Re: How Maddie's creche attendance was "arranged"

by Judge Mental 29.10.10 17:14

The work you are doing to prove something we have always been extremely suspicious of, has come as a great relief to oneself. May one just warn all you marvellous people that when you find anything crucial, that the Tapas 9 and their friends could cover up at this late stage, please pass it straight on to the PJ, and by-pass the posters here. Just in case there are those amongst us who would not use this information for the good of finding out what really happened to Madeleine.

One has always been under the impression that the individuals in this group of people will not go down alone, and that if they do go down, they will ensire that others go down with them. Therefore, it is quite feasible that what you are saying is true. McCann would be the very last person who would shoulder responsibility on his own.

by **kikoraton** 29.10.10 19:16

Very wise, your Lordship. I think I am keeping just about on the discreet side. But if anything I have said should make either of the Robert Naylors on my list break cover, I should be delighted!

by Shibboleth 29.10.10 22:50

Áinne's signature does appear to be "female". And it puts Signature 4 as looking more like a forgery as well. The macron over the A is very distinctive over signature 3 and not quite so clear, but still there, on signature 1. It quite definitely not there at all on signature 2 - the space all around the top of the A is quite clear. She might be artistic and have a flowery signature, but she is also a person who notices small details and she definitely would not misspell her own name! Á and A are totally different letters in the Gaelic alphabet!

by Shibboleth 29.10.10 22:59

Oops, sorry. Now edited.

by Guest 29.10.10 23:04

Shibboleth wrote:Oops, sorry. Now edited.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] I have deleted my post and your quote

by Guest 30.10.10 9:02

Shibboleth wrote:Áinne's signature does appear to be "female". And it puts Signature 4 as looking more like a forgery as well. The macron over the A is very distinctive over signature 3 and not quite so clear, but still there, on signature 1. It quite definitely not there at all on signature 2 - the space all around the top of the A is quite clear. She might be artistic and have a flowery signature, but she is also a person who notices small details and she definitely would not misspell her own name! Á and A are totally different letters in the Gaelic alphabet!

Perhaps the real person who signed Ainne's name is someone who also works with children? Who can be artistic where children and drawings are concerned?

I do not believe that any of those Naylor entries, were made by a Naylor and will gladly eat my hat, if one day I find out that they did. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Shibboleth 30.10.10 9:26

Stella wrote:
Shibboleth wrote:Áinne's signature does appear to be "female". And it puts Signature 4 as looking more like a forgery as well. The macron over the A is very distinctive over signature 3 and not quite so clear, but still there, on signature 1. It quite definitely not there at all on signature 2 - the space all around the top of the A is quite clear. She might be artistic and have a flowery signature, but she is also a person who notices small details and she definitely would not misspell her own name! Á and A are totally different letters in the Gaelic alphabet!

Perhaps the real person who signed Ainne's name is someone who also works with children? Who can be artistic where children and drawings are concerned?

I do not believe that any of those Naylor entries, were made by a Naylor and will gladly eat my hat, if one day I find out that they did. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It could well be, Stella. It's someone who likes to use their own creativity, rather than strictly follow a set pattern. If they were following a recipe, for example, they would add their own things to it to make it more unique. They wouldn't just follow it rigidly and weigh out every ingredient.

by Guest 30.10.10 10:07

Maybe with the right incentive, anything is possible. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **kikoraton** 30.10.10 13:29

So Gerry wasn't content with taking the "false Madeleine" to creche. He usually had a second child with him, and that was the Naylors' Elizabeth. And in doing so, he wrote "Robert's" name all over the page, and signed it with a fake signature. Why? Because it was important that he gave the impression that Robert Naylor of London was present and participating.
Reading the above contributions, it's looking more and more as tho' Áinne's signature was forged.
I really didn't want to start looking for two substitute girls - one for Maddie and the other for Eliz Naylor. Help! Can somebody work out what's going on?

by Guest 30.10.10 14:54

Perhaps ?? it went like this:

Every morning Gerry, Dave and RN met up and walked all of their children together to the creche.

