Can Anyone Explain Why the Discrepancies Started on Tuesday Morning? Please ask if you need further info

Which is what Kikoraton theorizes as MBM was dead by 29th April.

There were a potential 14 children in Madeleine's age group who could have been in Mini-Club (Sharks and Lobsters combined) at any time but how could the McCanns, in the precarious situation they would have been in, be sure that all these children would turn up for each session to allow a phantom "Madeleine" to go unnoticed in the crowd.
 For example, on the p.m. of Thurs. May 3rd only four children were present in the Lobster group - two boys and Madeleine and Ella (who left). Why would Ella be taken away when every little girl was needed there to help disguise Madeleine's absence! How could they be sure that all or, indeed, any, of the Sharks' little girls would turn up to maintain the confusion. We simply don't know how many children were present for each Sharks' session but I'd wager that afternoon numbers were much lower than morning attendance. Normal parents don't park their kids in creche all day everyday!
 We can see this from the twins' Jellyfish records which show that, on the p.m. of April 30th, only two other children out of the registered 12 were present with the twins. That situation is repeated on the p.m. of May 1st - two other kids and the twins in creche. On the a.m of May 2nd the twins have also only two other kids for company. Although there were 12 children registered in the Jellyfish group many often did not attend, especially for the p.m. sessions. Lily Payne never went in the afternoons and seems to have missed several morning sessions too. How could the McCanns take such a risk while not knowing how many children would turn up for each mini-club creche session. Just suppose that on the p.m. of May 3rd  the Sharks mirrored the poor creche attendance of the Lobsters for the afternoon session and only, say, two boys and two girls turned up. How could they hope Madeleine's absence would not have been rumbled. These people were risking everything, even their very freedom, if they were hiding Madeleine's death or fatal illness. Does anyone seriously imagine they would run such the risk, over which they had no control, that nothing would happen which would reveal that their daughter was not around while they pretended she was. Bear in mind there was no need to take this path. There were other ways of having Madeleine "disappear" which did not involve the mercy of others and sheer luck. If Madeleine was fatally ill rather than dead they could have seen to it that the kids skipped creche sessions like many other children did, in order to spend "family time" together on trips and outings, then have Madeleine abducted elsewhere. I can't imagine the McCanns running this incredible risk from the Sunday to Thursday night. 
The suggestion that  phantom "Madeleine" went unnoticed in a crowd depends on there having been a large attendance of the Sharks children everyday, but especially on that Thursday afternoon. We have no way of knowing how many, if any, "Sharks" girls were at that session but removing Ella would just further increase the risk that Madeleine's absence would be spotted.

GordonGarner wrote:Hi De ho. Your work is astonishing. Spent the last 2 days sifting through it, amazing. It beggars belief that there isn't a wider knowledge of all this through media and general public. Can I ask you, were the police investigation aware or onto any of this in the original investigation ? It's not an angle I've ever seen in the general reporting of the case even when the M's were arguidos. It's the most complex case I've ever studied, like many I used to think I could find the solution but I can't. I still struggle with why all these people would be prepared to lie over something so serious but then again we don't know what their incentive may be ? It's a conundrum wrapped up in an enigma . I even wondered out loud if the whole thing was a giant hoax, a media phsy op designed to see if a story of this magnitude could be made up and sustained...who knows ? But your work is amazing . So frustrating that it's never likely to be heard in a courtroom. Imagine the length of any fair trial ? It would take months to sift through if done on the level !

Thanks very much GordonGarner.

I originally started an MSN group back in 2007 which was for my own use.  Everything was so complicated, I wanted to compile all the info into an easy to find format so that it was easy to access for posts.


MSN Groups - Madeleine McCann
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It opens on the Site Menu but all the info categories available can be seen if you scroll down left hand side menu.

CLICK HERE to see Category List for Original MSN Group:

That group/forum contains all the original info (2007/2008) and likely contains some long lost details that haven't seen the light of day in  10 years.

MSN Groups closed in early 2009 and I was able to migrate the group to Aimoo Forums in a 'Read Only' format.

I took some of the info and added it to Remembering Madeleine Aimoo Forum but the vast majority still remains untouched since I originally posted it as there was far too much to repost to the 'new' forum.

Remembering Madeleine Aimoo Forum
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Once the FILES were released I started compiling the information and initially started with Staff statements and compiling the Staff Rota for the Millenium and Tapas (originally for my own use).  

I continued with all the other statements as they were made available and put together about 300 TIMETABLES and timelines.

I also added all random info to each TOPIC thread.

The info is easily available if you Google the topic name (eg Huelva, Blue Bag, Forensics etc) and add Aimoo Madeleine.  So Google *'keyword' Madeleine Aimoo* and the results will direct you to each topic that I have compiled all the information.  I use this all the time as I know there is lots of info for each topic in the forum.

