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

by Lilemor1 25.11.10 8:42

Hello, I am new! I think that there is a possiblitiy that the McCanns did fly to Portugal with their Madeleine BUT that Madeleine did die within hours after their arrival in Portugal.And the staff of MW did NEVER EVER see Madeleine.... Which would have been important for the McCanns to avoid confusion... There is also a possibility that IT (Madeleines demise) did not happen in 5a or at the Ocean Club at all.Perhaps the little girls corpse, in a bag (?), found its way to 5A and the hire car. But not an alive Madeleine, imo. I don´t think that the McCanns would have taken the risk to let Madeleine appear there alive, at the Ocean Club.I assume that there are video-cameras installed on the airports. Those cameras will have filmed Madeleine in Portugal as well as in GB.

by Guest 25.11.10 8:51

Lilemor and welcome to the forum thumbsup

by Lilemor1 25.11.10 8:54

candyfloss wrote: [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Lilemor and welcome to the forum [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Hellooooooooo :-)))

by Lilemor1 25.11.10 8:55

Bye, I´ve to work now. See you again later.

by **Tony Bennett** 25.11.10 9:33

Lilemor1 wrote:Hello, I am new! I think that there is a possiblitiy that the McCanns did fly to Portugal with their Madeleine BUT that Madeleine did die within hours after their arrival in Portugal. And the staff of MW did NEVER EVER see Madeleine...Which would have been important for the McCanns to avoid confusion...

Well, Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann seem to agree with you...nearly...according to this statement in today's 'Press and Journal' (northern Scotland newspaper publishing interview with Philomena McCann today): [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

QUOTE

The book will be published on April 28, 2011 – to coincide with the fourth anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance from the Praia da Luz resort.

UNQUOTE

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

by **kikoraton** 25.11.10 9:59

Very observant, Tony. 28 April, eh???
Welcome to our new posters.
Stella - Michael Hannar doesn't claim to have been there at that time. He may have rung the Press with his observation - obviously he doubted the McCann story straight away.
I think the photos of Madeleine in the wendy house may have been taken on the first day, shortly after arrival. There was a lot of discussion of this on another forum. I know some people think that Madeleine didn't even travel to Portugal. Personally, I think she did.

by Guest 25.11.10 10:32

in Diane Websters statement she recounts that they spent some time on the airport of arrival to sort out the childrens seats for the car Gerry had booked. A rather strange story, as David Paine arranged all the
details and allegedly they travelled by a Mark Warner minibus.

kikoraton, your sketch of the madeleine stand-in that was staying in that other bungalow might account for the story Gerry told about them going for breakfast at the millenium. He said that on their way back they got lost and made quite a detour back to their appartment. Might that coincide with walking the 'borrowed Maddie' home?

parapono

by Guest 25.11.10 11:20

kikoraton wrote:
Stella - Michael Hannar doesn't claim to have been there at that time. He may have rung the Press with his observation - obviously he doubted the McCann story straight away.

Good point !!!

by **kikoraton** 25.11.10 12:15

Hi parapono - nice to see you here! Yes, I think Gerry inevitably got confused over all the movements, especially if the "borrowed" Madeleine had to be handed over to her real parents at a certain location. Dianne Webster's story is also interesting because she says that they needed to hang around while they found six child-seats. Was this a crucial slip?

by Cheshire Cat 25.11.10 12:23

kikoraton wrote:Very observant, Tony. 28 April, eh???
Welcome to our new posters.
Stella - Michael Hannar doesn't claim to have been there at that time. He may have rung the Press with his observation - obviously he doubted the McCann story straight away.
I think the photos of Madeleine in the wendy house may have been taken on the first day, shortly after arrival. There was a lot of discussion of this on another forum. I know some people think that Madeleine didn't even travel to Portugal. Personally, I think she did.

I believe the playground pics were taken early on and definitely at the Ocean club. The bald, dark skinned gentleman who appears in one of the playground photographs reappears later on walking along the street with Murat.

by Cheshire Cat 25.11.10 12:36

In order for me to understand this thread a bit more, can anyone help with these questions:

1. If GM did sign in another child as Madeleine McCann, why would he also need to sign in another child at the same time and not only that, but forge the signature of the other childs father?

