Leave No Stone Unturned

please, do not tell me, such courses are really there, and made by ceops, are they?

i mean, it would result in a full mind conversation in only using mm, mmm, mmmmm,mmm, mm, in all its possible meaning, concluded with a firm aha!!!

it is already something with what the reporters had produced about this topics, but after it some pages back came again back on two letters, the mm citation, i realized, i actually can and do much to often, on my own, a full conversation with only me and myself in mmm, naaa, ehhh, ssss, huuuh while reading the crap. so i think i have to update my linkdn profile, with being fluent in neanderthal language too. 

a shame we never have been able to get to hear the tapes of the tapas 7 rogatories, the problem with neanderthal is, you must hear it to get the gist of what it means, and at least david payne must speak it very good too. video would make it even better, there is usually a lot of movement in the head and facial parts too.

it even looks to be, the m sounds have the largest set of meanings. and others do understand what you mean with it too. 

but there is even something else with the piece, he was asked to write for madeleine, but that was not what he really did, he did write an excuse note for their parents, there is nothing in it for, or even about madeleine at all. 
and when you start reading it sentence for sentence, is is quite a odd piece.




but the most common full question in my head with all these kind of written pieces is always, are these people for real? do they really write it all down from mind, heart and soul, or just because you have to, most times because they pay you for it. this one only looks to have only called to soon, i know of that guy, and got the most fingers pointing, than you have to write something. but hehe, shipman was a doctor too. we have to accept they come in a variety of characters. 

but if you cannot took up parental responsibilities over your own family, how would that work out over your patients? 

take this one;

Our profession can relate directly to Madeleine's disappearance, and many doctors have personalised the tragedy. 


is this guy really telling us, it is to be quite normal to loose a child on holiday as you are a doctor?


luckily for their offspring, that is never became clear in the numbers. not even in the uk itself. 

If truth be known no doubt they did leave their children alone in their apartments every night to fend for themselves - if they checked every 10 minutes there's no saying any one of the children was safe, a tragic accident can take only a few seconds.

The Tapas restaurant staff witness statements verify the group were individually absent from the table during each evening - the frequency is of course very debatable, as is who went where. We've only got their word for it.

Sometimes the simplest answers are the best.

Sorry I don't seem to have made myself clear. I meant the Tapas staff verified the fact that individual members of the group periodically left the table to check on their children and then returned to the restaurant.

From Tapas bar witness statements..

JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (waiter)

Of the times in which this group had dined in that bar it is [was] often [for] someone from the group to go to check at the apartments the state of the children (their offspring) who were sleeping there.

RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA (waiter)

It was usual [for] someone of that group, to leave to go to the apartments to check the children (children of the group members) who slept there.

That Gerald McCann, the missing girls father, informed him that the children of the couples friends were in another apartment and that they were being looked after by the mother of one of the friends, who was never present in the apartment whilst the inquiries were being carried out. 

Finally, he states that the photograph of the missing girl was handed to him by Gerald McCann, the girls father, he does not remember seeing the photo in the possession of any other person.
Reads, ratifies, signs.

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

The Children of the others were being looked after in another Apartment, and Gerry already had a Photograph ready ?

on that evening of 3 may indeed, the friends who had been in, or very near 5a, only fiona was a mother. rachel and jane looked at their own most of the time, but diane, the mother of the friends looked after the paynes. 

i think it was a good explanation, because both david and fiona kept around and in , or just ouside 5a that evening when the gnr got there. 

it is just a chronological summoning up of that evening after the gnr arrived. 

and there is a better safer link, i don't have a clue why google often send you to the older http addresses, but there are https links too. i only still got it when i take one from earlier searches and bookmarked it. 

