Pat Brown: The 5 Main Clues in the Madeleine McCann Case

Silentscope wrote:Assuming they knew that they were going to be ‘GRILLED ALL NIGHT’ by the PJ once the alarm had been raised, why book anything?

If they didn't book anything, surely it would look even more suspicious than it already did?

They had to keep up the pretence.

Silentscope wrote:Assuming they knew that they were going to be ‘GRILLED ALL NIGHT’ by the PJ once the alarm had been raised, why book anything?

Exactly.  They knew on Sunday that they only needed to pre-book the Tapas until Thursday.

Seem to be missing the point. The MW tennis group had their usual end of week booking for the Tapas on Friday as it was the last night for many of the weeks holidaymakers so most of the T9 would be there anyway. Tennis group booked for 12, presumably as the norm, but no doubt could accommodate a few more depending on the number of players that week who were interested.

8. Have you read this thread?

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11056-smithman-5-the-evidence-of-the-smith-family-from-drogheda-ireland-the-twelve-sets-of-contradictions 

If so, please could you go through each of those 12 sets of contradictions and fully explain ech one? We would all be grateful for your input on this. 


1 The Smiths statements did indeed vary. If they were part of any cover-up I think they would have stuck to the same story. Martin Smith first named Gerry as the man he saw in a 20/9/07 statement.


2. He didn't appear to lower his head according to Peter Smith.
Martin Smith said in his 30/1/08 statement, said it was the way Gerry turned his head down which was similar to the way the individual did on 3/5/07, I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane.


3. He knew the man they saw not Robert Murat because he knew him by sight.
He said in his 30/1/08 statement , he has been contacted by Brian Kennedy to take part in a photo fit exercise, he said he has given no stories or helped in any photo fits.


4. Aoife said she didn't see the girls face, she appeared to be sleeping.
Peter said her eyes were closed.
Martin said her eyes were closed. 

5. Martin Smith said he had given no stories in his 30/1/08 statement.

6. Martin was heard saying " I thought they were Father and Daughter so I wasn't suspicious. All other media.

7. The statement of Peter. All others media,

8. He did indeed change from did not notice the body clothing in 26th May statement, to darkish
top maybe a blazer in 30/1/08 statement.

9. Correct, didn't see audio so cant comment.

10. Said he met Murat twice in May and August 2006 in Luz bars, in May 08 statement.
All others media.

To me the reason the disappearance and probable death of Madeleine is the embarrassment it would cause to all those people in authority in UK.

It's hard to believe the life of a little tot means so little. 

Jim Gamble pitched his star on the bandwagon. I wonder how he feels now. 

Just about every celebrity pitched themselves in a media frenzy. I wonder how they feel now - well I would wonder except for the fact their lives have moved on and there are other brands to promote.

sharonl wrote:

Silentscope wrote:Either the Restaurant was going to be too full with other witnesses, who would probably all want to help with searching the area. 

Or Friday was not advantageous to the plan for some other reason.

Unless someone has another suggestion?

If they had pre-booked the Tapas for the week, and the reasons that they had claimed, I would imagine that on Friday, the last day of the holiday, they would definitely want to eat together.  Where else were they planning to eat that would have been close to the children?

As Doug D has already pointed out, the Tapas restaurant was booked on Friday nights for the tennis club.  The McCann group used the tennis facilities all week, stands to reason they would be part of the tennis club Tapas booking for the night of Friday 4th May 2007.

Mathew Oldfield witness statement - 10th May 2007

Prompted about the dinner reservations/bookings at Tapas, he relates that the first time thay made a reservation was on Sunday, not knowing who had made it. Asked if it could have been ROB the deponent admitted that that was possible, reiterating to not know for sure who had made it.

Relating to the other days, he clarifies that on Monday morning his wife undertook such reservation, adding still that it would have been for all the remaining days except for Friday, 4 May, as there was to have been a Tennis Club dinner that night.

I doubt Matthew Oldfield would lie about something that could be so easily checked.

Pat Brown inched herself in to a media frenzy giving herself attention.

I agree with Verdi.

Jill Havern wrote:

Silentscope wrote:Assuming they knew that they were going to be ‘GRILLED ALL NIGHT’ by the PJ once the alarm had been raised, why book anything?

If they didn't book anything, surely it would look even more suspicious than it already did?

They had to keep up the pretence.

So why did they NOT? 

They should have made up something to show they were still ‘on Holiday’ and planning to have a ‘normal’ time somewhere. The possibility is that they might have been expected at the Tennis function - but it does not sound like it to me according to the Statements from Mr Oldfield provided by Verdi. It seems Friday has got no mention in any interviews, books or publications as far as I know. Strange that no-one has ‘backfilled’ that night?

