Timeline questiom

by Paddingtom 12.08.24 8:59

Im just about to go down a rabbit hole following a line of thought, but before I do, I have a question for the forum.

You know the bits of scribbled timeline information that had been written on MM's clouring book, what does the forum think their original purpose was?

Were they written with the sole purpose of influencing the PJ or were they for the Tapas 9 eyes only to remind them of the timetable they were supposed to be following? I know the Pj got hold of them, but were they meant to?

Thanks in advance for your replies.

by **crusader** 12.08.24 11:04

One thing about the timelines, they both start at 8-45.
It is stressed in the statements that the Payne's and D Webster didn't arrive until 9pm and Matt Oldfield had to go and "hurry them along".

by Paddingtom 12.08.24 15:15

interesting Crusader. Do you think these means they were meant as a guilde for the participants rather than helpful information for the PJ?

by **crusader** 12.08.24 15:35

I think the lists were probably near the truth of that night, the timings only changed in the statements.
They look to be, not about checking the children and the times they checked, more of what was found at each check ie windows doors and shutters, that seemed important.
At the the time the lists were written they probably thought the story of the abduction would be believed.
So in my opinion, the lists were probably made to be seen by the police, if they were not, they made no attempt to hide them as far as I know.

by **sharonl** 12.08.24 19:35

Seems to me that these were attempts to get their stories straight. They had a timeline and each one of them needed to learn it.

Maybe the first one wasn't working or that someone who doing want to be involved suddenly join in and so the second one was written up.

by Cake Lover 12.08.24 19:49

How would they compile a time line, when they weren't wearing watches? Clarrie told us that, and he knows everything.

by **crusader** 12.08.24 19:56

Petermac proved that the timeline was impossible.
It was hastily made up and it didn't stand up to scrutiny.

by **sharonl** 12.08.24 21:48

Cake Lover wrote:How would they compile a time line, when they weren't wearing watches? Clarrie told us that, and he knows everything.

The timeline is not real, it was probably made so that they all said the same thing when questioned.

by Paddingtom 13.08.24 6:34

ok. thankyou all. your contributions have beeen very helpful. I think my best option is to keep an open mind at this point and see where things take me. thanks again.

by **PeterMac** 14.08.24 15:41

crusader wrote:Petermac proved that the timeline was impossible.
It was hastily made up and it didn't stand up to scrutiny

And of course there are 4 (FOUR) different timelines

Two slightly different ones on the back [and front ?] of the "Sticker Book"
A 4 page word processed one, handed in some days later with lots of explanatory notes and filing in of details
A fourth one, found in Kate's possession at a much later date

ALL ARE DIFFERENT.

by Cake Lover 14.08.24 16:09

sharonl wrote:
Cake Lover wrote:How would they compile a time line, when they weren't wearing watches? Clarrie told us that, and he knows everything.

We know that their ridiculous timelines aren't true, my point was that they wrote them down at all.

by **crusader** 14.08.24 16:17

That's true, the timelines on Madeleines book were just a guess and that's the reason they don't work.
That reason goes for all the other timelines as well.
It could have been to show the police or so they could all get their story straight, but that didn't work either.

by **sharonl** 14.08.24 18:42

Cake Lover wrote:
sharonl wrote:
Cake Lover wrote:How would they compile a time line, when they weren't wearing watches? Clarrie told us that, and he knows everything.
We know that their ridiculous timelines aren't true, my point was that they wrote them down at all.