2. Are you looking for someone who could have been a Maddie substitute or do you have evidence to suggest that a particular girl was used for this role? (it was previously suggested that it could have been MEN)

Cheers

CC

by tiny 25.11.10 12:43

Lilemor1 wrote:Hello, I am new! I think that there is a possiblitiy that the McCanns did fly to Portugal with their Madeleine BUT that Madeleine did die within hours after their arrival in Portugal.And the staff of MW did NEVER EVER see Madeleine.... Which would have been important for the McCanns to avoid confusion... There is also a possibility that IT (Madeleines demise) did not happen in 5a or at the Ocean Club at all.Perhaps the little girls corpse, in a bag (?), found its way to 5A and the hire car. But not an alive Madeleine, imo. I don´t think that the McCanns would have taken the risk to let Madeleine appear there alive, at the Ocean Club.I assume that there are video-cameras installed on the airports. Those cameras will have filmed Madeleine in Portugal as well as in GB.

.

hi lilemor1,i think you could be right about Madeleine,s demise earlier,the smiths sighting and the tanner sighting were all part of the plan,it was gerry carrying a substitute child,and thats the reason gerry has not really mentioned the smiths sighting to make us think it was him and Madeleine that was seen instead it was him and a substitute,the same as when asked about murat he said no comment to try to make out there was something and got us all guessing,that was a red herring and we know there are a few of those swimming about

by Cheshire Cat 25.11.10 12:58

tiny wrote:
Lilemor1 wrote:Hello, I am new! I think that there is a possiblitiy that the McCanns did fly to Portugal with their Madeleine BUT that Madeleine did die within hours after their arrival in Portugal.And the staff of MW did NEVER EVER see Madeleine.... Which would have been important for the McCanns to avoid confusion... There is also a possibility that IT (Madeleines demise) did not happen in 5a or at the Ocean Club at all.Perhaps the little girls corpse, in a bag (?), found its way to 5A and the hire car. But not an alive Madeleine, imo. I don´t think that the McCanns would have taken the risk to let Madeleine appear there alive, at the Ocean Club.I assume that there are video-cameras installed on the airports. Those cameras will have filmed Madeleine in Portugal as well as in GB.
.

hi lilemor1,i think you could be right about Madeleine,s demise earlier,the smiths sighting and the tanner sighting were all part of the plan,it was gerry carrying a substitute child,and thats the reason gerry has not really mentioned the smiths sighting to make us think it was him and Madeleine that was seen instead it was him and a substitute,the same as when asked about murat he said no comment to try to make out there was something and got us all guessing,that was a red herring and we know there are a few of those swimming about

You should read the Tony Bennett article about Murat. It is long and detailed but raises many other questions about Murat and suggests that the "I'm not prepared to comment on that" comment from GM was not a red-herring but perhaps a man being caught off-guard.

by Guest 25.11.10 13:30

Cheshire Cat wrote:In order for me to understand this thread a bit more, can anyone help with these questions:

1. If GM did sign in another child as Madeleine McCann, why would he also need to sign in another child at the same time and not only that, but forge the signature of the other childs father?

Perhaps the substitute MM was known to EN and for the substitue child to happily go somewhere she was not expecting to go to, she needed a little friend to go along with her. Going along to a strange place, with a strange man on her own, might have been a bit too much for her ! As for forging another persons signature, maybe RN did not want to be part of it?

