Re: The McCanns family trip to Sagres 30th April

by Guest 11.10.11 16:20

russiandoll wrote:Stella your reply confused me so bear with me and please assist as I am going through creche sheets and find them v interesting.
The am and pm are both on 1 sheet for Maddie's group.
Correct. Despite Catriona Baker in her statement saying that am and pm had seperate sheets !!!

looking at what you posted it appears that a different person signed Maddie in and out am and pm sessions.....can you please clarify what point you were making to Moa? I read it as Gerry am and Kate pm.
thank you !
Correct. Gerry signed in and out am. Kate in and out pm, as seen on the sheet for the 30th April.

I only posted my own thoughts on 30th april in this area of the forum because of the date....... am not sure there was a trip to Sagres as reported in some newspapers [curious how they got the story].
What has grasped me about this date is total silence from Kate about that day's events.
No mention in the book about the trip to Sagres which is documented elsewhere and which I believe was shortly before Morocco trip.[will check but book jumps from 7-10th June as far as I can recall ]

What concerns me is the notable change in routine on 30th April, and on that day Maddie was out of creche for a couple of hours when twins were attending theirs. that and the bizarre 15 min attendance.
Precisely. It must have been queried with them and maybe the answer to that has been witheld.

Nothing strange about a child being taken out of creche by a parent, it is a holiday after all and there are things to do.
Madeleine was presumably under the supervision of an adult after 3.30 p.m....are there any independent witnesses to Maddie being around and about anywhere after 3.30 p.m.? [ apart from the sole shopkeeper sighting in Sagres?]
Nope.

Kate's diary suggests family around ocean club area all day.

am still cross-referencing trying to get an idea of movmements...its quite laborious so will be grateful for any pointers.
On the Creche Enquiry thread, you will find somewhere in the last 8 pages or so, a coloured chart with all the times for every child who attended creche.

by Guest 11.10.11 17:34

Stella.
Im really sorry but im still confused about your comment as it seems from your answer above that you do agree that Gerry signed in and out the first time on 30 April, and Kate signed her out on the second time?

I feel you where trying to make a point to me about something that I unfortunatly do not understand. It might be because English is my second language. scratchhead

But as others pointed out here aswell, I was curious because she do make a BIG deal about her last name in the book. And that makes me believe that she did not use both names Healy and Mccann, only Healy. Not only at work but always also the mum Healy..So therfor it should be Healy all the times when Kate signed out on the creche records in my oppinion that is...

Im sorry Stella if I understood yoy wrongly...

by Guest 11.10.11 20:33

Moa wrote:Stella.
Im really sorry but im still confused about your comment as it seems from your answer above that you do agree that Gerry signed in and out the first time on 30 April, and Kate signed her out on the second time?

I feel you where trying to make a point to me about something that I unfortunatly do not understand. It might be because English is my second language.
But as others pointed out here aswell, I was curious because she do make a BIG deal about her last name in the book. And that makes me believe that she did not use both names Healy and Mccann, only Healy. Not only at work but always also the mum Healy..So therfor it should be Healy all the times when Kate signed out on the creche records in my oppinion that is...

Im sorry Stella if I understood yoy wrongly...

Hi Moa,

I think your English is great and you get your points across well... so no worries there...

I know what you mean about Kate signing McCann rather than Healy.. I've looked at all the creche records for Lobsters and Starfish where the twins were and out of all the times Kate signed (yes, looks like Kate signed out Madeleine on 30 April afternoon - in fact, looks like she signed madeleine in at 1515, dropped the twins off at 1525 then went back and got Madeleine out of the creche at 1530). so all the times she signed the children in and out, only once did she use Healy - 1730 on 2 May signing Madeleine out.. all other times she used McCann.

Can't get image to display so this is a link to the creche sheets and signature is on 2 may :

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

The other signature we have from the same time is the 4 May statement to the PJ and this is signed Healy:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Not sure if any of this bears any great significance or just means the name is interchangeable.. Maybe when she is p****d off with Gerry she reverts to Healy?

by Guest 11.10.11 21:44

Stewie wrote:
Moa wrote:Stella.
Im really sorry but im still confused about your comment as it seems from your answer above that you do agree that Gerry signed in and out the first time on 30 April, and Kate signed her out on the second time?

