Bernt Stellander interview

by **crusader** 25.10.24 10:42

I'm sure both Kate and Gerry say specific things to mislead.
There was no point in mentioning the tea stained pyjamas unless it was to mislead, same goes for the crying incident asking why they didn't come when Madeleine and Sean cried.

by **BerntS** 25.10.24 11:20

The insane Pajamas photo on back of the sofa was to "pro actively" having an explanation ready of how her DNA could be on back of the sofa, as it's about impossible to clean the splatter off such material.
They could just say it must be transfer of DNA from placing it on back of the sofa for that photo to be taken.

That insane photo tells the whole story, actually.

by **crusader** 25.10.24 11:40

The pyjama photo was supposedly taken by a professional photographer who's name I've forgotten now, but could find if needed.
Edit
It was Luis Forra who took the photographs on 5th May.

by **Nina** 25.10.24 12:40

crusader wrote:The pyjama photo was supposedly taken by a professional photographer who's name I've forgotten now, but could find if needed.
Edit
It was Luis Forra who took the photographs on 5th May

So were they plus a photographer allowed back into apartment 5A to take photographs or was it another sofa in another apartment? Often in these holiday lets the furniture is the same or very similar.

by **crusader** 25.10.24 12:57

It's never been proved that the photo was taken inside 5a on the blue sofa.
There is a theory that the McCann's took the photo and gave it to the press association, but Louis Forra said he took it, but we don't know where that was.

by **Ladyinred** 25.10.24 13:03

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16107-dr-martin-roberts-if-madeleine-s-pyjamas-had-not-in-fact-been-abducted-then-neither-had-madeleine-mccann?highlight=Pyjamas

I was reading this earlier. Suggests Kate took the photo.

by **BerntS** 25.10.24 13:13

Forra took different photos in Portimao.
It's a deliberate confusion constructed by Clarrie.

by Clishmaclaver 25.10.24 13:50

BerntS wrote:Forra took different photos in Portimao.
It's a deliberate confusion constructed by Clarrie.

I could be wrong here, but I think I read something a few years ago about the photo having been taken at Portimao Police Station. Would Clarrie have put Forra up to taking the photo just to muddy the waters?

by **crusader** 25.10.24 14:01

We can't say Forra is lying, why would he, what has he to gain?
The question is, if the PJ didn't ask Forra to take the photo, who did, Mitchel was not on the scene at that point.

by **Silentscope** 25.10.24 16:33

I came across a Post from Isabelle McFadden where she had a Twitter conversation with the actual Photographer. He claims to have taken the Pyjama photo in the Police Station, and that any discussion that the McCanns took the Pyjama photo is false.

I will see if I can find it later on, and put it up for discussion.

by **Ladyinred** 25.10.24 16:49

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12555p450-dr-martin-roberts-a-nightwear-job

Silentscope - I have found it on this thread.

by **AnneCGuedes** 26.10.24 0:47

PeterMac wrote:If you were going away for one week, would you pack TWO pairs of pyjamas for each of your Three children ?
And if Madeleine has a long sleeved AND a short sleeved pair, which would it be necessary to Wash one because it had a drop of tea (?) on it. Vomit yes, Fae***. yes, but TEA ?

This is another part of the Story they didn't rehearse properly, like the point at which Kate said
"These are the ACTUAL pyjamas she was wearing - when she. . . . Oh bugger, what have I just said ?"

K remarked that M had not tea the evening before. Remember she suggested that there was a kidnapping rehearsal the night before (May 2nd) that would explain the crying episode.

by **AnneCGuedes** 26.10.24 0:52

crusader wrote:
If Kate had washed Madeleine's pyjama top and put it out to dry, I'm not convinced it would be dry enough for her to wear that same night, the weather wasn't warm enough to fully dry washing in my opinion.

Everything (coming from a washing machine) gets dry in a couple of hours in South of PT, even when it rains... if it's windy.

by Spring123 26.10.24 12:38

Thanks for adding me! I'm currently reading Bernt Stellanders book

by **Nina** 26.10.24 12:59

Spring123 wrote:Thanks for adding me! I'm currently reading Bernt Stellanders book

Spring123.

by **CaKeLoveR** 26.10.24 13:07

That's a good start, Spring123. thumbsup

Welcome to the forum.

by **crusader** 26.10.24 13:13

Welcome Spring 123. welcome2

by GreenTara 26.10.24 14:36

AnneCGuedes wrote:

crusader wrote:
If Kate had washed Madeleine's pyjama top and put it out to dry, I'm not convinced it would be dry enough for her to wear that same night, the weather wasn't warm enough to fully dry washing in my opinion.