2. Are you looking for someone who could have been a Maddie substitute or do you have evidence to suggest that a particular girl was used for this role? (it was previously suggested that it could have been MEN)

As far as I know the substitute child is yet to be identified.

by tiny 25.11.10 13:32

Cheshire Cat wrote:
tiny wrote:
Lilemor1 wrote:Hello, I am new! I think that there is a possiblitiy that the McCanns did fly to Portugal with their Madeleine BUT that Madeleine did die within hours after their arrival in Portugal.And the staff of MW did NEVER EVER see Madeleine.... Which would have been important for the McCanns to avoid confusion... There is also a possibility that IT (Madeleines demise) did not happen in 5a or at the Ocean Club at all.Perhaps the little girls corpse, in a bag (?), found its way to 5A and the hire car. But not an alive Madeleine, imo. I don´t think that the McCanns would have taken the risk to let Madeleine appear there alive, at the Ocean Club.I assume that there are video-cameras installed on the airports. Those cameras will have filmed Madeleine in Portugal as well as in GB.
.

hi lilemor1,i think you could be right about Madeleine,s demise earlier,the smiths sighting and the tanner sighting were all part of the plan,it was gerry carrying a substitute child,and thats the reason gerry has not really mentioned the smiths sighting to make us think it was him and Madeleine that was seen instead it was him and a substitute,the same as when asked about murat he said no comment to try to make out there was something and got us all guessing,that was a red herring and we know there are a few of those swimming about

You should read the Tony Bennett article about Murat. It is long and detailed but raises many other questions about Murat and suggests that the "I'm not prepared to comment on that" comment from GM was not a red-herring but perhaps a man being caught off-guard.

well if gerry was caught of guard then i dont believe Murat had any thing to do with Madeleine going missing but something else, i will hold fire on my thoughts untill the tanner v murat case actually gets into court because i think this will never happen if gerry or kate know murat as there might be a journo who actually likes digging stuff up like they did with Murat before and might find there is a connection between them

by Autumn 25.11.10 14:11

and a big welcome to all new posters

Here is the link to Tony's article about Robert Murat, well worth reading for anyone who has not yet read it thumbsup

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

(click on 'articles' at top of page)

by Cheshire Cat 25.11.10 14:49

Stella wrote:
Cheshire Cat wrote:In order for me to understand this thread a bit more, can anyone help with these questions:

1. If GM did sign in another child as Madeleine McCann, why would he also need to sign in another child at the same time and not only that, but forge the signature of the other childs father?

Perhaps the substitute MM was known to EN and for the substitue child to happily go somewhere she was not expecting to go to, she needed a little friend to go along with her. Going along to a strange place, with a strange man on her own, might have been a bit too much for her ! As for forging another persons signature, maybe RN did not want to be part of it?

2. Are you looking for someone who could have been a Maddie substitute or do you have evidence to suggest that a particular girl was used for this role? (it was previously suggested that it could have been MEN)

As far as I know the substitute child is yet to be identified.

Thanks Stella.

by Guest 25.11.10 15:21

hi all. I know this will read as nitpicking but still... However convinced I am of the necessity to voice our concern in a safe way as to not invite the Carter Rucks, it would be almost as bad to copy Gerry mcCanns non-language. Ill explain: if there is evidence, the stage of suggesting is over. Indications do suggest, or point in a certain direction. If there is clearcut evidence of something, you can state it as such. All IMO of course. And one more thing, if a poster has gotten evidence that might lead to reopening the investigation, then it is not advisable to state it on this public forum, but to consult a trustworthy moderator how to get that to the Pt police. And in the meantime mumm is the word! Better safe than sorry.
nits picked parapono

by Guest 25.11.10 15:27

Exactly parapono shhhh

say no more smilie

by Judge Mental 25.11.10 16:26

parapono wrote:hi all. I know this will read as nitpicking but still... However convinced I am of the necessity to voice our concern in a safe way as to not invite the Carter Rucks, it would be almost as bad to copy Gerry mcCanns non-language. Ill explain: if there is evidence, the stage of suggesting is over. Indications do suggest, or point in a certain direction. If there is clearcut evidence of something, you can state it as such. All IMO of course. And one more thing, if a poster has gotten evidence that might lead to reopening the investigation, then it is not advisable to state it on this public forum, but to consult a trustworthy moderator how to get that to the Pt police. And in the meantime mumm is the word! Better safe than sorry.
nits picked parapono

Agreed. One would also add that kikoraton, Stella and kangdang are three of the very best people to contact by PM, if anybody has information they would prefer not to state on the board.