I feel you where trying to make a point to me about something that I unfortunatly do not understand. It might be because English is my second language.
But as others pointed out here aswell, I was curious because she do make a BIG deal about her last name in the book. And that makes me believe that she did not use both names Healy and Mccann, only Healy. Not only at work but always also the mum Healy..So therfor it should be Healy all the times when Kate signed out on the creche records in my oppinion that is...

Im sorry Stella if I understood yoy wrongly...

Hi Moa,

I think your English is great and you get your points across well... so no worries there...

I know what you mean about Kate signing McCann rather than Healy.. I've looked at all the creche records for Lobsters and Starfish where the twins were and out of all the times Kate signed (yes, looks like Kate signed out Madeleine on 30 April afternoon - in fact, looks like she signed madeleine in at 1515, dropped the twins off at 1525 then went back and got Madeleine out of the creche at 1530). so all the times she signed the children in and out, only once did she use Healy - 1730 on 2 May signing Madeleine out.. all other times she used McCann.

Can't get image to display so this is a link to the creche sheets and signature is on 2 may :

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

The other signature we have from the same time is the 4 May statement to the PJ and this is signed Healy:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Not sure if any of this bears any great significance or just means the name is interchangeable.. Maybe when she is p****d off with Gerry she reverts to Healy?

TY Stewie :)

That I find very strange, signing Healy only once. She makes it a Big deal in her book. And it sounds like she never used Mccann at all.
So why do it all times but one?

thanks for a good answer and for the links :)

by Angelique 12.10.11 1:36

This name thing of Kate's has been discussed before. I am sure that the only time Kate signed the creche records was when the name Healey was used. She said that she only became McCann after Madeleine disappeared. Which is correct. I think someone else was signing for her when the name K.McCann was used. When you marry and elect to keep your maiden name, this must be how you sign all documents. Her Bank Account will be in the name of Healey, as will her Bank Cards. Legal documents etc. You must not swop and change. If she wants to change to McCann she must make a Deed Poll which I am sure she did not do during her holiday in Praia da Luz prior to Madeleine going missing.

The fact that the name "Healey" appears means that it was Kate signing. The other signatures were either Gerry signing using her initial (odd) but more likely someone who knew she was married to Gerry McCann but did not know she wasn't using the name "McCann"

by Guest 12.10.11 6:50

Angelique wrote:This name thing of Kate's has been discussed before. I am sure that the only time Kate signed the creche records was when the name Healey was used. She said that she only became McCann after Madeleine disappeared. Which is correct. I think someone else was signing for her when the name K.McCann was used. When you marry and elect to keep your maiden name, this must be how you sign all documents. Her Bank Account will be in the name of Healey, as will her Bank Cards. Legal documents etc. You must not swop and change. If she wants to change to McCann she must make a Deed Poll which I am sure she did not do during her holiday in Praia da Luz prior to Madeleine going missing.

The fact that the name "Healey" appears means that it was Kate signing. The other signatures were either Gerry signing using her initial (odd) but more likely someone who knew she was married to Gerry McCann but did not know she wasn't using the name "McCann"

I must agree. I also believe she just signed it one time herself and thats when Healy was used..

by russiandoll 12.10.11 11:01

I disagree....I think its reasonable that a woman keeping her maiden name for professional purposes and for her bank account and passport would still use her family name for signing a creche sheet on a family holiday [even though she would ahve been officially booked in at the resort under Healy as per her passport]. The staff at the resort would probably know her or refer to her as Mrs McCann unless told otherwise about her surname.

Her police statement is signed Healy, understandable as this is an official document.
I think the sole signing of Healy at the creche is more questionable.

by Guest 12.10.11 12:06

russiandoll wrote:I disagree....I think its reasonable that a woman keeping her maiden name for professional purposes and for her bank account and passport would still use her family name for signing a creche sheet on a family holiday [even though she would ahve been officially booked in at the resort under Healy as per her passport]. The staff at the resort would probably know her or refer to her as Mrs McCann unless told otherwise about her surname.

Her police statement is signed Healy, understandable as this is an official document.
I think the sole signing of Healy at the creche is more questionable.

