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

by Shibboleth 19.10.10 8:51

Thank you, Stella. It is difficult to tell. The Ms look different. But the capital C and the small c, in relation to the M, look very similar. I might have time later on today to have a closer look.

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 9:39

G formed in the same way as his creche initialising. Round-topped M. C identical.
That's fine. It was GM who signed in "Maddie", no doubt about that. Are the figures and letters of the Naylor sign-in performed by the same hand?

by Shibboleth 19.10.10 9:58

kikoraton wrote:G formed in the same way as his creche initialising. Round-topped M. C identical.
That's fine. It was GM who signed in "Maddie", no doubt about that. Are the figures and letters of the Naylor sign-in performed by the same hand?

I would have said so, yes. In the meantime, I leave you with this. I don't think any further explanation will be required.

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

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 11:56

So we're agreed on that. I'll show you some signature-squiggles next.
Meanwhile, let's think about the circumstances in which Elizabeth's father, apparently not participating in her signing-in, might have allowed GM to do it on his behalf.

by Shibboleth 19.10.10 12:16

Bring it on, Kikoraton. Like I said, I am no expert, but if I can help, I will.

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 16:05

Well, that's encouraging! In another place, they used to say "put a sock in it, kiko...we know Cat Baker couldn't have been mistaken, and Maddie was taken by fairies after 5.30 on the 3rd". So, here are the first two signatures. Sort out the "R.....N" scribble from the signatures on either side. Sometimes, the "R.....N" stretches over three or four lines above and below:

29 April, morning. It's Eva or Ena (Berry) above, and L Mann beneath. We're not interested in them.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

29 April, afternoon. It's NB (Berry) above, and our old friend GMC beneath. Berry is of no interest.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 16:15

There won't be any for 30 April, because RN (or, in my opinion) GMcC forget to insert a signature in the morning, and Eliz N did not attend in the afternoon.
And, guess what, when Eliz N doesn't go to creche on any particular session, it's not Gerry but Kate who signs "Madeleine" in. Funny thing, that.

by Guest 19.10.10 16:25

A very funny thing indeed that Kiko winkwink

I'm still working on your earlier question by the way, I just need more time to see the vista nerdy

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 19:21

Take your time, Stella. There's only one direction this is moving now. I shall check the Spanish press tomorrow for any news of the lifting of the ban.

by **kikoraton** 19.10.10 20:43

This is the signature for the morning of 1 May. Remember that at present we are interested only in the ("imitation"??) signature pertaining to the father of Elizabeth Naylor. In the afternoon, it was "Ainne Naylor" who brought her to creche. I'm presenting here all the differing signatures pertaining to the father of the child, for discussion.
Above the R.....N signature is that of Russell O'Brien. Below is that of Julian Totman.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 20.10.10 8:40

Well my dear Kiko, with yesterdays news, I'm not surprised your theory was not allowed to be explored on the other site. I have a very strong feeling we may possibly be getting a bit to close to the truth !!

by Guest 20.10.10 9:37

OK, I have just started the ground research into the booking of the creche.

List 1, are those individuals who specified on there initial reservation that they required creche facilities.
List 2, are those individuals who had children, but did not specify in advance they would be needing creche facilites.

The names that appear in red, are those individuals who did not reserve the creche, but still managed to get booked into the Lobster group, presumably after they had arrived at the resort.

LIST 1

Berry 1 x mini ending on the 4th ?
Handy 1 x toddler 2
Heselton 1 x toddler 2
Patel 1 x mini
Totman 1 x toddler 2 plus 1 x mini
Reap 1 x mini
Taylor 1 x mini
O’Donnell 1 x mini plus 1 x baby club
Burlton 1 x toddler
Janczur 1 x toddler 2 plus 1 x baby club
Edmonds 3 x juniors
Foster 1 x mini

LIST 2

O’Brien – no
Payne – no
McCann – no
Mann – no
Hynd – no
Clifford – no
Carpenter – no
Thornhill – no
Weinburger – no
Naylor – no a special note on booking says “Aware of no baby club”
Mills – no
McCormick – no
Bullen – no

by Guest 20.10.10 9:52

L Payne was also booked into the Starfish group.

So the question is, if they kicked up so much stink over a listening group before they left, why did the tapas group not book the creche facilities in advance?

Why did Naylor's booking state that he was aware of "no baby group", when there was one for all babies over 3 months old? His youngest was 11 months old, so easily qualified for care.

by Guest 20.10.10 10:31

S Payne was 11 months old, do we know if she attended baby club? I will check Dave's and Fiona's statements.

The Naylor's also had an 11 month old baby, although claiming not to know about one, could they have later used this facility and met David Payne there?

by Shibboleth 20.10.10 10:34

Here are the three signtures, in the order in which Kikoraton presented them, and a sample of Kate's signature for comparison.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Purely as an interested amateur, I would say that signatures 1 and 3 are the same. But signature 2 was done in a different hand. I am looking at things like the angle of the letters, pressure of the pen, relationship of the letters to each other, variation in pressure when forming each letter. These are things that are very difficult to copy, because handwriting is a natural function and therefore an unconscious one.