There were 3 different clubs and 3 different Fathers, so simples, Gerry came up with the following solution. Hey guy's, rather than all of us having to be in two places at once, why don't we divide up the children and then we only have to sign one lot in each !!!

Gerry took 2 to Lobsters, Dave took 3 to Jellyfish, RN took 2 to baby club and they all signed in as quickly as possible to get to tennis.

If it happened like this every day, it would mean that RN never went to Lobsters, he only ever went to baby club.

Then the woman took over in reverse to collect,

Kate picked up Jellyfish, AN picked up baby club, ?? picked up Lobsters.

It's quite a clever little bit of jiggory-pokery and happens every day for some normal school runs !!!

by Rainbow 30.10.10 15:40

That makes more sense than substitute children.

by Guest 30.10.10 16:13

I'm glad you liked the idea of that little arrangement rainbow.

It still means that Gerry had the perfect opportunity to sign in 2 children.

One of which was probably EN, but the other child remains to be identified. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **kikoraton** 30.10.10 18:13

OK, but each father should have used his own initials, as an honest way of passing on responsibility from himself to the nanny. GM [may well have - ed.] used a fake signature for Elizabeth, which wasn't even that of her father.

Did DP use his own, or did the children he took to jellyfish all have different parental signatures?
How about the baby club?

by Guest 30.10.10 18:37

kikoraton wrote:OK, but each father should have used his own initials, as an honest way of passing on responsibility from himself to the nanny. GM[may well have -ed] used a fake signature for Elizabeth, which wasn't even that of her father.
Did DP use his own, or did the children he took to jellyfish all have different parental signatures?
How about the baby club?

Kiko, just a reminder not to state things as facts., as in your second sentence re signature. We do not know this is fact so the word probably/may have etc should be added. Would you please ammend the post and if it's too late to do so please ask one of the mods to do it.

This should serve as a reminder to all posters too, to be careful with your wording. Thanks.

Kiko post amended by admin - ed.

by Shibboleth 30.10.10 18:58

Stella wrote:Perhaps ?? it went like this:

Every morning Gerry, Dave and RN met up and walked all of their children together to the creche.

There were 3 different clubs and 3 different Fathers, so simples, Gerry came up with the following solution. Hey guy's, rather than all of us having to be in two places at once, why don't we divide up the children and then we only have to sign one lot in each !!!

Gerry took 2 to Lobsters, Dave took 3 to Jellyfish, RN took 2 to baby club and they all signed in as quickly as possible to get to tennis.

If it happened like this every day, it would mean that RN never went to Lobsters, he only ever went to baby club.

Then the woman took over in reverse to collect,

Kate picked up Jellyfish, AN picked up baby club, ?? picked up Lobsters.

It's quite a clever little bit of jiggory-pokery and happens every day for some normal school runs !!!

Yes, I have done that myself. But I signed with my own name and my own signature. I didn't try to fake my friends' handwriting.

by **kikoraton** 30.10.10 20:13

Yes, OK, happy with the amendment. There are more important matters afoot!! But don't overlook the fact that I have posted up so many variants of/attempts at this signature, as to suggest that it is not genuine. And how would I know that it's an imitation? Let's consider the likelihood that I have seen and am in possession of an original Naylor signature.

If DP and GM and RN had had this cosy signing-in arrangement, then surely we should have read in the witness statements that GM and RN were good friends from before the PdL holiday? Does Gerry ever mention taking a girl called Elizabeth to the creche with him?

by **Tony Bennett** 30.10.10 21:06

Can I just bring in Stephen and Carolyn Carpenter and their 3-year-old daughter I_______ at this stage.

I want first of all to quote from Carpenter's main witness statement:

QUOTE

“My wife booked the holidays in the MW resort in Praia da Luz, from Saturday 28th April to Saturday 5th May, at ‘Going Places’ in Welwyn Garden City.” You go on to describe your previous holidays and that you chose this one because you were told that the ‘babysitter’ service was available. You arrived at the resort on Saturday morning, pardon, on Saturday at approximately two in the afternoon and were accompanied to your apartment, FP02 Ocean Club.