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


it is far more curious that russell escapes the inside of 5a in his rogatory and still has been searching through a camera and written two different time lines, and even jane describes russell inside 5a on that evening of may 3, when the gnr was doing their work. when she came in to tell about tannerman the first, but none had a really coherent story about, zero hour and the next day. 
well before or much after that they keep on mostly incoherent. so at least they can show consistency. 

the gnr must have met all except diane, rachel did a run to tell the gnr about jane het tannerman the first, and later jane took that story by herself. 

russell had one evening that week off, because of a sick daughter, matt and rachel had the runners on separate nights. and some have kate booked for the tuesday, but that is not what they themselves stated, both are also consistent incoherent about that. 

it is more easy and clear to follow a string of noodles with your eyes and see where it is going in a pack uncooked ones, than making a understandable pattern of the tapas 9.  they left just far to many stones, the size of alps behind. trying to turn the stones would not work well. 

but it can be worse, if you ever have time look up on google books the book of danny collins. it was in its full on there, but really after chapter 4 i had seriously to have a lie down in a dark room. so it could have been much worse.

@sharoni#610

That all depends on the ACTUAL Day of poor Madeleine’s passing….

And IF she and the Twins were part of that Arrangement.

i do remember that amaral told, the pj toyed a bit around with the idea, all children could have been in one apartment in the evening, but also that they all could have been checking by the poolside patio doors, but could never establish it. i think even on different times when he talked about that chapter. i think some was also in his first book. 

it would quite impractical to keep all children together and it would go against their reasons to not use the evening creche. and it would not be different with or without madeleine. the adult on duty had still to eat too, and only russell was catered with a meal. 

rachel must have been in on tuesday may 1, because she is always used as the one who did hear no child cry from 5a, when pamela fenn did. 

a shame no one was able to ask silvia batista to tell what she meant with the onliners that made it out from the time after she ended up in and around 5a that evening and night. she of course would be at least a bit grumpy and biased, because she had to also protect the name of the ocean club at the same time. 
she translated jane her first tannerman 1 meeting and a reaction is known that she must have said at a time, that never could have been a true story, because jane would never could have seen someone from the point jane described it. as she had the story first hand, i would love to hear more about how she meant that.

her statement is far more about the organisation of the ocean club. still she could understand all parties, english and portuguese. there are only little bits. she was at least not very impressed by the tapas 9.

still rachel is often be used as a counter witness to pamela fenn, but if pamela states she heard a young child cry the evening of tuesday may 1, rachel could not be a counter witness at all about a crying child on tuesday, because she just was in the tapas restaurant. and pamela fenn was not at home on the wednesday. when rachel kept her day in, in 5b. rachel never could tell if a child cried anywhere in block 5 on tuesday, because she was not there.

rachel kept in on wednesday, and the mix up with the crying episode she was asked about by kate was part of the she asked why we did not come saga, madeleine told about on thursday breakfast time. but rachel could not say she did hear crying from 5a. 

two separate events of different days. kate could not name a event about the crying madeleine asked her about, and that means there was no counter witness for tuesday. so nothing that could counter pamela fenn on that.
there was simply no other who could be a counter witness to it. 

rachel did already got sick, or poorly on tuesday evening by her words, but stayed in and around 5b on the wednesday, and was not at the tapas restaurant. 

the result is that only two people did reflect to a time children in 5a did cry, one is pamela fenn on tuesday, the other by the strange story per kate told by madeleine, unknown time and day.

crusader is that not a hickup, in most statements jane brought russell his meal over. only on thursday jane took over from russell to stay with the kids.

crusader wrote:That where it came from,  Gerry told Vitor Martins PJ officer, the children were being looked after in one apartment.
He was reffering to the night of 3rd May and not every night.
It's also a mystery as to why the twins were left in their cots in a cold and noisy room, why were they not taken out to be looked after.

The various statements taken at different periods of time cast shadow over the whereabouts of the twins after Kate McCann raised the alarm - the most pertinent being that Gerry McCann stood guard outside the children's bedroom so they weren't disturbed.  

