Re: Discussion thread for Bernt's SECOND interview with James English

[deepeepee]

To be fair, Bernt didn't say Gerry was seen leaving with Madeleine's body.

Wow, its true, that is a shocking mistitling (is that a word?) 
On many levels.

No one said that the man referred to by the witness was Gerry McCann.
He did not say the witness said that the person they saw was Gerry McCann.
He did not say that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.
He did not say that the witness said that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.

Just total clickbait.
Someone who is able to contact him should get James English to change or delete this interview snippet.

She did say she recognised the person as being Gerry the same man she had seen on the Sunday with three children at the pool.

Well, unless I missed it, I think you may be assuming something there. No One mentioned Gerry's name at all in the statement . Saying he was the same man who has three kids by the pool is not the same as saying Gerry.
If I recall, she said that she did not get a good look to identify him completely as it was very dark.
I am not saying it was not him or whoever but details are very important.

If someone did mention names then please let me know where. It would make the statement very different legally.

[deepeepee]

P.S. I think Gerry would be extremely interested (legally speaking) if he was identified by name 

[CaKeLoveR]

#Bluebag - the people coming out. I get it now.

[crusader]

It wasn't the witness that Mentioned Gerry, Mr Stellander said " in short Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag leaving the apartment between 1-45 and 1-50 am on the morning of May 3rd"

[Nina]

To be fair, Bernt didn't say Gerry was seen leaving with Madeleine's body.

Wow, its true, that is a shocking mistitling (is that a word?) 
On many levels.

No one said that the man referred to by the witness was Gerry McCann.
He did not say the witness said that the person they saw was Gerry McCann.
He did not say that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.
He did not say that the witness said that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.

Just total clickbait.
Someone who is able to contact him should get James English to change or delete this interview snippet.

She did say she recognised the person as being Gerry the same man she had seen on the Sunday with three children at the pool.

Well, unless I missed it, I think you may be assuming something there. No One mentioned Gerry's name at all in the statement . Saying he was the same man who has three kids by the pool is not the same as saying Gerry.
If I recall, she said that she did not get a good look to identify him completely as it was very dark.
I am not saying it was not him or whoever but details are very important.

If someone did mention names then please let me know where. It would make the statement very different legally.

You are absolutely correct she didn't say the man was called Gerry. She said she recognised him as being the same man she had seen on the Sunday by the pool with three children. I think  she also mentioned he played tennis too. Good spot deepeepee even an odd word here and there can make all the difference. 

[deepeepee]

It wasn't the witness that Mentioned Gerry, Mr Stellander said " in short Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag leaving the apartment between 1-45 and 1-50 am on the morning of May 3rd"

I will have to go back and listen to it all again but if that is exactly what he said then that just doesn't make sense after all the vagueness from the witness.
I will get back to you tomorrow...

[Nina]

It wasn't the witness that Mentioned Gerry, Mr Stellander said " in short Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag leaving the apartment between 1-45 and 1-50 am on the morning of May 3rd"

I will have to go back and listen to it all again but if that is exactly what he said then that just doesn't make sense after all the vagueness from the witness.
I will get back to you tomorrow...

I think I will have to listen and watch again. I found the watching difficult because the wording wasn't always the same as was being spoken, don't know what the technical wording is called. So I need to watch again, ignore the written word and just listen to what he and James were actually speaking.

[crusader]

It's at 32.55 on the video.

[AnneCGuedes]

Really Anne, you just made that up.

Do you want people to take you seriously or not?

No, that statement is a fact.
 

"Having already seen various photographs of Madeleine alongside her images on television, he states that she may have been the child he saw. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been Madeleine. Indeed, this is the opinion of his family..."

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615

[MikaelaB]

What is Bernt reading from, it looks like they worked extensively on the interview beforehand.

The anonymous witness and BBC report needs a lot of work to make it believable and why now, why didn't the witness come forward years ago?

Bernt fluffed over the photographs he says he has.  I need to watch this again.