Either they were just clumsy and started making notes, forgetting to discard them later or they were done for the PJ to find. I don't think that they would have left 2 timelines with discrepancies laying around deliberately though.

by Cake Lover 14.08.24 19:02

Panic, perhaps. Not to mention a few arguments would have taken place, given what they were trying to do.

by **crusader** 14.08.24 19:25

Why would they need a timeline in the first place, at that point they had nothing to prove.
It seems a very strange thing to think about considering a child was missing, why would they need the police to know where they were, it wasn't about them.
Madeleine was missing, and it was about finding her, not covering their arses.

by Cake Lover 14.08.24 19:31

That's the sensible view. Was it a case of trying to impress upon the P.J. where they were not, rather than where they were? That's probably not the case, it's just a thought.

by **Nina** 14.08.24 20:55

crusader wrote:Why would they need a timeline in the first place, at that point they had nothing to prove.
It seems a very strange thing to think about considering a child was missing, why would they need the police to know where they were, it wasn't about them.
Madeleine was missing, and it was about finding her, not covering their arses.

Exactly it is like writing a shopping list, just net needed even though you are hungry.

by **sharonl** 14.08.24 21:27

crusader wrote:Why would they need a timeline in the first place, at that point they had nothing to prove.
It seems a very strange thing to think about considering a child was missing, why would they need the police to know where they were, it wasn't about them.
Madeleine was missing, and it was about finding her, not covering their arses.

Good point

If Madeleine was genuinely missing they wouldn't need a timeline. The fact that they had two then, speaks volumes.

by Paddingtom 15.08.24 7:30

PeterMac wrote:
And of course there are 4 (FOUR) different timelines

Two slightly different ones on the back [and front ?] of the "Sticker Book"
A 4 page word processed one, handed in some days later with lots of explanatory notes and filing in of details
A fourth one, found in Kate's possession at a much later date

ALL ARE DIFFERENT.

Thankyou for that peter. I knew about the two sticker book ones and Kates one but I didnt know about the word processed one with lots of notes. Do you know where I can find it please?

Thankyou all for your contributions.

With extra info I have found, I am leaning towards the sticker book ones being entirely for the eyes of the police. They were telling the police what they wanted them to know, not necessarily the acurate picture of timelines. The timelines say alarm at 22.00. We know there is a lot of eveidence to say the alarm was actually raised at 9.30. Im still formulating my train of thought,,,it may come to nothing or it may highlight an problem...I will have to wait and find out.

by Paddingtom 17.08.24 7:26

KM is well known as having her own timeline amonst her doculments but as it does not seem to be readily available, I thought you might like to see it. here it is:

8.35. pm rest. First to arrive

9.00.p.m G- conversation with Steve

9.30..p.m. Matt – Carolyn

10.00p.m. me

8.40.p.m. Jane next

8.45.p.m. Matt and Rachel

Russell?

Held

Evie moody

R is out for a long time

Jane went to replace him

Me: Dont ask me!!!.....I dont know.

by **Bluebagthepirate** 17.08.24 8:05

^^^ where is that from?

by Honesty 17.08.24 8:09

Shouldn't it be in chronological order? Perhaps it's not because it's a draft as at this stage she had not decided where to try and fit everything in.

by Paddingtom 17.08.24 8:23

Bluebagthepirate wrote:^^^ where is that from?

It is in Goncalo's second book Maddie Basta de Mentiras!

by Paddingtom 17.08.24 8:24

Honesty wrote:Shouldn't it be in chronological order? Perhaps it's not because it's a draft as at this stage she had not decided where to try and fit everything in.

Goncalo says it was drawn up days after the alleged disappearance.

we know this is true because it has an alarm time of 10p.m. there ia a lot of evidence, agreed by Goncalo, that the alarm was actually raised at 9.30.

by **crusader** 17.08.24 8:50

Who's Carolyn?
Carpenter?

by Honesty 17.08.24 9:04

Thank you. Has KM ever given an expanation for this timeline?

by Paddingtom 17.08.24 11:15

crusader wrote:Who's Carolyn?
Carpenter?

No idea. Who is carolyn carpenter?

I agree with your point that if MM was really missing they wouldnt need timelines. If MM was really missing they would be headless chickens running around screaming her name, not writting up timelines.