Taking time differences and language differences (translation) into consideration, in my considered opinion the twins were not in that bedroom during the invasion of people when they apparently slept through the mayhem.  I believe they had already been moved to another apartment, who wouldn't under the circumstances, the rest being only a story to bolster the sedated abduction scenario.  All that rubbish about Kate McCann checking for breathing - if you thought your child/ren might be at deaths door because someone had sedated them you would panic and take them to a medical centre - not sit on the bed faffing about what ifs.  Were the twins sedated as well as Madeleine when she was abducted - there was a lot of emphasis placed on sedation, I don't think sedation entered anywhere in this story, I think it was fabrication to facilitate the phantom abductor.

No one but no one would leave children asleep or otherwise at the scene of a crime, instinct dictates that you remove them to a safe place - even if the parents were prostrated by trauma, if not they someone would have stepped in and moved the children away from thcrime scene.

Gonçalo Amaral said at the time of GNR/PJ inspection the two cots were empty - that might have been when he considered the possibility that the children all slept in one apartment every night whilst the group were dining.

I've said time and time again, Dianne Webster was an oddball, it could be said she was only on that holiday to help with the Payne's kids - she wasn't part of their 30 something set.  If one babysitter was required to care for all the children, why not her, she is the most logical person to volunteer night duty but she didn't did she,  She was seen every night at the Tapas bar with the rest of the group.

My view today, the group were selfish enough to leave their individual children alone in their respective apartments for a couple of hours resulting in the fate of Madeleine McCann

Why has this even become the object of issue?

It is made clear by the witness statements that the children's mothers were not present at apartment 5a after Kate McCann raised the alarm because they had their own children to attend to - to look after in their particular apartments.  The twins were moved to David Payne's apartment, quite when has never been satisfactorily established.

Where is the discrepancy, where is the conspiracy?

No point trying to find a chink when all is clear as crystal - even logic dictates.

madeleine by KATE MCCANN

David reiterated his concerns about roadblocks and border notification and I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated.

On the night Madeleine was taken, you may remember, Gerry and I had been very concerned that Sean and Amelie had hardly moved in their cots, let alone woken up, despite the commotion in the apartment. Since Madeleine was snatched apparently without making a sound, we had always suspected that all three children might have been sedated by the abductor. We mentioned this to the police that night and several more times in the following weeks, but no testing of urine, blood or hair, which could have revealed the presence of drugs, had ever been done.

While this didn’t totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it meant nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise.

the statements of silvia batista tells a lot about what happened to the twins, she arrived shortly before, some minutes before the gnr arrived, she had to come in after het boss called her at home in lagos.

she was noticed by phone around 22.30 hours. arrived at 5a first, walked in and got a notice the gnr arrived at the main reception, she left to catch them. 

in her statement the twins stay in their cots in 5a, until the police asked to put then elsewhere. it is silvia batista herself who take the toys and blanket from the cots and gave then too kate, after kate asked for it. 

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

no gerry holding the door, the door was simply closed at times, gerry was the one who in the company of silvia batista handed a bundle of what looked like the same picture of madeleine to the gnr, it was at first not something the mccann party made a decision, but the gnr had asked sylvia batista for all the passports of the family and pictures of the child. 

her statements are to the point, i would love to have seen one in the same style as the rogatories from her.

she had mostly an outsider role, but bias in her statements could come from being called back to work, after you working day was long over and your mind was probably far more into reaching for bedtime, for some stupid tourist who could not keep an eye on their kids, and her position as manager in the ocean club. 
still she was the one that could observe the tapas 9 from very early on. 

she was no official translator, but it was a common practice needed in her job. an official translator often has to only translate what is said without any bias. good ones are to be impartial, only the words itself do count. 
but someone who gets most translation experience in a job like silvia had, will have always some bias, people could agree, being neutral or against her position. but it becomes a more natural translation, because she not only will be able to understand what people are saying, but also place it in the environment they talked about.
she would hardly escaping the middle man position. the difference is, only the words put in translation, or putting the story all together in a real life setting. 