Is there an active social media place where he speaks?

Hi wallace 'n grommit

Bernt said at the start of the interview he'd be reading from notes so he could answer in as much detail as possible and address clearly all the questions James put forward. 

This was a follow up interview; he wanted to to be specific and not forget anything, hence the notes. His memory is brilliant but he did not want to digress and in consequence forget important details. Don't forget English is not his first language. I thought he was brilliant and clearly explanatory.

He actually explained during the interview why the witness did not come forward at the time; it was on the 2nd May she saw the man carrying the bag so the action wasn't pertinent to the events of the 3rd, so she dismissed it at the time. When one considers Bernt's timeline it falls into place. Bernt said later in the interview she would have been scared to say what she'd seen after consideration, what with all the palaver that followed and the implications surrounding her sighting. 

Hope this makes sense. I've only watched the second interview once, but am going to watch it again to absorb the details; maybe even a few times lol.

Apologies if a reply has already been posted. I haven't read all of the posts yet; I'm always late to the party being in the southern hemisphere.

[Jill Havern]

He actually explained during the interview why the witness did not come forward at the time; it was on the 2nd May she saw the man carrying the bag so the action wasn't pertinent to the events of the 3rd, so she dismissed it at the time. When one considers Bernt's timeline it falls into place. Bernt said later in the interview she would have been scared to say what she'd seen after consideration, what with all the palaver that followed and the implications surrounding her sighting. 

Can you imagine how she must feel now as the reality of what she potentially saw that night sinks in?
She could have witnessed the concealment of the most famous 'missing' child, and biggest cover-up, in modern history.

No wonder she feels scared when you consider what Team McCann have since done to Gonçalo Amaral, Tony Bennett, Pat Brown and Brenda Leyland.

[MikaelaB]

He actually explained during the interview why the witness did not come forward at the time; it was on the 2nd May she saw the man carrying the bag so the action wasn't pertinent to the events of the 3rd, so she dismissed it at the time. When one considers Bernt's timeline it falls into place. Bernt said later in the interview she would have been scared to say what she'd seen after consideration, what with all the palaver that followed and the implications surrounding her sighting. 

Can you imagine how she must feel now as the reality of what she potentially saw that night sinks in?
She could have witnessed the concealment of the most famous 'missing' child, and biggest cover-up, in modern history.

No wonder she feels scared when you consider what Team McCann have since done to Gonçalo Amaral, Tony Bennett, Pat Brown and Brenda Leyland.

Yes it would be a horrendous situation to be in.

[AnneCGuedes]

It wasn't the witness that Mentioned Gerry, Mr Stellander said " in short Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag leaving the apartment between 1-45 and 1-50 am on the morning of May 3rd"

I will have to go back and listen to it all again but if that is exactly what he said then that just doesn't make sense after all the vagueness from the witness.
I will get back to you tomorrow...

This is right. You find it at 33'13-21

[MikaelaB]

No sound though so where was Kate during this time if it was silent. No mention of sound. 
 how could she remain silent?

How could they discover and remain silent ? No mention of any sound in the darkness. Only on May 3, from 9:50 on.

When I broke the news of my young brother's death to my parents they sat in stunned shock.  No crying, no talking - words seem futile.
Just silent contemplation in their grief.
That lasted for DAYS ! ! !

Screaming at death is not normal in western culture.
Compare the funeral of Diana with that of Arafat.

It is normal when a sudden death has been reported for a police officer to go into a house and experience a "Deathly quiet".
Even the TV will usually be turned off !

Yes I agree. A bit off topic but alluding to "western grief": In the 1940s when my father was a young police officer he was sent to the home of a young man who had committed suicide. The parents were in shock and after he'd finished his procedure they invited him to stay for dinner. This was mid 40s, different times. He'd wanted to decline but they were persuasive and he was young and wet behind the ears. He stayed but it was an awful experience he said. The three of them ate their meal in deathly silence. In hindsight he realised they wished company in their quiet grief.