by **kikoraton** 25.11.10 16:45

Cheshirecat asked:"1. If GM did sign in another child as Madeleine McCann, why would he also need to sign in another child at the same time and not only that, but forge the signature of the other childs father?"
This is the BIG question, which only Robert Naylor and Gerry McCann can answer. But my tentative view is that, the father of the substitute (sounds like) Madeleine went with GM to sign in two girls, one for each man. (This applies in the majority of cases - in others, for example, only one of the girls seems to have attended creche. There always have to be exceptions, especially as children are not always malleable!). The substitute's parent wishes to be totally incognito. In fact, it has to be so, or the whole deception is exposed. On their way to the creche, they pick up EN. GM signs in the substitute child (sounds like Madeleine, and that of course is what he writes). The substitute's parent is happy to allow GM to do so. The substitute's parent is not EN's father, who hasn't shown up. No need for him to do so - two dads for two girls is quite enough! So GM has to sign in EN as well. In doing so, the stupid man forgets to alter the slant and formation of the letters and numbers, but of course he is obliged to attempt a scribble representing RN's signature. I believe that the sub and EN are good friends, and that the sub had blond hair and was about 90 cm tall.
"Are you looking for someone who could have been a Maddie substitute or do you have evidence to suggest that a particular girl was used for this role? (it was previously suggested that it could have been MEN)"
I think M.E.N. of Wigan is out of the picture now.

by soulthief 25.11.10 18:40

Is this leading to Madeleine may have never gone to the club?

by Cheshire Cat 25.11.10 18:51

This theory is getting pretty complicated, trying to explain how GM needed to sign in two girls.

Kate also signed Madeleine into the creche ? But Kate didn't sign in EN as well? Why would it be only GM that had to sign in two children?

by **kikoraton** 25.11.10 18:57

I don't think she ever went to the Lobsters. Otherwise, how could a substitute have been used? Everyone would have known..

by **kikoraton** 25.11.10 19:50

KM only ever signed "Madeleine" in when EN was not present. I.e. when she didn't show up. or when (on the first morning) there was a 35 minute interval between G signing in EN, and K arriving with "Madeleine". K certainly never signed in EN.
Áinne Naylor always signed EN out, except once when nobody did.
G usually signed "Madeleine" out in the mornings, K in the afternoons. Except on 3 May, when K signed her out from both sessions. I think (thanks for reminding me, Stella) that was because G had an important mobile phone call to answer at exactly the time K signed her out in the morning.

by ufercoffy 25.11.10 20:01

kikoraton wrote:Áinne Naylor always signed EN out, except once when nobody did.

What do you mean by that? Is EN still in the creche?

by **Tony Bennett** 25.11.10 21:33

I've re-read this thread and have pondered about a few things.

Let us accept for a moment the 'kiko' hypothesis is correct: that Dr Gerald McCann took another Madeleine and Elizabeth Naylor to the creche and forged the signature of one or the other Robert Naylor.

One question then that has been barely touched on in the 45 pages so far is: What happened to the substitute Madeleine after the creche closed on the night of Thursday 3 May?

Because, for sure, that Madeleine could not have been at the creche on the morning of Friday 4 May.

by littlepixie 25.11.10 21:58

I have got a bit lost on this thread sorry. I thought the Madel(e)ine and Elizabeth were the same girl and there was someone (GM) signing two signatures for one girl? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **Tony Bennett** 25.11.10 22:44

littlepixie wrote:I have got a bit lost on this thread sorry. I thought the Madel(e)ine and Elizabeth were the same girl and there was someone (GM) signing two signatures for one girl?

AN ATTEMPTED SUMMARY OF THIS THREAD

I will try and summarise, being more of an observer than a researcher on this thread.

No, that is not correct.

The basic thesis advanced by 'kiko' and supported by a few others (not saying whether I agree or not, just summarising) is this.

* That one way or another Madeleine died on Saturday 28th or early Sunday 29th. Her body must have lain in Apartment 5A for a period after death, howsoever caused.