At about 4.15 on the same day you went to a crèche meeting where you were told who the crèche workers who would look after your children were and that your children would be in different groups given the difference in age. I____ was in the group for children between three and four years old, her crèche worker was Emma and it was only after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann that I realised that she was in the same group as I____. That night C____, F____, I____ and I went to the Millennium Restaurant, we did not see any of the other MW tourists there and I remember that I did not see any of the other people I mentioned in my statement there. On Sunday the 29th April C____ and I participated in a coffee morning of the MW tennis group where I met Gerry, Kate, J____, C____, R____, A____, G____, A____’s sister and A____. There There were other tourists there whose names now escape me. In total there were approximately some sixteen people at this coffee morning and tennis was one of the activities that the man, or that both subscribed to during the week. I am summarising a bit, because...

UNQUOTE

A few points that might be relevant to this thread or others:

1. Stephen Carpenter knew Dan (the tennis instructor) from at least one previous Mark Warner holiday.

2. His elder daughter (I_______), aged three-and-a-half, was apparently in the crèche with Madeleine. Her crèche worker was Emma, but Emma says Madeleine wasn't in her group.

3. If I have followed this right, Catriona Baker was Madeleine's crèche worker.

4. Carpenter only realised that his daughter attended the same crèche group as Madeleine after her disappearance.

5. Despite meeting Dr Gerald McCann several times, he cannot remember much about the dates or the other children (or Madeleine).

6. The Carpenters apparently used three 3 babysitters; Leanne looked after their children in the evening - though according to the David James Smith article in 'The Times', the Carpenters had their children with them that evening'; Dr Gerald McCann was quoted as saying that he was so glad he didn't have to have his children with him.

7. I think Carpenter described himself as a 'Maintenance Technician' although enquiries suggest he is or was a Company Director at Bushey, Hertfordshire.

8. I think I am right in saying that Carpenter's wife had a 'chat' at some satge woith Philomena McCann.

9. It was Carpenter who referred to a 10th 'grey-haired man in his fifties' being at the 'Tapas 9' table.

10. Carolyn Carpenter was also interviewed but its seems not to be in the PJ files and might have been withheld.

I am not sure where I_______ Carpenter comes up on the crèche records. Was she in a different group from Madeleine?

There was I think another I_______ who was the daughter of M Handy & G Downie.

by Judge Mental 30.10.10 22:52

Tony Bennett wrote: ''Can I just bring in Stephen and Carolyn Carpenter and their 3-year-old daughter I_______ at this stage.''

You may indeed. What has taken us so long? One would be most interested in knowing our posters views on the Carpenters, Naylors, Gorrods and Totmans etc.

by **Tony Bennett** 30.10.10 23:23

Judge Mental wrote:Tony Bennett wrote: ''Can I just bring in Stephen and Carolyn Carpenter and their 3-year-old daughter I_______ at this stage.''

You may indeed. What has taken us so long? One would be most interested in knowing our posters views on the Carpenters, Naylors, Gorrods and Totmans etc.

The reason I hesitated was because I wasn't sure if I______ Carpenter was in a different group from Madeleine. The creche leader for Madeleine was mostly Catriona Baker, I think, while the Carpenter's girl was in a group led by 'Emma'. Therefore I might be reading too much into why Carpenter appeared not to know who Madeleine was. So I apologise for going off tangent when I realise the focus is those signatures.

But if you're interested in Carpenter, he appears to have moved shortly after Madeleine's disappearance from Ware to Stevenage (also in Hertfordshire), where the following year (2008) he seems to have got mightily upset with Stevenage Borough Council, sending them threatening letters etc., you can read this up on the internet. I think this is him, see especially page 12:

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

Apologies if I've got the wrong man here.

by **Tony Bennett** 30.10.10 23:32

The Carpenters were once used on a Madeleine Forum - it might have been 3As - to prove that Madeleine's abduction was planned and that she was alive.

This post (below) is among many that I've saved, and my records suggest that the post was made by 'sadie' and addressed to 'PR' whom I believe was 'preciousramotswe' and who now inhabits the ailing PFA2 forum.