[JB2024]

I'd like to follow-up further with the witness statement from the witness that says she saw the black bag entering the Church two weeks later. I searched the PJ files but couldn't find anything. Is it possible the black bag sighting was just the sighting in 5A only and the sighting at the Church was another slight obsfucation of the truth by Kate in her book. As the black bag witness statement was circuating could it be that the McCanns were being proactive in integrating this sighting into Kate's book to just acknowledge this by 'mentionitis' but obsfucating the details. If BS was still on the Forum I'd be asking this? @PeterMac do you know anything here?

[Bluebagthepirate]

To be fair, Bernt didn't say Gerry was seen leaving with Madeleine's body.

Wow, its true, that is a shocking mistitling (is that a word?) 
On many levels.

No one said that the man referred to by the witness was Gerry McCann.
He did not say the witness said that the person they saw was Gerry McCann.
He did not say that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.
He did not say that the witness said that the person was carrying Madeleine's body.

Just total clickbait.
Someone who is able to contact him should get James English to change or delete this interview snippet.

She did say she recognised the person as being Gerry the same man she had seen on the Sunday with three children at the pool.

Well, unless I missed it, I think you may be assuming something there. No One mentioned Gerry's name at all in the statement . Saying he was the same man who has three kids by the pool is not the same as saying Gerry.
If I recall, she said that she did not get a good look to identify him completely as it was very dark.
I am not saying it was not him or whoever but details are very important.

If someone did mention names then please let me know where. It would make the statement very different legally.

Oh come off it.

Any more molehills?

[Bluebagthepirate]

It wasn't the witness that Mentioned Gerry, Mr Stellander said " in short Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag leaving the apartment between 1-45 and 1-50 am on the morning of May 3rd"

I will have to go back and listen to it all again but if that is exactly what he said then that just doesn't make sense after all the vagueness from the witness.
I will get back to you tomorrow...

Really?

It's as plain as day who the witness means.

[Bluebagthepirate]

Really Anne, you just made that up.

Do you want people to take you seriously or not?

No, that statement is a fact.
 

"Having already seen various photographs of Madeleine alongside her images on television, he states that she may have been the child he saw. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been Madeleine. Indeed, this is the opinion of his family..."

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615

"may".

Now go back and read what you wrote.

[Ladyinred]

He actually explained during the interview why the witness did not come forward at the time; it was on the 2nd May she saw the man carrying the bag so the action wasn't pertinent to the events of the 3rd, so she dismissed it at the time. When one considers Bernt's timeline it falls into place. Bernt said later in the interview she would have been scared to say what she'd seen after consideration, what with all the palaver that followed and the implications surrounding her sighting. 

The witness was the man on Thursday, 3rd May, in the early hours - 2am, not 2nd May.

[PeterMac]

Well, unless I missed it, I think you may be assuming something there. No One mentioned Gerry's name at all in the statement . Saying he was the same man who has three kids by the pool is not the same as saying Gerry.
If I recall, she said that she did not get a good look to identify him completely as it was very dark.
I am not saying it was not him or whoever but details are very important.

If someone did mention names then please let me know where. It would make the statement very different legally.

The same man with three Children by the pool on Sunday who just happens to come out of 5A carrying a child sized object in a bin liner just
20 hours before a child sized object is reported missing from 5A.

How could this woman possibly know his NAME ?

[HiDeHo]

After more than a year of deep research I showed a couple of graphics...the info is too huge to release until I have all the 'timeline' sources.

I have always been aware that his claim of her on the hill could 'fit' and I sought out info regarding the day he claims they buried her...as I alluded to I dispute her body STILL on the hill.

As I have mentioned, and I won't bother again, I see no credibility in most of  his claims.  I see a LOT of claims that need questions answered and a lot of 'research' that is incorrect.

I cannot blindly believe a scenario that does not stand up to scrutiny.

There was a reason he blocked me before we even communicated, along with him using my graphics and videos without any credit or permission...something I would not usually have any issue with.