well the paynes are described as being hysterical, i can see how she reached that, david and fiona where there in and out when silvia was their, have been part of the group that showed no commitment to search for the child at all, in her opinion. to call out for the grand gesture of closing the borders, i think she was only polite to keep it at hysterical and not call them hypocrites. 

sylvia batista would have been the most likely to have been instructed the portuguese workers of the ocean club, she looks to be a quite hands on manager too. 
i would love to know what she also could have in the investigation by off record information, and informal conversations. 

and of course there are bits and pieces missing, from most people of the ocean club and mark warner too, it was only their work place, most people do not care very much for a company, but they would not bite the hand that is feeding them. so for the workers there are their own toes that can restrict in what they tell, but the same about when they are under hours. 
it mostly will show in gaps in the information, they would not really tell you that talking with each other was just gossiping and just to kill time when under duty. but to get from such an conversation into a possible observation is difficult. and people are very versatile in solutions to not have to do they have been hired and paid for. but that has not to be ending up in a statement , your boss can read too. 
so when there is no impression of a natural flow in such statements, it has often nothing to do, or tell in the case. 

it is always important to look who you are putting a question too, and if there could be bias from other sources in it. most have nothing to do with lying, or stirring the pot. and it can be different in what fase a case is.

as long as you are still building a sound timeline, you do also want to know all snippets, and if you only can get access to it of records or informal, you can always go back and put the needed effort in to make important stuff into a formal statement. 

and usually you start out with so much possible lines, the selection must be only based on what you get your hands on. and there are often after the first stage when cases could travel even multiple times of day from one line into a very different one. there is never a golden key, it always must be all information together that tells what did happend. the gaps are always difficult, because that is where you yourself can put bias in. 

and in an investigation you do look into what you need to keep a specific line up and running. to find ways to get to that information, but you have to hang on to that line and also place it under scrutiny in all others that still are on the board. 

nothing is really thrown out ever, only it gets another position of importance. a lot of what get a lower ranking is most often because it was not about your case itself, how promising it looked, it was happening, but not in the case at hand. nothing happens in a stand alone situation. 

if you think social media looks like a cat fight, well i have experienced much worse during briefings and team talk. it is not just a job, even if you learned to control your emotions pretty good, it just cannot always work, and you are still evenly mad in your mind. 

this case about such a young child, is a difficult case because of just that. and it is much easier to keep only looking at a case, when things are only material. officers of the law are in an investigation also nothing more than a tool. the law itself is only written on paper, it can not do much or anything by its own, it needs tools to work. and there are many kinds of tools in the toolbox of a case. and it is never just one that really stands out and you can only start giving meaning full points to them when a case reached a final conclusion. 

for me this case has only one victim, and i too are one that is influenced by the grabbing of the ultimate innocent victim syndrome. we all have been once that child, we can reflect about how much influence we have as a young child on how our lives unfold, you decide not what happened with you or around you on that age. 

and i do not care about all the adults their toes in this case. you cannot exclude toes because of feelings for the adults. that is a luxury position you only can serve with hindsight, when a case indeed has reached an final conclusion. people are always still people, there is no role you can choose to uptake or end up in, that tells if you are of any quality between utterly bad and ultimate good.

and yes i have personal bias in the parent child relations department, i know parents are not good people because they are just parents. they come in all kind of variations, and you cannot keep it the soft approach just because you are in a role, i have an enormous curiosity in how people tick, how that gets into result, i am a hard one when it comes to invest in relations to all people automatically. my relations to people are based on mutual respect and has to be earned, by me and the other party. 

i do not softe up because people are parents, old, more stupid (i prefer not yet found the manual and instructions more), because they show tears or not, i am not easily to impress by titles, rank or money to a name. that is just temporary reached stuff, it is not really something that belongs to the personality. 