I think the point of the signing is to get the name on the person signing the child out. So therfor in my oppinion there is no reason for her to use Mccann there when she clearly, according to her self, never ever used that name. Say that on of her friends , as they did after may 3, picked up the kids for them, what name would they write? Their own ofcourse. Not Jane Mccann or Fiona Mccann. So why should Kate? What if they werent married ? Why change your signature just for signing your kid out of the creche?

Maybe the sole siging of Healy was a slip, maybe for some reason she felt she had to write Mccann that week. Maybe it wasn't her writing it, maybe it means nothing at all.
But it feels not right in someway, like rest of the case even the signature contradicts itself..

by crispyroll 12.10.11 12:56

I still do not understand why on Madeleines birth certificate Kates name is "McCann" and not "Healey". In my opinion it must be: "mother: Kate Healey", maiden name: "Healey". A birth certificate is an official document and Kates official name is Healey and not McCann.
Why is it?

by Miraflores 12.10.11 13:36

crispyroll wrote:I still do not understand why on Madeleines birth certificate Kates name is "McCann" and not "Healey"......

So in that case, contrary to her statement in her book, she didn't only become McCann after Madeleine disappeared.

It's all these little contradictions which add up and make people have trouble believing the McCanns.

by Guest 12.10.11 14:24

Miraflores wrote:
crispyroll wrote:I still do not understand why on Madeleines birth certificate Kates name is "McCann" and not "Healey"......

So in that case, contrary to her statement in her book, she didn't only become McCann after Madeleine disappeared.

It's all these little contradictions which add up and make people have trouble believing the McCanns.

Well spotted Miraflores. thumbup

by Guest 12.10.11 16:10

Kate Mccann was obliged to put Mccann as her name on Madeleine`s birth certificate as that is her legal name; Healy is given, again correctly, as her maiden name.

She could of course have mentioned this as an example of one of the few times in her personal and professional life that she has had to use the name Mccann rather than Healy. I just wonder why she mentions it at all unless it is to cover herself for something else which is ofthen the Mccanns`s modus operandi.

by crispyroll 12.10.11 16:17

Why is "McCann"her legal name? That is the point I do not understand! She did not change her name with her marriage. If I would marry and do not want to change my maiden name, then my maiden name stays my legal name. This is the case in Germany, maybe it is different in other countries.

by Guest 12.10.11 16:22

Yes crispy roll, that is the difference in the UK as far as I am aware. Legally your name changes. But for personal and professional reasons, you can of course keep using your maiden name. It`s clearly different in Germany and probably in other countries too.

by Guest 12.10.11 16:24

Perhaps the confusion and questions we are asking, is in direct relation to what is seen on the creche sheets !!!

by russiandoll 12.10.11 17:00

Final chapter details the new phase in her life after the disappearance of her daughter, hence the focus on the name McCann. Although I wrote that it is not uncommon for women using their maiden name for work purposes, ina palcae they have worked prior to marriage, she does not state that was the reason she continued to use Healy :

" On May 4th I became Kate McCann. According to my passport, driving licence and bank account I was Kate Healy. I hadn't kept my maiden name for any particular reason-it was just who I was. But when Madeleine was taken, the press automatically referred to me as Kate McCann, and Kate McCann I have been ever since. Overnight our old life had gone and I'd become a different person." [well Kate why would they refer to you as Kate Healy since it doesn't appear anyone on that holiday ever used Healy just called you Kate or Mrs McCann].

I doubt that all those official documents now have McCann on them, possibly she signed McCann at the creche as that was the family name[ children and Gerry] and as that name was on the creche sheets and the nannies were not familiar with them then it made sense to use McCann so all names tallied and it was clear to anyone reading the sheets in Kates absence that parents had signed in and out. Even though the staff would know her by sight for record keeping it makes sense on a family holiday when using the facilities.

I am more interested in the 1 occasion when Healy was used.am going to check her signature on the witness statement . Whatever, it is the inconsistency that arouses interest and/or suspicion....

Why is Kate so surprised at the press referring to her as Kate McCann? I doubt she ever referred to herself as anything but Kate to introduce herself to staff and holidaymakers or as Kate,Gerry's wife. As if she'd say oh hello Im Kate Healy.