However...his incorrect claims of 'fact', refusal to respond to questions, rudeness towards anyone that does not blindly believe is not a person I choose to use my energy on or have a lot of respect for.

Not wishing for this thread to turn in to another handbag fight, I will just post this with his permission as it shows Bernt's side of the story:

The reason I blocked Lizzie in 2022!!! and had forgot about it, was that her forum reacted very negatively to the truthman masked man video which someone tried to post in her forum. That was also the reason that we unpublished it for some time. 

So when Jane Harris asked me to do a q and a for one hour, I never saw Lizzies question (because I had blocked her in 2022). 
Jane  texted me during the 3 hours and 25 minutes! Q and A, so Jane sent me Lizzies question on messenger, I answered, and Jane forwarded (I would assume).

Before I logged off, I asked if I'd missed anything, even if Jane had initially said on the thread I might not be able to answer every question, since certain people are watching, team mcc.

Lizzie was extremely offended, and that's where everything started. 

So Lizzie seems to assume things from her imagination. I blocked her because I knew truthman was not welcome since he said Smithman was irrelevant.

ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS!!  He is lying AGAIN!!! I can PROVE IT!!

[deepeepee]

It's at 32.55 on the video.

OK I was wrong completely. I missed that the first time...   Mea Culpa!

I have had to listen again and I thought it would be useful to note down exactly what was said to help me (and maybe anyone else) understand.
 
So, just to be clear, here this is Bernt talking in his own words, summarising what he was told by a person (a private investigator) who contacted him (Bernt) about what was told to this P.I by a witness that the P.I. interviewed.
 
Bernt says at 33m13s "In short, Gerry was seen carrying a heavy black sack or bag, leaving the apartment between 1:45 and 1:50 am on the morning of May 3rd. That's two hours after I claim she died from an accidental fall inside the apartment."
 
Bernt says at 35m58s "Gerry must have noticed someone walking by as he carried that heavy black sack out from apartment 5a in the middle of the night. The night before the fake abduction."
 
Then, after that, he goes on to read the transcript of the witness questions and answers.
 
....Interviewer: "What did you see?"
Witness: "I saw a man carrying a black large bag over his arm, looked like trash bags."
Interviewer: "Did you see which direction he came from and went to?'
Witness: "He came out of the apartment 5a and walked to his left towards the car park"
Interviewer "Did you actually see the man come out of the door?"
Witness: "No. As by that time I was already walking past."
Interviewer: "Did you actually see the door open?"
Witness: "I can't be sure but it looked open."
Interviewer: " What was he carrying? Can you describe the item? Was it a suit bag, maybe?"
Witness: "I don't know what it was. It looked too heavy to be a suit bag. Looked like trash. But he was holding it with both hands. It looked heavy."
Interviewer: "Is that usual time and place for people to take away rubbish?"
Witness: "Yes, but not at 2 am. People sometimes leave the bags outside the door but there was a problem with guests piling up rubbish in the gardens. The smell was not good and people complained. I thought maybe he was taking it to a car."
Interviewer:" Is the rubbish collected?
Witness: "No, residents dispose of their own rubbish."
Interviewer: "Can you describe the man? What was he wearing? Was the man Gerry McCann?"
Witness: "Maybe. But I can't be sure as it was very dark. It looked like a man with dark hair, tall and not a local. He had a dark coat on. I could not see his trousers because of the wall."
Interviewer: "Have you seen him before?"
Witness: "Yes. At the pool area on Sunday, I think. And I think a few more times around. He has three small children. And I have seen him running and playing tennis, with other people."
Interviewer: "Did you see where he went?"
Witness: "No."
Interviewer: "Where exactly did you see him?"
Witness: " As I turned the corner and started walking up the little hill, I heard a sound. I could not see over the wall at that time as the wall was too high, it sounded like a shutter opening. This was just as I crossed the little driveway for the car park. I turned to my left and saw a man carrying a black bag.
Interviewer: "Was there a light on, or a window open?"
Witness: "No. No lights on, but yes, the window was wide open. Shutters as well. I thought this was odd because it was quite cold and very late.
Interviewer: "Did you see anyone else?"
Witness: "No, it was very quiet, like always."
Interviewer: "What did you do after you saw the man?"
Witness: "I carried on walking, crossed near the white box like I normally do, up the hill and turned right on my way home. I was quite tired."
Interviewer: "Would you recognise this man again?"
Witness: "I don't know. It was very dark but yes, I think I could."
Interviewer: "Can anyone confirm what you saw?"
Witness: "No. That is another reason I have said nothing."
Interviewer: "Has the GNR or police interviewed you?"
Witness: "No."
Interviewer: "Would you allow me to bring you in as witness to what you saw?"
Witness: "No. I don't want any part of this. Besides, it was the day before. Not the day she went missing."
 