Here it is, just as it was written, with 'sadie's comments as 4 'POINTS' below, in black and red ('sadie's origianl emphasis, not mine):

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

Quite right PR.

1) Bundleman was seen by Jane Tanner going in an Easterly direction

2) The Carpenters left reception going in an Easterly direction, too. They were about 55 yards further South, down the road that Jane Tanner had walked up. They carried on Eastwards, walking across a small car park for about 70 yards or so, until they met an alleyway running North to South. This alleyway is called 'Aldeamento - The Ocean Club' and it is very narrow and runs in a Southerly direction towards the sea.

3) In order to get to the point that he met the Smiths in R. d'Escola, bundleman must have turned right (South) down this alleyway, before transversing across to R. d'Escola.

4) Mrs Carpenter heard the words 'Madeleine, Madeleine' whispered or murmured ('maria's translation). The abductor knew her name. The hearing of these words must have happened either at this junction of the little car park and the alleyway, or in another nearby place.

5) After crossing the alleyway, the Carpenters in their statement say they took a semi-circular route. This would take them across the rear lawns/gardens to their apartment block. Their apartment adjoined the grounds of a certain villa.

6) The only other places that the whispered words 'Madeleine Madeleiene' could have come from are the gardens of their apartment block, the grounds of the villa, or the mysterious garage (the geographical position of which I am not sure).

POINT 1

The carpenters statement verifies Jane Tanners sighting. Jane Tanner DID see bundleman Q.E.D.

POINT 2

Bundleman knew Madeleines name. Therefore it WAS planned

POINT 3

Madeleine WAS alive, otherwise he wouldn't have whispered her name

POINT 4

All of these places above are EAST of apartment 5A

The witnesses verify that bundleman went in an EASTERLY direction.

Amaral insisted that bundleman went in WESTERLY direction. He rubbished two completely independant statements
when he had absolutely nothing to show this was true. Why was it so important for Amaral to say that Bundleman did not go in an Easterly direction? Why?...Hmmm?

Now he says that Madeleine died in Apartment 5A...so she didn't get taken in a Westerly or an Easterly direction, Mr Amaral?...Hmmm?

Recently, was it on TV, Amaral stated that he had proof that Madeleine died in Apartment 5A.

Mr Amaral, I can prove that your proof is NOT a proof...but it is late...we'll do that another day.

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

There you go - one of the most erudite analyses from the 'pro' side you will ever find.

by **Tony Bennett** 30.10.10 23:40

Here's a note I wrote on Stephen Carpenter's interview/statement; you really have to read the whole statement to understand the points I'm making, but here's my conclusion:

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

It looks from Stephen Carpenter's interview as though the first Robert Murat learnt of Madeleine's disappearance was by Carpenter walking back to his apartment past Murat's house.

Before this moment, let's look at what Carpenter says he had been doing that morning:

Got up.

Changed.

Left the apartment.

Went to MW reception.

Chatted to Dr Gerald McCann's two surfing friends [who they? - ed].

Walked to the supermarket.

Went to '24-hour reception' and tried to talk to some Portuguese men.

Went back to MW reception.

Returned to his apartment, passing by Murat's house.

We don't have any times, but I'd suggest it was probably well past 9.00am when he went back to his apartment and heard Murat shout over the garden fence.

Question: was this really the first time that Robert Murat knew what had happened to Madeleine?

POINTS:

1. He and his mother bith said they heard police sirens at around 10.30pm.

2. He 'phoned Sergei Malinka at 11.39pm on 3 May.

3. He 'phoned Michaela W. at 11.40pm on 3 May.

4. He 'phoned Michaela W. again at 8.27am on 4 May.

5. His mother Jennifer Murat and Murat himself said that they heard about Madeleine on the TV 'early that morning'.

Are we really expected to believe that the first that Murat knew about what was going on was his chance encounter with Stephen Carpenter?

by aiyoyo 31.10.10 8:14

Bit unbelievable isnt it considering the close proximity of his house to the resort and searchers were everywhere.

