan of activities to develop with the children who are entrusted to them, notably outside, like swimming tennis, the beach...

To our question, she specifies that she is responsible for a group of children, similar in age to the missing minor and that each supervisor has around seven children who stay with the same supervisor for the week.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 2:24

Verdi wrote:Catriona Baker witness statement - 6th May 2007

In answer to our questions, she responds that she has been in Portugal since March 21st of this year and that this is her first visit to the country. Next, she says that she came to Portugal to work as a play leader, having obtained a contract of employment with the "Mark Warner" company. She states that her contract started on March 21st and ends on November 7th 2007, the date on which she will return to her own country. She points out that the company in question, in its turn, has a contract with the "OCEAN CLUB" tourist village to provide a child care service for parents who are clients of the village

She adds that in the tourist village, this type of child care takes place in four different places according to the ages of the children.

For children aged four months to one year it is the "Baby Club" which is close to the OCEAN CLUB's main reception. For children aged one to two years, it is the "Toddler" which is next to the "Tapas" restaurant. For children aged three to five years, it is the "Mini Club" which is also close to the Ocean Club's main reception. And finally, for children aged six to nine years and from ten to thirteen years, it is the "Junior Club" which is close to the "Millenium" restaurant.

Concerning the operating hours, there are four separate services.

* Mornings: 9am-12.30pm
* Afternoons: 2.30-5.30pm

* Dining Out Service 7.30pm-11.30pm (children are watched in a room above the main Ocean Club 24hour reception; there is no extra charge for this service but parents must take and fetch their own children)

* "Baby sitting Service": 7.30pm-1am (children are watched in their own apartments; there is an extra charge for this service)

The informant mentions that the work of the play leaders is the same in all areas specified above and that all colleagues have similar training. Rotations are scheduled, which means that they change places from week to week, changing the age group they have to work with.

She states that as part of her job she has to work out a weekly plan of activities to develop with the children who are entrusted to them, notably outside, like swimming tennis, the beach...

To our question, she specifies that she is responsible for a group of children, similar in age to the missing minor and that each supervisor has around seven children who stay with the same supervisor for the week.

I'm not sure I understand the reason to highlight the clubs are in four different locations with the baby club as per Charlotte Pennington) '....the physical space where the children groups are located is contiguous; '

I'm confused why 4 locations is relevant

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

by Phoebe 25.01.18 11:08

The Mini Club consisted of two groups, the Lobsters with Cat and the Sharks with Emma. I agree with HiDeHo that evidence suggests that these two groups shared a common play area and were combined for certain activities, especially when there were few children. The baby club was so close to this (according to Charlotte) that during nap- time, when her charges were asleep, she stepped into the mini-club to lend a hand. All three of these nannies claim to have interacted with Madeleine during the week.

Kirsty Maryan also claims in her police statement -

"The deponent further clarifies that the Junior group does not find itself subdivided from the other groups, in that, at this moment, there are not enough children that permit it;"

This clearly implies that when child numbers were low (as in April May 07) the children of various groups were combined. She further claims to have had charge of Madeleine for half an hour on one occasion when Emma was helping to get high tea organized.
While this cannot be described as "everyone" it is four nannies who swore they had direct contact with Madeleine during that week. At high tea it seems ALL the children from creche ate together at the tapas under the supervision of their various nannies. Therefore I understand HiDeHo's point. How were these nannies all fooled into believing they had interacted with Madeleine if the latter had not been at creche since Sunday/Monday. Emma, Charlotte and Kirsty had no friendship with the McCanns or Chloe Corner. Why would they knowingly lie to police in such a high profile and important investigation?

by Guest 25.01.18 12:28

HiDeHo wrote:
I'm confused why 4 locations is relevant

It all goes back to the frequently repeated claim that Catriona Baker, the employee charged with the Lobster group care for that week, might have been mistaken about Madeleine's identity. In short - Catriona Baker mistook one child for another and/or a substitute child was registered with the group, to replace Madeleine (maybe not by you but this has been suggested on many occasions). Apparently because there were so many children housed in the same location.

In addition, the photograph of the child's playroom has repeatedly been presented as the Ocean Club crèche in use when the McCann family were holidaying there. There is no evidence to confirm nor even suggest that to be a fact, it's a random photograph of a kids playroom.

by Guest 25.01.18 12:37

Phoebe wrote:Why would they knowingly lie to police in such a high profile and important investigation?

It wasn't "a high profile and important investigation" when these witness statements were taken, on 6th May 2007.

As for Charlotte Pennington, she said a lot of things that didn't ring true. A fantasist! I truly believe she used the situation to further her career as an actress.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 12:45

Ahhh. I have been confused by the responses regarding 'everyone' and the reason that four different different locations have been important.

Is it something to do with the title I have given the thread?

I apologise if it appears misleading.