Judging from the size of the Seating area, the Restaurant had the capacity to take on their booking.

Interesting in any case.

Sorry, I didn't read your question properly.

I am on a different wavelength, but on the right channel!

No problem

Booking sheets for the week show 4 tables of 4 as the limit, so 16 people per time slot. The tennis booking for 12 people was for 8.15 and only one eat-in earlier at 7.30, with nothing later.
 
Not clear how long a meal sitting was expected to take, but the last sitting was at 9pm, with some staff booked every day until midnight, so they expected the later eaters, and this would have included the tennis lot, to have a longish session.
 
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

It's already been pointed out, more than once, that the Tapas restaurant was reserved for the Mark Warner tennis club on Friday nights - that includes Friday 4th May 2007.

The reservation is documented on file.

The witness statements were not recorded verbatim.  
The McCanns and their group of friends were interviewed as witnesses - not suspects.  
The police interviewer would ask specific questions and the interviewee would respond - routine policing.

There is nothing to be gained by speculating what Matt Oldfield, or any other member of the group, did or didn't or should've or shouldn't say.

The fact of the matter is, the Tapas restaurant was reserved for the tennis club on the night of 4th May 2007, whether or not the group would or wouldn't have been part of that reservation is immaterial and will not lead any further into discovering the truth.

I put it to the Forum that regardless of when whatever happened THURSDAY was the last day that the ‘Abduction’ could be arranged for the following reasons.

1. The Tennis Club meeting, whether they were booked in, or not, would result in too many other potential witnesses being around.

2. Those extra persons could have seen something they were not supposed to IF the body was removed on that night.

3. Most of the Tennis players and Trainers would be known to the Arguidos and they might not want to put them in the position of being ‘duped’. 

4. If the McCann group was expected by Mark Warner Staff as part of the Tennis party, there is no problem. If not, the Questions remain.

Why did they only block book until Thursday, and where else were they planning to go or do on Friday night?

Why could the ‘Abduction’ NOT be reported on Sunday to Wednesday?

Why could it NOT have been Friday?

Oh dear... when is this speculation nonsense going to end?

Madeleine McCann's disappearance was reported on 3rd May 2007, and so far, no one has been able to fully determine what precisely happened to her. 

What has been pointed out is that the statements by the McCanns and their Tapas friends are contradictory, illogical and inconsistent with the physical evidence.

Guessing why the disappearance was not reported days before or days later requires making an assumption that we know exactly what crime was committed against Madeleine... and we do not!

Can we just stick to the evidence, please?

@Paulo Alexandrewrote:

Guessing why the disappearance was not reported days before or days later requires making an assumption that we know exactly what crime was committed against Madeleine... and we do not!

The Crime of Abduction is defined in German law as soon as the Child is removed from its place of Residence or Care without the permission of the Parent or Gaurdian. What has happened to her afterwards is not relevant. Even if the Child is later returned unharmed it is still an offence.

The Evidence is the Child is not where it should be. 

The Parents did not consent to its removal from the Family unit.

The Parents say they played no part in her disappearance.

Evidence enough for me.

!!!

Silentscope wrote:@Paulo Alexandrewrote:

Guessing why the disappearance was not reported days before or days later requires making an assumption that we know exactly what crime was committed against Madeleine... and we do not!

The Crime of Abduction is defined in German law as soon as the Child is removed from its place of Residence or Care without the permission of the Parent or Gaurdian. What has happened to her afterwards is not relevant. Even if the Child is later returned unharmed it is still an offence.

The Evidence is the Child is not where it should be. 

The Parents did not consent to its removal from the Family unit.

The Parents say they played no part in her disappearance.

Evidence enough for me.

First of all, Madeleine disappeared in Portugal, not in Germany. 

Secondly, there is not a scrap of evidence to substantiate the notion that Madeleine McCann was abducted. The available evidence actually contradicts this idea.

And finally, are you here for honest reasons or do you just want to waste time?

Silentscope wrote:The Crime of Abduction is defined in German law as soon as the Child is removed from its place of Residence or Care without the permission of the Parent or Gaurdian. What has happened to her afterwards is not relevant. Even if the Child is later returned unharmed it is still an offence.

The Evidence is the Child is not where it should be.

The Parents did not consent to its removal from the Family unit.

The Parents say they played no part in her disappearance.

Evidence enough for me.

Madeleine McCann was British, she disappeared whilst on holiday with her family in Portugal. German law has no place in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

You Silentscope, seem to have a problem understanding the true purpose of a forum such as CMOMM.  You rock up after years on the pretext of concern about the German prisoner, expecting to dictate how the forum is administered but I'm sorry to say - that's not how it works.  You don't get to come here and after a few hours start trying to change the course of a well established English speaking professional platform with a determined goal of seeking justice for a little lost soul .... Madeleine McCann.