On top of which, surely someone in the village who's among searchers would have told him about it.

I dont know what to make of it tbh.

by **kikoraton** 31.10.10 10:02

I shall have to look more closely at carpenter - thanks for bringing him to our attention, Tony. I agree, that it's a pathetic attempt by Murat to claim it was the first he had heard of it. His and Michaela's and Malinka's mobiles and landlines had been buzzing from even before 2200 on the previous day.
Somewhere, I have the full names of those whose initials are given, at the tennis meeting. Useful?
What surprised me, especially after google earthing it, is that the Murats' villa is totally surrounded by OC property. It's as though they have been granted a term of occupation, possibly due to the Symington family connection. Which puts Robert's participation in the phone message aspect of the McCann case into an interesting perspective. No time to say more now, with places to go and a half-wild kitten sat on my neck.

by Guest 31.10.10 10:15

I must say that is the one thing I found very strange that Mr Murat never heard any of the commotion going on that night. There must have been plenty! Loads of police and people running around looking for Madeleine, shouting her name........for a quiet little place like that it must have been bedlam. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Does anyone have a picture to hand of how close Mr Murats house is to the apartments, and could post it up? I will have a look around to see if I can find one. It would be interesting to see how close his villa is.

by Guest 31.10.10 10:37

Found this one,

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

It's not quite as close as I thought, though difficult to tell from this image.

by Irish Eyes 31.10.10 11:00

To me it looks quite close judging by the cars in the road. It looks like Murat's villa is about 20 car lengths from the complex.

by kathyBelle 31.10.10 11:26

Hi Candy, do you suspect Robert Murat had something to do with Madeleine's disappearance? I always presumed he didn't because his alibis checked out. Let's face it, Robert Murat was interrogated many times in the lead up to him being made an arguido. The McCanns, had given the PJ reason to suspect, they were involved with Madeleine's disappearance, yet they were not interrogated in the way that Robert Murat was interrogated.

Also Robert Murat's mum's house was raided more than once and her garden was dug up at least twice, by the police.

In a news report, I saw Robert Murat, standing outside his mum's house with his lawyer. The lawyer said that Mr Murat, had requested to be made an arguido, because it gave him certain rights. The right to have a lawyer present and the right to remain silent when questioned, were just two of the rights an arguido is entitled to have. He was never going to remain silent, unlike Kate McCann, but because of the many times he was questioned as a witness, he could not have a lawyer present, unless he was an arguido.

I read that once it was established that Robert Murat was not involved in Madeleine's disappearance, he expected to be released from his arguido status and he was very upset to learn that he had to remain an arguido, until the McCanns were either prosecuted or released from their arguido status.

Unlike the McCanns, Rober Murat remained in Portugal for the whole time he was an arguido. He would have had to report to the police station in Pria da Luz, at least once a week, under the terms of his arguido status. Which makes me wonder why the McCanns were allowed to leave Pria da Luz, and head for home, because they too, should have attended a police station, at least once a week.

I know one thing, David Payne and Robert Murat are similar in looks and David Payne, if what Katherine Gaspar said is true, is a man who shouldn't be around children and certainly shouldn't be a doctor. Yet Robert Murat, is the one who is still suspected of being involved with Madeleine's disappearance. If not by the police, by certain members of the general public.

by Judge Mental 31.10.10 14:42

KathyBelle wrote: ''If not by the police, by certain members of the general public.''

Not to mention some of the McCanns own friends, who went out of their way to convince the police they had seen Murat.

by **kikoraton** 31.10.10 15:58

As I worked it out from carpenter's description (I am not infallible in these matters), the Murat villa is here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
See the circular grassy area in or near the centre? Go 2cm or perhaps 3cm north of it, and there's a villa in its grounds.

and this is how it looks on the OC website:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
On this map, as I calculated it, the villa is on the green area in the centre, occupied by the numbers 5-12 and the legend "Indoor Pool"

by Judge Mental 31.10.10 17:39

@ Kikoraton and Stella.

According to some messages one has been receiving, these findings of yours are continuing to cause great consternation amongst those who believe in the abduction theory.