Everything (coming from a washing machine) gets dry in a couple of hours in South of PT, even when it rains... if it's windy.

…except they were washed by hand, so…

by **PeterMac** 26.10.24 15:28

AnneCGuedes wrote:
K remarked that M had not tea the evening before. Remember she suggested that there was a kidnapping rehearsal the night before (May 2nd) that would explain the crying episode.

Well quite.

She had not had tea because she was already dead.
The "rehearsal", was in fact the real thing which was played out into the early hours of Thursday 3rd.
The crying was Kate crying "Maddie, Maddie' as she cuddled the body to her check pants and T shirt before Gerry forced her
to hand the body over for temporary hiding.
Kate tried not to, but was dealt with "Robustly" as the bruises on her arms demonstrate.

And all the rest of the story was poorly thought through backfitting, - hitting out at furniture, not knowing where the bruises had come from

Every police officer has seen it dozens of times "I walked into a door, I fell over, the airing cupboard door caught me in the face . . ."
to explain away a black eye or bruised cheek, split lip or bloody nose . . . Which of course it doesn't
The bilateral upper arm contusions we see in the photos are classic retraining injuries caused by a MAN gripping HARD and probably shaking a smaller and weaker woman.

by **sandancer** 26.10.24 17:34

Hello and welcome to the forum Spring123 .

When you surface from " The Brick " Please let us know your thoughts , if there are any questions there will always be someone willing to answer

by **sandancer** 26.10.24 17:47

A " kidnapping rehearsal " laugh

. To quote John MCEnroe " you cannot be serious " !

So he lets himself into the apartment must have been through the unlocked patio doors so he didn't have to " jemmy " the window open like he apparently did the following night ? Finds his way round , sees 3 children asleep but decides to leave "it" and come back the next night and do the real " abduction "

Couldn't make it up could you !

But they did make it all up ,and people actually believed the fairy tale .

by **BerntS** 26.10.24 18:05

Sundancer.
The "rehearsal" was agreeing on the hand written timelines, as to who says and does what the next evening. This was done in the early hours of May 3rd.
The modified timeline was written the next night, after the faked abduction, because Matt was not willing, hence the removal of his inside 5a check, yet leaving a space open as Russell, Dave and Gerry believed they could get him on board...

by **AnneCGuedes** 26.10.24 18:14

sandancer wrote:people actually believed the fairy tale .

No, nobody believed it, but of course they didn't say it directly.

by **BerntS** 27.10.24 9:02

The question is; why didn't they simply remove her wearing what she fell in.

The tea stain was most likely blood and spinal fluid, and maybe even vomit.

Again, the wild idea was to wash it as they needed a pro active argument why dna had transfered to the back of the sofa. Creative yes, but still an insane idea to think that someone would think taking photo of the pj would not be suspicious. It was a priority to have an explanation of DNA and fluid on back of the sofa. A splatter is impossible to clean to the extent that CSI or dogs don't discover it.

The reason why the photos had to be blackened was that the police would ask where some clothes were and why they disposed them.

by **crusader** 27.10.24 9:12

Bernt, it's been established, to a point anyway, that the McCann's didn't take the photo.
Louis Forra did, but it is not known where he took it, I can't see him being allowed into 5a to take it.

by **CaKeLoveR** 27.10.24 10:13

If the tea stain was blood, all they had to say was that Madeleine had a nose bleed. That wouldn't work for other bodily fluids, of course.

by **crusader** 27.10.24 10:18

That's always assuming that Kate did actually wash the Pyjama top, proving that Madeleine had worn it the night before.

by **CaKeLoveR** 27.10.24 10:22

Indeed; all we know from them is lies, modified statements and altered times/days.

by Justice for Maddie 27.10.24 11:26

Wait. Amelie wore Maddie's pyjama? Can someone explain it? Poor Amelie, it must be traumatic for her.

Bernt Stellander interview R.cda9d2c8ebd09a50cf7d5a35246ed47e?rik=Jt%2fPZ9rmCIbhxQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk%2fNigel%2fsitebuilderpictures%2fcrimewatchappeal2

Bernt Stellander interview R.cda9d2c8ebd09a50cf7d5a35246ed47e?rik=Jt%2fPZ9rmCIbhxQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk%2fNigel%2fsitebuilderpictures%2fcrimewatchappeal2

by **BerntS** 27.10.24 12:03

Crusader.
Forra did not take that photo, because we can tell it's still damp!!!

Yes, it's been confirmed that he took photos of the pj in Portimao, but those were the other photos, NOT on blue background.

That is the confusion created by Clarrie.