I will now leave it to your good selves to compare all three signatures to Kate's, and judge for yourselves whether any of them match. Let's see whether anyone else comes to the same conclusion as I do! winkwink

by Guest 20.10.10 10:46

Excellent work Shibboleth. clapping1

It's as I thought. yes

Now we need to find an example of David Payne's signature, there has to be one somewhere in those files.

by Guest 20.10.10 10:48

From Fiona Payne’s Rogatory Statement:

"All the kids were booked into their relevant kids clubs, S*****t was the only one that was in the baby crèche and that was kind of next door to where Madeleine and E**a were in the sort of older kids club and that was near the main reception".

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

Unfortunately, the baby creche records are not included in the files, which is a big shame, as we could have checked to see who else was in there?

by Guest 20.10.10 11:12

This is the last page of David Payne's statement. Is the first signature, with a heavy hand his?

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

by Guest 20.10.10 12:43

I would like to know why Payne, Oldfield and O'Brien's passport is not in the files, when all of the OC and MW staff are? Not unless they are hidden somewhere I cannot find them, but I have spent most of the morning looking for them. Very strange.

thinking

by **kikoraton** 20.10.10 16:51

Payne's will be the initials on the first line.
Shibb - why do you think (if I understood you correctly) that KM's signature might relate to our quest?

by **kikoraton** 20.10.10 20:21

In my heavy-handed way, I have wiped the full creche-record for 2 May from my images. If anyone has a link (I'm sure Stella has) please post it!!
But I have the necessary signature from the morning session. Here it is. The little loops at top and bottom of the down-stroke, are in fact belonging to O'B's signature above, and the "C" of Gerry's, below.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Shibboleth 20.10.10 21:01

Kate's signature is particularly interesting. It is very "flowery", it belongs to an exhibitionist. It's very upright with only a slight lean to the right. This is someone who doesn't plan ahead much. They live for the here and now. But they are very concerned with appearance, they like to be looked at.

At first I thought it might match signature 2, as the angles and overall pressures are similar. But the quality of the gif makes it hard to tell for sure.

by **kikoraton** 21.10.10 5:30

I think that must be GM, shibboleth, because the line underneath is in the same handwriting (all agreed??), and is signed GMC. I've still got the daddy of all daft signatures to follow, and then it will be time to work out "why?"

by Guest 21.10.10 9:55

What I am going to work on next is to check everyone's statements to see who, if anyone, talks about booking into the creche. If so, when did the booking arrangements take place and by WHO ??

As highlighted above the tapas group did not book in advance, so could they have all just turned up on the day and guarantee there would be a place for everyone?, or did they make arrangements some time on the Saturday? did each family book for their own?, or did someone ?? book for everyone?

I might be gone some time laughat

by Shibboleth 21.10.10 10:31

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

Gerry's signature is very controlled. It slopes to the right. He plans ahead. Look at the capital letters compared to the small ones - they are very tall indeed. This is someone who thinks he's important, people look up to him, look at me. He is a leader and mover and shaker. The letters are all thought out and carefully formed in that signature, with even pressure throughout. The rounded forms (e, a, d) are completely closed off. That's why the printing in the creche register is so interesting. It's sloppy, it's been done in a hurry, there is less control there, less thought. He wants to "get it over with".

He also gets bored with things. He drops things to go off and start new things. We know that from the way the nn tails off at the end. He is not a completer-finisher. He misses small details, and that is his undoing. If we didn't know what the nn actally was in the context of the rest of the signature, we'd have no way of telling what that squiggle was supposed to be - it's almost nothing more than a horizontal line by the time it gets to the end, in contrast with the careful, precise forms at the beginning.

A bit like this case, actually - total control at the start, ending in flatline. It really is very interesting, whether you "believe" or not. Now I have shown you what to look out for, you should all be able to discover interesting things for yourselves too.

by Guest 21.10.10 12:34

What is very obvious when reading everyone’s statements concerning the day time crèche arrangements, is that no one mentions booking it before they left, or after they arrived. At the Rogatory interviews, no one asks them a direct question on the subject either. Tanner was the only one who was specifically asked what things she booked at the welcome meeting and still does not mention the crèche arrangements.

They were all introduced to the crèche nannies at the welcome meeting, yet no one mentions talking to them or booking any child in. All very strange indeed. thinking

by **kikoraton** 21.10.10 15:56

And here's the daddy of them all - the supposed R.....N signature with a nervy great flourish, on 3 May morning. You can see how it lurches right up into NB (Berry's) line above, and down thru GMC into JT's line.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Now the question is, how many of these different signatures can we count (over the last three pages of this thread), all of them supposedly attributable to Robert Naylor?

by Guest 21.10.10 16:14

Is there any possibility that those creche sheets are not the originals? How soon after the alarm was raised were they siezed by the PJ? Was there enough time for someone to reproduce them excluding certain names and the new ones are the ones that were handed to the PJ?

Based on the tapas receptionist's statement, the tapas book was not given to the PJ until several days later. Could that have also been the case where the creche records are concerned?

I guess what I am trying to ask is, how do we know for sure that any of those signatures pertain to those individuals?

by Guest 21.10.10 16:35

Just when we thought we had seen every version possible Kiko, take a look at these ones. laughat

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

by Judge Mental 21.10.10 18:33

Latest topics