I asked you some while ago if there is a German site that debates the case of Madeleine McCann, my thought at the time was that your talents would be more suited to a German market - if indeed that's your location/nationality.  Your response was less than clear but I truly wonder why you don't set up a blog or forum for the German market, which I'm quite sure would be good for you and any followers your might manage.  Provide the link and I would gladly return the favour with fact and evidence.  What you do with that of course would be at your discretion,  within your own domain!

Maybe a few members have given you presumed strength by supporting your presence here.  That in itself is not a problem, they are only viewing isolated posts on face value - that's what we are about ,  I however, as forum moderator, see something very different and it's not to the forum's advantage nor to my liking.

Originally back in June 2020, you came here with questions about the involvement of Christian Brueckner in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  I won't go into detail about your wavering commentary at the time, just suffice to say you left the forum satisfied that the German man had no connection with the case but it wasn't long before you resumed posting with more of the same contradictory narrative from one day to the next - which alas continues to this day.

As I said, you don't appear to know what you are talking about which I'm sure your mentor is aware - hence you are being used as a medium to spread his word.  Cowardice some might say - cunning others might say - unacceptable I say!

You have no respect for the true purpose of this forum, you show no regard for simple forum expectancy, to say nothing of forum etiquette.  I strongly advise you to read and absorb the following link before continuing on your quest for forum dominance.  Not forgetting your abuse of the private messaging facility - underhand tactics arouse suspicion.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14711-forum-etiquette#377086

You are seriously trying my patience.

Think about it - there is no need to respond.

Back on topic!

German law can only be applied to the Abduction by Paedophile as stated by the Parents, because it is now SUSPECTED to have been done by A GERMAN NATIONAL who was in Portugal at the time.

I look forward to seeing Kate and Gerry giving evidence as Witnesses in a Court in Germany sometime soon. Along with all the ‘Concrete evidence’ that Brückner ‘did it’!

But it will probably never be allowed to go ahead...Brückner will no doubt become the ‘most perfect suspect’ sooner or later.

The ‘mitschuld’ (own fault) of the Parents would also be a problem.

Back on Topic.

@ Tony Bennet

1. What time do you say the high tea started and ended?


Creche time finished at 5pm I would estimate high tea start time 4-45 to 6pm.


2. In particular, what time do you say that each of the following arrived at the high tea: Cat Baker, Madeleine, the twins, Gerry McCann?



Time of arrival for Cat Baker, Madeleine Twins I estimate between 4-45 and 5pm.
Gerry anytime before 6pm.


3. Do you suggest that anyone else was present at the high tea, if so, who else do you think was there?



Graham Mcenzie in a 6/12/07 statement referred to seeing the McCann's when children had tea together and played together after tea. 


4. Have you read all the accounts of those who describe the high tea? If so, how do you explain each of the multiple discrepancies in the accounts of Cat Baker, Kate McCann, Gerry McCann and Charlotte Pennington?



I have no explanation as to why the accounts have so many discrepancies. If all the accounts of the high tea were the same, I would be suspicious. People see things in different ways. No-one had any reason to pay particular attention to who arrived and when  They were recalling from memory.


5. Do you think it is a truthful account ('madeleine', hard copy, pp. 66-67) that Madeleine was 'so pale and worn out' when Kate saw her Madeleine first 'at 5.30pm', and that 'the five of us' went back to the apartment with Kate 'carrying Madeleine'? Is it really credible that Kate, rather than Gerry, was carrying Madeleine?



Neil Berry remarked on Netflix about his kids being tired out after a busy week. I can see nothing unusual about Kate carrying Madeleine the short distance from the pool area and Gerry walking with the twins.


6. Do you say that there was a 'like' high tea at the Tapas bar every other day of the week? If so, please, where do you find the evidence for that?



Maria Manuela Antonia Jose, cook tapas, in a statement   dated 6/5/07 said the last time she saw Madeleine was approximately 16-30 3rd May when she was having dinner with the other children in their part of the restaurant, as she did each day of the week.


Tiago Rochas  Barreiros Tapas supervisor, in a 8/5/07 statement said he remembers the missing child's family frequented the tapas pool where they took their children between 16-45 -17-30 at the time babysitters would take care of the children. 


What about the other families staying at Ocean club and using the creche, if no High tea was available wouldn't  they have been making statements to the Pj to say there was no  high tea.


Just for the record. I have a big problem with the creche registration sheets of Madeleine's Lobster group. I will post later.

Thank you *@crusader*. Am preparing replies to all your posts but am behind schedule

Just for the record, In no way do I think the McCann's are innocent.