So this witness does not say it was definitely Gerry.
 
Bernt definitely does though and also again refers directly to Gerry carrying a big black bag later as well. He is quite clear and insistent about this even though he says the witness did not want to say it was Gerry for sure.

[Milo]

#349

The man carrying the “load” was seen in the early hours of Thursday 3 May.
Madeleine would have died late on the night of Wednesday 2 May.
Which would give the McCanns enough time to do what they had to do before sounding the “alarm” on the night of Thursday 3 May (c. 10 pm).
We must revisit the details of Wednesday and Thursday, day time. Where were they?!?!?

[Milo]

#346

But don’t we believe that Gerry was not at the pool oon Thursday?

[deepeepee]

Well, unless I missed it, I think you may be assuming something there. No One mentioned Gerry's name at all in the statement . Saying he was the same man who has three kids by the pool is not the same as saying Gerry.
If I recall, she said that she did not get a good look to identify him completely as it was very dark.
I am not saying it was not him or whoever but details are very important.

If someone did mention names then please let me know where. It would make the statement very different legally.

The same man with three Children by the pool on Sunday who just happens to come out of 5A carrying a child sized object in a bin liner just
20 hours before a child sized object is reported missing from 5A.

How could this woman possibly know his NAME ?

Maybe I was not very clear but I was not referring to her knowing his name when i said "not the same as saying Gerry" I meant that she could not identify him as (the person) Gerry McCann.

According to Bernt, the interviewer asked her directly if it was Gerry mcCann. She said  "Maybe. But I can't be sure as it was very dark"

[Silentscope]

Apartment 5A is the only Door at the end of the small wall next to the Car Park.


From the Witness's perspective.

From 'Bagman's' perspective.

[AnneCGuedes]

Apartment 5A is the only Door at the end of the small wall next to the Car Park.


From the Witness's perspective.

Not if the witness was "walking up the little hill" as she said. She would have had to stop and face the building to have that perspective.

[Silentscope]

The Witness refers to this small stretch of Pavement between the Corner, and the Entrance to the Car Park,

Qoute:

As I turned the corner and started walking up the little hill, I heard a sound. I could not see over the wall at that time as the wall was too high, it sounded like a shutter opening. This was just as I crossed the little driveway for the car park. I turned to my left and saw a man carrying a black bag.

[AnneCGuedes]

The Witness refers to this small stretch of Pavement between the Corner, and the Entrance to the Car Park,

Qoute:

As I turned the corner and started walking up the little hill, I heard a sound. I could not see over the wall at that time as the wall was too high, it sounded like a shutter opening. This was just as I crossed the little driveway for the car park. I turned to my left and saw a man carrying a black bag.

In 2007 the car park didn't look like that. It was all planted with high Schinus molle, false pepper trees. Rachael was afraid of their shadows.

[Silentscope]

I agree the Trees have been cut back, but the Wall height was never changed.


Check the number of Steps required from the Corner to the Car park entrance.

Then Imagine someone raising the Shutters, to see if the air was clean before telling Bagman he could go, as no-one could be seen at that point.

It would seem to Match her Testimony.