And whats wrong with them presuming she is Kate McCann, she talks as if
its an insult as she does about the disrespect to Madeleine. About becoming a different person:

" So, it seemed, had our daughter. Madeleine would person to correct anyone who amkes the mistake of shortening her name. " Im not Maddie Im Madeleine !" And quite right, too. It's often done inadvertently, or in a good-natured attempt to sounfd friendly, but the press know what her name is and yet to this day they insist on calling her Maddie.I find it quite disrespectful."

From a woman who actually lengthens her sons short name Sean to Seany, as a diminutive, its quite unvbelievable she has not ever shortened her daughter's longer name.....but I guess Maddie gave Kate and Gerry her tuppence worth over that.

All trivial stuff really,why such a bleeping big deal made out of the names? it's maybe those darned creche sheets.

and for the record, when I wanted to use my maiden name after divorce I was told that it was quite straightforward.....the name on my birth certificate is a name I am always legally entitled to use. And there is no legal requirement of course to take your husbands surname on marriage.

by Miraflores 12.10.11 17:28

Yes crispy roll, that is the
difference in the UK as far as I am aware. Legally your name changes.
But for personal and professional reasons, you can of course keep using
your maiden name. It`s clearly different in Germany and probably in
other countries too.

No - legally your name does not have to change on marriage. This link explains it. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 12.10.11 17:31

Thanks for the clarification. I guess what I should have asked is whether it is obligatory in the UK for a married woman to use her married name on a birth certificate even if she intends not to use it at all.

by Miraflores 12.10.11 18:46

alison wrote:Thanks for the clarification. I guess what I should have asked is whether it is obligatory in the UK for a married woman to use her married name on a birth certificate even if she intends not to use it at all.

Interesting question. I found this link, which although from a specific local authority, will be stating national rules:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The key part says the mother needs to supply

Maiden surname
Surname at marriage if different from maiden surname

So if Kate chose to keep her maiden name there was no reason to give a married name. So why does Kate say that she was Healy until Madeleine disappeared? OK in the grand scheme of things it's trivial, but it does leave you wondering how much of what Kate says is reliable.

by Guest 13.10.11 8:13

The thing is on a birth certificate, if Kate had used Healey, the children and all the generations that follow them, could question if Kate and Gerry were really married, at the time the children were born. Later on in life when the children start work and have to show a birth certificate to an employer, it will look like their parents were not married and someone could comment on that. So the obvious thing to do would be to make sure their birth certificates looked shall we say, in order and complete !!

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 8:44

Here is a link I have found to Pamalam's Gerry McCann's blogs. Scroll down to Day 37 where he makes reference to a trip to Sagres with the family. Note the discrepancy in the day/date.

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

by **tigger** 23.10.11 8:58

Upsy Daisy wrote:Here is a link I have found to Pamalam's Gerry McCann's blogs. Scroll down to Day 37 where he makes reference to a trip to Sagres with the family. Note the discrepancy in the day/date.

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

Interesting that he muddles the dates. The second Sagres trip is certainly of interest considering the unusual number of family and friends there.

I'd better put the link here, doubtless there are others. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 9:10

Note how he makes mention of the fact that 'after' the Moroccan trip (and obviously the Sagres trip) that they must 'take some time' to reflect emotionally etc. Mmm....some mourning time perhaps??

by **tigger** 23.10.11 9:39

Upsy Daisy wrote:Note how he makes mention of the fact that 'after' the Moroccan trip (and obviously the Sagres trip) that they must 'take some time' to reflect emotionally etc. Mmm....some mourning time perhaps??

Also the little mention of the abductor height between 5'7" and 5'11" - that's the difference between a fairly short and 1" short of 6' man.