and i am not ready with this case. even a german side liner would not make me ready with it, because it can never giving the final conclusion as it stands. 
and there are far more lines to still look into, and i do not see the need to make them opposites, for me it is not needed to see it as degradation of the work of others, but there are based on the same very little facts and circumstances other lines there, that deserve looking into. 

and yes in what you accept as conclusions about finding things likely or possible or unlikely or impossible is fed by your own mind and life experiences, your own bias is even in your gut feelings. 

i myself has still no line found that is good enough to accept that is what did happen that week in may 2007 in portugal. my very first impression of the mccanns was they do know very well what happened, and i did try a lot of lines to see if that impression could be changed by facts and i never reached a point i was able to get to something other as they do know what happened, but after that where that happened stand exactly for is for me still not just one solution in one line that shows enough to see it as the conclusion. 

i can accept you cannot always find a fact you need, or can not prove points, that is not so different from working an investigation itself as an officer. that position gives you most times also a lot more tools to get after them, but still nothing is sure beforehand. also if you are an officer your hands are also restricted by things the member of a public has not. so it is not always that easy to say what position works best. 

if an investigation has the people to do it, different lines are often worked and followed up by different teams, they still meet up to check their findings to that of the others. and it is evenly as hard to not make the teams opponents, there is no need for, because it is still there for the same goal, solving that case.

there is another difference too, between officers working a case and others who look into the case. the first get paid to do it also, what is nice. but there is very little room for personalities. if you find something important, you are just the lucky guy in a moment, most times some whispers of well done, a hand on a shoulder, a shake with a hand. but there is not much room or time for honer. you are just on tool in the box, and the function or quality of a tool could be different,m but you need all tools to bring a case into a conclusion.
and in reality the police never solves cases at all. it is not their task to do it even. they are the toolbox to get the information so it gets in a manageable format to put it to the test and that means court. 
cases are solved in court. or not. but only if all the possible steps in the courts are made there can be a final answer and say the case is solved. 
people in the public, who have no protocol or restrictions by their own principles, can choose how they get praised. they can earn it on merit and dedication, like tony bennett did. he made the miles, he offered much of his own name, personality and life up for it. without ever suggesting it was about tony at all. 

quite a lot of people had put the question out to me; and what do you think about tony benneth.
my answer was almost always the same in context. with tony you know what you se is what you get.
he is fully aware of his own principles and stands for them, will always defends them, and he stands for his opinion. and he has all the rights in the worlds to do that, because of the effort and merit of what he put in it to get to his opinion, because it is all his. 

the next most asked question was, do you agree with tony benneth. and that is always a less conclusive answer. on points sometimes i do, on others i do not. but i had also  personal experience, in private messages and even by email. and our life experiences and all that results from that are often very different ende up in both our opinions about all kind of things. but it is impossible to get tony in a state of being impolite, he just won't. he is not the kind of guy that is out there to break others to pieces, and it is a shame so much people tried exactly to do that to him. there is no need to have fear of tony at all. 

tony is the kind of guy, when he knocks on your door, that you could let in without any worries at all. he probably would offer you to talk about what you want, he would not dictate you at all. he only will take from you what he can made us of in his growing into an opinion next thing, but will not forget who delivered it to him. 

he did all he did under his very own personal name, i like to think because for him it does not matter if we know, or not know what his name is, only that he takes responsibilities for what is put next to it, it is never about the name, it are the words besides it. 
and i like to still make use of these words, they always be a extra impuls to keep looking serious in all points of view. for me they are mostly tony's line. often tony's team line too. so even when i do look for other lines, i can reflect back to that. i do not see it as an against tony line. just a different one.

and i can accept, tony does not want to discuss all and every thing over, and he does have no need to do that, his work is freely for all available on this forum, he has not to repeat all endlessly over again. i also not suppose him to keep his voice out when it gets functional. tony made his bed and earns the right to lie in it.