If that is the case, my thoughts refer to the McCanns managing to deceive everyone into believing Maddie was attending the creche, but in terms of this thread it was meant regarding all the nannies that claim to have seen Maddie and how they managed to 'manipulate' the records to give the impression she was there.

Is that the issue or am I continuing to get it incorrect?

Please correct me and use the quotes from me regarding the comments being referred to as I have included posts with a large volume of text.

I try to cover everything at one time which may not be easily understandable (for which I apaologise)

by Guest 25.01.18 13:02

HiDeHo wrote:There were approximately 13 children that used the kids club (3 – 5 yrs old) and were divided into two groups. Lobsters and Sharks. However they all shared the same crèche room and although assigned to specific nannies, were likely interacting together.

The Sharks group was for babies, apparently between the ages of four months and one year. Being realistic, it's extremely unlikely the same location would be used to house babies (who would most likely be sleeping much of the time) and screeching excitable toddlers, running around playing.

by Phoebe 25.01.18 13:09

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] It wasn't "a high profile and important investigation" when these witness statements were taken, on 6th May 2007.

There was blanket coverage on Sky and other news channels, Police and much of the town of Luz had been searching for the child for two days. I imagine little else was discussed at the Ocean Club or indeed, in Luz itself. The world media had descended on the town. I would call that "high profile". Any normal young woman when subjected to police questioning would be very cautious about lying. I can believe Pennington was an attention seeker but the others? Its hard to imagine so many fantasists/ liars all in one place at the same time.

by Phoebe 25.01.18 13:23

From Stephen Carpenter's statement

"I**** was in the group for children between three and four years old, her crÃ¨che worker was Emma. "

Was there not supposedly two separate groups for children aged 3-5 years? According to Emma HER group was independent of Madeleine's but joined them for the beach outing. Usually these groups are given suitable, fun names to help them identify and bond, especially when there might be competition between two groups eg the Sharks versus the Lobsters. I can conceive of no reason to give a babies group a name, (they couldn't talk or understand the concept) especially something like "Sharks"! The toddler children were called "Jellyfish" and "Starfish". What was Emma's group called?

by Guest 25.01.18 13:29

Looking for a child that had wandered off, or if the parents were to be believed, abducted from her bed. The area was buzzing but that was not a precursor for the case being 'important and high profile' over the ensuing weeks/months/years.

If you look at the consistency of these initial witness statements, it becomes apparent that the child care workers were all asked the same specific questions. To establish the behaviour of the children (Madeleine in particular), how they interacted with their parents and the other children and above all else, if anything suspicious was noticed where the children were at any given time - routine policing. I strongly suspect the witnesses were briefed beforehand by Warners/Ocean Club management.

Again I stress, the interviews were not recorded verbatim, therefore cannot be regarded as a true bullet-proof account.

by Guest 25.01.18 13:45

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

All depends which witness or member of staff you care to believe, or take as believable.

According to Jeremy Wilkins, his five month old son attended the 'Sharks' group. Perhaps he just got the name wrong.

The inconsistencies are presumably the reason the same old subject is being picked-over nearly eleven years later.

This area is not really of any interest to me, other than to try and dispel unlikely theories like a substitute Madeleine and/or Catriona Baker not being able to identify one of her charges, out of a maximum of seven - and then only on one occasion.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 13:54

Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:There were approximately 13 children that used the kids club (3 – 5 yrs old) and were divided into two groups. Lobsters and Sharks. However they all shared the same crèche room and although assigned to specific nannies, were likely interacting together.

The Sharks group was for babies, apparently between the ages of four months and one year. Being realistic, it's extremely unlikely the same location would be used to house babies (who would most likely be sleeping much of the time) and screeching excitable toddlers, running around playing.

There was an area above the main reception that was for the Baby Club and the Kids club

There were TWO groups for the 3 - 5 year olds. One was called LOBSTERS with Catriona looking after them and the SHARKS had Emma looking after them.

I don't know the name of the Baby groups (three of them)

Explained in this post (click to open spoiler)

Creche Mini Club Post (Page 3 Jan 24):

Outside the Main Reception

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

Entrance to Mini Club and Baby Club

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

Directions from Main Reception to Mini Club and Baby club up the stairs

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

I have attempted several times to explain the likely volume of children in the creche of children between the ages of 3 - 5 with Emma Wilding having SHARKS (which included Jez Wilkins daughter) and Catriona with children (5 girls and two boys)

Emma's SHARKS group played mini tennis on THURSDAY (the mini tennis that Rachael claimed to have seen Maddie)

Catriona's LOBSTER group played TUESDAY morning

I can see that the misunderstanding has led to confusion.

Hopefully it can now be recognised that there was likely (approx) 13 children in the creche room (with Baby's club in an adjoining room)

Both groups spent times together as we can see from Emma

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

Approx 13 children likely sharing the same area. Unlike school, only there to be kept occupied during the random times they attended.