* That this was pre-planned and that the McCanns had a 'Madeleine substitute' already lined up. That was another blonde girl called Madeleine, about whose identity this thread has speculated

* That from Sunday until Thursday, the Madeleine that everyone saw was not the real Madeleine McCann

* That on a number of occasions Dr Gerald McCann took the substitute Madeleine to the creche along with another girl, Elizabeth Naylor

* Elizabeth Naylor is the daughter of Robert Graham Naylor, a London-based banker, and Ainne G Naylor, who inter alia is the Secretary of the PTA at the primary school where Eliabeth and another of her children attend

* That when Dr Gerald McCann took the two girls to the creche, he wrote in Elizabeth's entry on the creche sheets (the hadwriting makes this clear), and in the process (a) forged the signature of this Robert Naylor (or possibly another Robert Naylor) and (b) used other devices to try and make out that Naylor had actually brought Elizabeth to the creche e.g. placing the arrival times 5 minutes apart and using 12-hour time for one entry and 24-hour time for the next.

If 'kiko' and the other researchers think my summary is in any way in error or incomplete, I trust they will soon say so.

by **Tony Bennett** 25.11.10 22:44

Tony Bennett wrote:
littlepixie wrote:I have got a bit lost on this thread sorry. I thought the Madel(e)ine and Elizabeth were the same girl and there was someone (GM) signing two signatures for one girl?
AN ATTEMPTED SUMMARY OF THIS THREAD

I will try and summarise, being more of an observer than a researcher on this thread.

No, that is not correct.

The basic thesis advanced by 'kiko' and supported by a few others (not saying whether I agree or not, just summarising) is this.

* That one way or another Madeleine died on Saturday 28th or early Sunday 29th. Her body must have lain in Apartment 5A for a period after death, howsoever caused.

* That this was pre-planned and that the McCanns had a 'Madeleine substitute' already lined up. That was another blonde girl called Madeleine, about whose identity this thread has speculated

* That from Sunday until Thursday, the Madeleine that everyone saw was not the real Madeleine McCann

* That on a number of occasions Dr Gerald McCann took the substitute Madeleine to the creche along with another girl, Elizabeth Naylor

* Elizabeth Naylor is the daughter of Robert Graham Naylor, a London-based banker, and Ainne G Naylor, who inter alia is the Secretary of the PTA at the primary school where Eliabeth and another of her children attend

* That when Dr Gerald McCann took the two girls to the creche, he wrote in Elizabeth's entry on the creche sheets (the hadwriting makes this clear), and in the process (a) forged the signature of this Robert Naylor (or possibly another Robert Naylor) and (b) used other devices to try and make out that Naylor had actually brought Elizabeth to the creche e.g. placing the arrival times 5 minutes apart and using 12-hour time for one entry and 24-hour time for the next.

If 'kiko' and the other researchers think my summary is in any way in error or incomplete, I trust they will soon say so.

I should add that the advocates of this hypothesis (again not saying whether I agree with it or not) contend that it solves the following issues:

* It assists all those who for one reason or another claim this was all premeditated e.g. those who feel for example that the whole setting up of the Fund was also premeditated

* It explains all the sightings of 'Madeleine' during that week

* It explains how the creche records appear to show Madeleine attending the creche each day

* It explains the contrasting descriptions of Madeleine by others

* It could account for Murat being summoned over to help on 30 April - and explain why Dr Gerald McCann would not comment on whether he already knew Murat

* It would explain Dr Gerald McCann's 'I'm not here to enjoy myself' comment

* It would help to explain why no trace of Madeleine's DNA could be found in Praia da Luz - and Dr Gerald McCann had to return to Leicester to get some

* It would help to explain why the McCanns used an out-of-date photo of Madeleine for the search on and after 3 May

* It would help to explain why the McCanns and the rest of the 'Tapas 7' had a dearth of photos of Madeleine, apart from the 'tennis balls photo' and the hugely controversial 'last photo', again only produced after a visit back to England.

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

This theory would clearly explain a great many other puzzles about this case as well.

On the other hand, there are a number of strong objections to it.