and looking at the same item, from a different angle is for me not meant to discredit others, tony or all others. it is not about who it right or wrong, or eve more right or more wrong, just looking what another angles can deliver in answers, and we will probably never end up in a state , that we can even start to think to put our views and points to a real test. 
i still have not reached that state of making my bed, i always end up on thinking about a different colour of sheets, a bit warmer blanket or not, so far too early to step in and lie down in it. 

and i don't know if i ever get to a specific line of explanations that i can agree too full-hearted as  for me this could be the answer to the complete mystery of madeleine mccann. and it does not mean others could or must be right or wrong. 
i see it still as an ongoing journey, and i do like it to keep this forum, and tony and all dedicated (once) posters with me in it. 


the last part i wanted to say, for me a stone that has to be turned as well. now the forum is on the table, i do not want to get into a misunderstanding, that when the forum gets the chance to go on, for me at least it does not mean, all that work and effort until now was putting in, must be seen as trash, or toes to just put your foot on. for me it is impossible to even let me unthink about all other lines others came out and about, my memory is not perfect, so i ofte have to look back, and i do like it when i get corrected, and if that is because you only think different about it, or i just ended up making it messy, or are simply dead wrong. probably one of the last two.

so let's turn some more stones....

The Trampling of the “Crime Scene” was most likely pre-planned by Gerry who had read this passage in his Bedtime Stories. The Book was lying on the Sofa in the living Room in Apartment 5A.

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

Nigel Moore
03 January 2009
Thanks to Dr Martin Roberts for quotes

The PJ video recorded that Gerry McCanns' choice of bedtime reading, whilst staying at the Vista Mar villa, included 'The Interpretation of Murder' by Jed Rubenfeld.

A seemingly inappropriate choice of book for a man who believed his daughter had been abducted and could quite possibly be in the hands of a predatory paedophile. 

However, when one considers some quotes from the book, this may not have been such a peculiar choice of reading material:

"The announcement was pure invention, but it was believed, and therefore within three weeks it was so. Mr Banwell had mastered the great truth that truth itself, like buildings, can be manufactured." (p.9).

"I cannot be expected to solve a murder if the evidence is trampled and tampered with before I arrive." (p.22).

"In this heat, he explained, decomposition would rapidly set in if the corpse was not refrigerated at once." (p.28).

"Littlemore studied the bedroom. 'Miss Acton', he said, 'how do you think the man got in here last night?'

'Well, he must have – why, I don't know.'

It was, Littlemore reflected, certainly a puzzle. There were only two doors to the Acton house, the front and the back... ....Could the intruder have climbed in through a window?" (p.299).


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

I'm not attempting to forensically examine the exact time the twins were removed from apartment 5a, my post was only intending to point out that no parent/s or anyone else involved at the crime scene would leave two sleeping children amidst all the clamour.

Thus I believe the story was greatly embellished to instill the sedated and abducted by paedophile mantra, both in the locale and abroad. The press and media certainly picked-up on the story - understandably under the circumstances, not knowing the detail.

The book 'The Interpretation of Murder' was seen and photographed in the villa the McCanns rented two months after their daughter disappeared.

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

for me that is also the most important of the twins that been left behind.

it is one of the momewnts the mccanns did show non typical behaviour for parents.

the first was already leaving them behind and run out, and tell us, it was a no longer, if it ever was a secure place, so with the open window and the shutter up, and a not locked back door. 

at least that is what is makes it most unlikely as a story to be called something that happened.

but if you child was indeed abducted, and you still have to leave, it is very unnatural to leave these two just behind. certainly when you in your own words tell you already failed the oldest one, by not being there. okay that part they remembered pretty late and they just put another interview in for it. 

so if you are so sure for yourself, that room was broken into through shutters and window, how would you fix that in your mind to keep the other two there, after only closing it a bit, and just shut the door.