Any idea who Steve is?

by **Bluebagthepirate** 17.08.24 11:24

Yes, who is Steve?

by **PeterMac** 17.08.24 11:26

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The Word Processed one follows. It is in Gerry McCanns Blogs,,

The McCanns and Tapas group's prepared timeline, type-written and presented to the PJ on 10 May 2007

Sequence of Events: Thursday 3rd May 2007 - 2030 to 2200

As recalled by:

Gerry McCann - 5A
Kate McCann - 5A
David Payne - 5H (First floor)
Fiona Payne - 5H (First floor)
Dianne Webster - 5H (First floor)
Jane Tanner - 5D
Russell O'Brien - 5D
Matthew Oldfield - 5B
Rachael Oldfield - 5B

Times shown are approximate, but accurate to the best of our knowledge.

Prior to 2030, all couples and children were in their apartments preparing for bedtime.
- 5A (Madeleine, Amelie and Sean McCann)
- 5B (Grace Oldfield)
- 5D (Ella and Evie O'Brien) and
- 5H (Lily and Scarlett Payne)

2030: Standard booking for meal at Tapas restaurant for group – same all week (Sun–Thur)
2035: Gerry McCann (GM) and Kate McCann (KC) arrive at table at Tapas Restaurant.
2040: Jane Tanner (JT) arrives, followed shortly by Matthew Oldfield (MO) and Rachael Mampilly Oldfield (RMO)
2045: Russell O'Brien (RJO) arrives at table.
2055: MO returns to apartments to check on ground floor flats, passing David Payne (DP) and Fiona Payne (FP) and her mother Dianne Webster (DW) on their way down to the table.
2057: MO listens outside all ground floor flats’ windows on the car park side of the apartment (5A, 5B and 5D) to make sure they were asleep. At this time, all the shutters were down on each window.
2100: MO return to the table. Starters were ordered.
2105: GM returns to his flat (5A) and enters via the patio gate entrance. This and a child gate at the top of the stairs were closed at the time. He enters the flat via the patio door which is closed but unlocked.
The door is slightly ajar (about 45 degrees) which is unusual. All the 3 children were present and asleep. GM believes the shutter was down. The room in which the children are asleep is completely dark. On leaving the room, GM shuts the door to approximately 5 degrees. He then goes to the toilet to urinate.
2115: JT leaves table, and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5A. The two were standing just up the hill from the gate towards Rua A. da Silva Road. She did not speak to GM as she passed.
As JT continued up the hill towards the junction with Rua A. da Silva, she sees a man carrying a child in his arms crossing left to right from the apartment side continuing east along Rua A. da Silva in the direction of the "Millennium restaurant." He was on the same side of the road as JT 5-10 metres ahead of her.

Description of Man:
- Age 35 to 40.
- 1.7m tall approximately with a slim build.
- Good head of dark glossy hair with possible flick of hair to the right. The hair was longer at the back (i.e. not clippered or shaven).
- The central and the left side of the face were not seen
- Full length trousers, casual, the material hanging without creases. The colour was possibly a browny mustard. They were not jeans.
- Long sleeved jacket, fastened at the front, possibly by a zipper. It had a gathered lower hem and was also possibly brownish in colour.
- Shoes may have been a semi-formal brogue.
- Whether he was wearing gloves or not could not be ascertained.
- He was not wearing a rucksack or any other identifiable objects.
- He was only carrying a child, with the head against the left upper chest away from JT and the feet to the right – i.e. cradling the child like a baby.
- He appeared to be walking in a rush to get somewhere.
- He was not someone JT recognised from the week.
- He was not dressed typically for a "tourist," or at least his clothing did not seem to be of UK origin and may have been purchased in Portugal.

Description of Child:
- The child appeared to be a Caucasian girl about the ages of 3-4.
- She was seen to lie motionless/limp in the man's arms consistent with her sleeping or possibly drugged.
- She did not seem to be wrapped up well for the time of night wearing only pyjamas; the trousers were light coloured with a floral element, possibly with turn-ups. The top was not well seen though there was thought to be another colour involved possibly pink.
- She was not wearing shoes.