I'm interested in the date discrepancy: if Maddie died on the 1st, then 40 days would be 9th of June. Is 40 days important in mourning terms?Gerry says 40 days from disappearance on the 12th, but the 9th was the family do at Sagres.
Imo, as far as their consciences go, they could have left Maddie alone that night, (have to see if it was the same night they were at Chaplins) without giving her a sleeping draught. So to calm her down, a big dose which could be fatal. A perfect scenario for LIHOP (letting it happen on purpose).
Maddie could in any case already have been 'ill' so others were prepared.
It's also interesting that the 2nd of May disappeared from the agenda altogether (see Dr. Roberts on that).
The 2nd May was a Wednesday, the day the cleaner would come. I believe she stated she'd been and cleaned the windows, where on Thursday night only Kate's fingerprints were found.

Added from Wikepedia although for Orthodox Catholic church but: Special prayers are held on the third, ninth, and 40th days after death; the third, sixth and ninth months
3rd/4th, Kate and Gerry ask to pray in church.
9th/10th?
40 days: Sagres family gathering.

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 9:49

Yes, that would make it 40 days. I have to say, the theory I found most plausible was that she died the night of all the crying that Mrs Fenn heard and which stopped abruptly after they came home, which I believe was the 1st(as far as Mrs Fenn is concerned). So how would this trip on the 30th to Sagres be possible with Madeleine OR are we suggesting that the trip was made prior to a planned death whereby they checked out the area for her burial? I think I am may be confusing myself now. The creche records on 30th and subsequently could have obviously been faked/signed by person X on behalf and of course the kids all looking similar no-one would notice. His discrepancy in dates could be very telling, I agree. I need to think more about this so I can get it right in my head. Why would he make this mistake? Also he was, as per usual, referring to planning things in the future, when of course we all know, Madeleine 'could be found any time'.

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 9:53

Forgot to say, re the height, yes, why would you not just say 6ft ?? Very specific, considering it was only a passing glance at someone, from a distance. Very odd.

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 9:54

sorry, brain's not in gear today.. why not say EITHER 5'7 OR 6ft... there is a marked difference like you said, between a tall and short man!

by **tigger** 23.10.11 10:09

Upsy Daisy wrote:Yes, that would make it 40 days. I have to say, the theory I found most plausible was that she died the night of all the crying that Mrs Fenn heard and which stopped abruptly after they came home, which I believe was the 1st(as far as Mrs Fenn is concerned). So how would this trip on the 30th to Sagres be possible with Madeleine OR are we suggesting that the trip was made prior to a planned death whereby they checked out the area for her burial? I think I am may be confusing myself now. The creche records on 30th and subsequently could have obviously been faked/signed by person X on behalf and of course the kids all looking similar no-one would notice. His discrepancy in dates could be very telling, I agree. I need to think more about this so I can get it right in my head. Why would he make this mistake? Also he was, as per usual, referring to planning things in the future, when of course we all know, Madeleine 'could be found any time'.

I do believe in premeditation. So if it happened on the 1st, which would fit very well, then there was preparation in the form of Maddie being ill, never been in the creche at all.
I keep on saying that LIHOP is most likely, simply because I know people like that and have experienced their machinations. It's never their fault when the worst happens.
As far as the faith goes - we now have some correlation: the third day, the 40th day (Sagres) and three months (Huelva - where they meant to go on the 1st, but moved it to the 2nd).

I don't think she was buried in Sagres. But perhaps was still there? Imo someone else transported her to Huelva some time in June/July. It would be useful to know from which date onwards the Renault was being aired. The PJ know, I'm sure.

Love your signature: also hate 'bored of' journalists are using this as well now, o tempora o mores.

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 10:15

Aah, also, the Huelva trip was postponed wasn't it, due to a questionable stomach bug that G apparently came down with, which meant they travelled to Huelva on a date which turned out to be a public holiday so was perhaps a bit of a wasted trip ( mmm....). If I'm correct, K makes mention of this in her book, that they changed the date of the trip. So, are we saying that Huelva for body disposal then (which I think sounds plausible although trying to detach my heart from my body whilst saying so). I said I would but haven't so far looked into what these acid baths are all about and how people get access to them. I shall try to find out more. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Upsy Daisy 23.10.11 10:18

p.s. I noted from pictures I looked at of Sagres (on the 'net) that there is a church atop a rocky hill in Sagres). Did they visit this church? I recall K mentioning rocks, Rocha Negra (albeit in PdL). Maybe some indirect reference. Wonder if there is a crypt there for storage.