I showed the video as an EXAMPLE of how it may feel in a room full of 13 children and tryng to keep them occupied. ie the REALITY of how it may feel.

This video is from BBC Whistleblower investigating the creche in this portion of the program (Buttons) as well as Mark Warner in creche in Egypt)

We can see from the program that its not always as organised as presumed (not to say there were any issues with PdL but this thread is about a POSSIBILITY, not what is known)

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

I hope that explains all the misunderstandings and to show why this thread is something that I feel is important to address.

Please let me know if there are still issues that you disagree with.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 14:19

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

All depends which witness or member of staff you care to believe, or take as believable.

According to Jeremy Wilkins, his five month old son attended the 'Sharks' group. Perhaps he just got the name wrong.

The inconsistencies are presumably the reason the same old subject is being picked-over nearly eleven years later.

This area is not really of any interest to me, other than to try and dispel unlikely theories like a substitute Madeleine and/or Catriona Baker not being able to identify one of her charges, out of a maximum of seven - and then only on one occasion.

Jez Wilkins DAUGHTER is in the SHARKS mini club and his SON is in the baby group located in the same area above the Main reception.

Regarding 'no interest' (which of course is your prerogative) I would like to point out that this is NOT the same old subject. Its a topic that has NOT been discussed before, but it does rely on full understanding of how many children were in the creche room with Maddie which could explain how the McCanns were able to manipulate the creche records to indicate Maddie was there when she wasn't

I tried very hard to explain it all in the OP and the subsequent posts, but, as I mentioned earlier, maybe members dont have the full knowledge of all the details (and thats understandable) that need to be understood before it is recognised how IMPORTANT it is to understand the concept of this thread.

by skyrocket 25.01.18 15:44

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] – just so there’s no confusion, the photo which [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] posted showing mini age children playing in a tented creche is a photo of the MarkWarner crèche in the Waterside Gardens Site (Tapas), Ocean Club, Luz, as shown on the OC section of their website early October 2007. It is not a generic photo. In fact, on careful inspection, the roofline of the properties on the road behind the crèche can be matched up.

I am completely in agreement that it is highly likely that the Lobsters and Sharks were treated as a single large group - far easier to look after a dozen children between 2 carers rather than 6 children on your own. How would you stop children from one half deciding they wanted to play with children from the other half - it wouldn't work, IMO.

Just for the record - only 4 of the 14 (15?) nannies describe club locations.

by **HiDeHo** 25.01.18 16:39

skyrocket wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] – just so there’s no confusion, the photo which [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] posted showing mini age children playing in a tented creche is a photo of the MarkWarner crèche in the Waterside Gardens Site (Tapas), Ocean Club, Luz, as shown on the OC section of their website early October 2007. It is not a generic photo. In fact, on careful inspection, the roofline of the properties on the road behind the crèche can be matched up.

I am completely in agreement that it is highly likely that the Lobsters and Sharks were treated as a single large group - far easier to look after a dozen children between 2 carers rather than 6 children on your own. How would you stop children from one half deciding they wanted to play with children from the other half - it wouldn't work, IMO.

Just for the record - only 4 of the 14 (15?) nannies describe club locations.

Thanks skyrocket.

It is IMPORTANT to this thread to recognise that there could have been 13 children playing together in the one room and until that is recognised as a possibility/probability I can see where the concept of the thread makes no sense.

Glad we have it sorted! (Hopefully)

Just one thing to recognise skyrocket...and thank you for confirming the creche photo is from the brochures available in 2007 its not a photo of the creche above the main reception, (which is where the mini club Sharks and Lobsters were) but does give us an idea of what the creche may look like

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

This is the outside view of the Main reception and the creche is on the floor above...

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

This is the Toddler 1 and 2 location next to the tapas bar...

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

This is the map showing locations of the two creche and the Millenium Restaurant

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

by Crackfox 25.01.18 17:58

I think there are some really interesting points being raised in this thread and I believe the key to this mystery is buried here somewhere. One point I think is important is that the number of children signed in/out would be very important to the staff because even the most basic provision of care would involve ensuring when you leave the creche area for other activities such as tennis you have to at least do a head count to make sure you have the correct number of kids! For that reason I don't think the two signatures but only one child scenario is viable, IMO. Another issue related to this is the choice of a photograph of Madeleine with shorter, bobbed hair slightly darker in colour than certainly 'the last photo' suggests. I think this is relevant but I've yet to join the dots but I definitely think the choice of this photograph would not have been helpful in the immediate aftermath of the disappearance and raises the question of why a more recent image wasn't chosen as it would have been the most vital piece of evidence if you were looking for a missing child. Conversely, I think an image of a slightly younger Madeleine with darker, bobbed hair would be useful however if an audacious deception had taken place.

Latest topics