JT checked only 5D entering via the deadlocked door on the car park side of the apartment. Both children inside were asleep. She did not check 5A or 5B.

2120: JT then returns to the restaurant, by which time GM has also returned. The entire party then begins eating their starters which have arrived.
2125: After starters, MO and RJO go back to the apartments via the car park entrance to check all flats. They go first to 5D where RJO's daughter Evie is heard crying. RJO enters flat, whilst MO checks inside 5B, and then returns to 5D.
2130: RJO remains in 5D as daughter has vomited. MO goes to check on 5A via the patio gate entrance. The outside gate is probably shut, but the child gate on the stairs up to the patio is possibly open. The patio door is closed but unlocked.
MO enters flat, hears a sound in the children's bedroom that is probably one of the twins rolling over in their cot. He does not enter the bedroom but can see through a now quite open door (greater than 45 degrees) into the room.
He sees the two twins in their cot, but does not check Madeleine formally as no sounds and twins asleep. He recalls the room did seem lighter than expected, perhaps suggesting the shutter had been raised or the curtains opened?
2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that Evie unwell.
2140: JT returns to 5D to take over care of Evie from RJO.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives.
22.00: (approx): KM leaves table to check children in 5A. The patio gate is closed and the child gate is also probably closed. She enters through the closed patio entrance, with the curtains closed. She crosses the living area, and there is no noise from the children's bedroom. She is about to leave, when she notices the bedroom door was open (approximately 60 degrees).
She starts to close it and it slams. Considering the patio doors had caused a draft, she checks these doors but they are closed. KM returns to the bedroom and opens the door to check the children were not disturbed by the noise.
At this point, she notices that Madeleine is missing. She checks the other single bed in the room and also Kate and Gerry's beds. Then she double checks that Madeleine was not in her bedroom again. At this point she notices the curtains blowing forward with a gust of wind. She runs over, pulls open the curtains and notices the shutter was completely raised, and the windows pushed open to the left as far as possible.
She then completes a check of the bathroom, kitchen and wardrobes.
On failing to find Madeleine, she runs to the entrance of the restaurant, shouting from the path leading to the restaurant area raising the alarm that Madeleine was missing.

********

The Oldfield check from No 1, gets whooshed for No 2, then reinstated with ludicrous detail in No 3
Sneak preview from Chapter 62, coming out today !!

CHAPTER 62

Pool Photo Proves Madeleine Was Dead

The Pool Photo is one of the strongest pieces of evidence

AGAINST the McCanns

by Paddingtom 17.08.24 11:31

Honesty wrote:Thank you. Has KM ever given an expanation for this timeline?

Not to my knowledge. That doesnt mean she hasnt,

My guess is that this is the proper interpretation:

8.35. pm rest. First to arrive

8.40.p.m. Jane next

Russell? Held (up?) Evie moody

8.45.p.m. Matt and Rachel

9.00.p.m G- conversation with Steve

9.30..p.m. Matt – Carolyn

R is out for a long time

Jane went to replace him

10.00p.m. me

Do you notice 10.00pm me?     Not 10.00p.m. discovered MM missing? or 10.00p.mp. Check children?

no, its "me".............Im next in the timeline/on the list.    Its a shopping ;list...things to do....and tick off.

Do you also notice no mention of the Paynes?.

This list only refers to those which had a part to play in the story.
Those that didnt, werent mentioned they neded to keep track of the players and keep them on time.
.
The Paynes did not contribute to this evening as far as Im aware, other than it being recognised that they were late and one of the players was dispatched to hurry them up as the curtain was about to rise.

Was their lateness due to their understandable reluctance to take part? Stage fright? Did someone have to go and persuade them to come to the stage?    The audience was waiting. Possibly.