2011 - 2012  I used all the info I had put together and with the initial help from Joana Morais I created my first video :) (Followed by another 3-400)

HiDeHo4 Remembering Madeleine Youtube Channel
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In 2012 Facebook groups started to be popular for the case and by the end of 2012 and I was admin of Madeleine McCann CONTROVERSY  facebook group.

As often happens on the case, there was some 'drama' and I was kicked out of my own group, but, suspecting something was about to happen I had already created a new group HiDeHo CONTROVERSY of Madeleine McCann (I had originally chosen the 'controversy' name so I kept it.) :)

To assist with threads that are difficult to create on the limited facebook format I created another  forum for Reference to direct facebook members to view easier to read threads.

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

Followed by a WORDPRESS 'blog' to cover the main topics for reference


HiDeHo CONTROVERSY Wordpress Blog
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I also have several other FB groups covering different topics (far more than I can keep up with, but thanks to great fb admin they keep me on my toes..

FB groups are great for getting the word out but cannot compare to forums and CMOMM.

Jill has been great and even created a special category for my research and videos, which I really must take time to update, but although I post on 'Latest News', once the threads have become quiet she removes them to my special category :)

HiDeHo's Videos and Research
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So... in answer to your question    about whether the police are aware of my work, I don't think the PJ have been sent any but I was in touch with detectives in Operation Grange and I was encouraged to send them my videos and research from the Remembering Madeleine Forum and they assured me that 'everything, EVERYTHING' was looked at.

I created a special category at the top of the forum with some of the main info from the forum so it was easier for them to access


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


GordonGarner. Because of your interest in the info I have added many links to 10 years of research, a lot of it not accessed too frequently because it is so complicated and most people don't have time (or motivation) but its what I have retained over the years and still use in all my posts or for anyone that wants a link to a topic.


Maybe you will find a little long lost gem of information :)

@ HiDeHo   It has been claimed that the way in which Madeleine's "attendance" at creche was faked, or that her absence went unnoticed, is due to a cunning ploy by Gerry and Russell. Russell would allegedly bring Ella to creche and Gerry (without a child) would accompany them and engage the nannies in chat to distract them. Then he would sign in Madeleine although she wasn't actually there.
 If this was their scheme why did Russell remove Ella from creche on the afternoon of Thurs. May 3rd. By doing so he would have merely highlighted the fact that there was NO little girl left in the Lobsters group (if Madeleine was indeed only there on paper) just two boys. How could they know that there would any girls in the Sharks group who were unknown to the nannies. Indeed, how could they guarantee that their would be any blonde girls, indeed any girls at all, there that afternoon who might be mistaken for the phantom Madeleine. Deliberately removing Ella on the very afternoon that would command most police attention seems counter intuitive to the plot to deceive  the nannies based on the number of little girls there.

Hi De Ho..thank you, I will sift through with interest.
Many thanks.

Seeing the photographs of the two young girls up-thread what's striking is the dark glasses, if Madeleine had a coloboma wouldn't she have to have some eye protection like this?

Crackfox wrote:Seeing the photographs of the two young girls up-thread what's striking is the dark glasses, if Madeleine had a coloboma wouldn't she have to have some eye protection like this?

No.

No need to identify this young girl but again, it shows how similar to Maddie, hair colour and age, sharing the same creche room.

Further confirmation of how difficult it must have been for the nannies to perfectly identify each child and know each child by name within the first few days in a room of up to 14 children.

The number of blonde girls who could have potentially attended creche still does not get around the problem facing the T9 as they allegedly gambled on Madeleine's absence not being noticed for 4 days. On Thursday afternoon for example, after Russell removed Ella there were no girls at all left in Cat's group (assuming Madeleine was only there on paper). How could the T9 dare to take the risk that this would not be noticed. They had no way of knowing how many girls (indeed if any at all) would show up for the "Sharks" afternoon session that Thursday. We do not have access to the Sharks records, but, based on the Jellyfish records, very few children outside of the McCanns twins spent all day, everyday, in creche. Removing Ella that afternoon seriously increased the risk of Madeleine's absence being spotted. If they were hoping Madeleine's  absence would go unnoticed or that another child of the T9 (and this could only have been Ella) would be mistaken for her, then surely they would not have removed Ella on the very afternoon of the "abduction".

P.S. I'm afraid I can't say I'm a fan of this new page layout. IMO it makes it much more difficult to see new posts as they arrive!

Crackfox wrote:Seeing the photographs of the two young girls up-thread what's striking is the dark glasses, if Madeleine had a coloboma wouldn't she have to have some eye protection like this?

You are correct in implying that an issue with iris coloboma is sensitivity to light (only have to google it). However, not all children suffer with this, so I don't think the sunglasses thing can be made an issue here.