the twins taken to a safer place as not even from their own urgency, but from the gnr and pj because they wanted to looked at what was told to be a possible crime scene. 

also a minor point extra, because when the twins been swept to 5h the payne apartment they had to be transferred through the dark, cold and wild windy climate in praia da luz, and as silvia batista later took toys and a blanket, it was probably not a problem to not use a blanket during bringing them over. 

one of the serious point why they did not want to use the evening creche service was to not break a habit and having to walk with the through the cold of night. 

the same is with the sleeping like rocks, but i did hear this week in one of these interviews on youtube in the video's from the deception detective guy, something remarkable, it was said while kate looked for madeleine within 5a, the twins became stirred. i only realized it by afterthought. 
so they can hardly been very good under sedation. 

and it is just a pretty consistant factor, that forgetting about their kids, they are in both not their first duty of care, that are only themselves. 

not things that can be become unrecognized by putting just another statement out, or talking about proud daddy moments. 

also there is no remark of both, about the sleeping as a rock in the statements, the abductor with the good stuff was much later arriving in the book of tales from 5a. 
the complete illusion of the sound sleeping children is also consistently confusion. there are as many bits about good as bad sleeping habits. so you never will be able to get a nominal threshold in behaviour of the 3 children in that. still at least 3 people found it a strange situation, fiona payne, and both the officers of the gnr. 

i heard quite a lot over all other children their habits in that field, but that tells very little about the 3 little mccanns, of course. or these children are nominally sound sleepers, as a rock, or they have a need of a sleeping potion. 

and there was no good reason at all to keep the twins in situ at all. no one would mind it if they had been taken out and brought to one of the others to mind. for most people it would be first choice to not let them wake up in a room full of strangers and starting to use their full decibel reach. 

also another point it, all these stories about moving doors, who moved and moved, had been even closed when the twins had been still in, so there was not a very great urge to keep them under view and best hearing circumstances too. 

than not even any great urgency to speak to people who have been around the kids, matt was even in 5a he said, i do think that part never did happen in the way it was stated at all. but he said it, rachel had to said it and the mccanns had to said it, even russell puts his two half cents in. 

the only other source was directly above and that was by the given and stated stories not a friendly handling off at all. pamela fenn was still up and it would be very likely at that time of day that came with the use of lights in that apartment, the moyes directly above pamela fenn already slept, and got much later on in contact, and not so much is to get from their story in the media about did you seen something odd earlier this evening, but far more if the had a computer/laptop they could use. 

the only signs of parental concern was in fiona payne her statements about kate checking with her hand on the back of the twins as if she was checking, if they had been still breathing. 
for me that is actually the only red flag situation for the possibility of having been sedated. but even stronger at least a sign there habit that evening was outside the normal range of behaviour for the twins. 

both parents mccann did not talk about it that same evening, that is was strange, out of habits, or very normal for the twins to sleep through all. 

still they had to make the choice to leave the back door on the patio closed but unlocked, because otherwise the children would wake up because of the opening of the unlocking of front door. 

it is in all its ways a very crooked story, with a lot of back filling, and different ways to explain the same part of events. 

i could understand the odd white lie, some polishing up of little bits. but they are very good in telling to us how we have to look a them, but never are delivering themselves in a way, that fits together as the same picture with the words spoken in each of them. if it is not in your mind, you would never show what you tell.

and i think most people who get into the line something is off, do not even see immediately how that is exactly happening, i still see new very little bits every time i look at the old interviews. 

it is the same what is strange as that she told she said to the pike advisor, that she did not know how to act as a parent of a abducted child, and you know, that is never a secret, because if you are indeed a parent of an abducted child you become that. it is not something you have to study for, read at least 3 books about, when it happened you simply are that mother of an abducted child. that is why there is no guide for. 
and it was only their own choice to become one. every one else would have been okay if they had only be the mother and father of a missing child.