Discrepancies between the book and the statements in the PJ Files/Videos/Interviews

candyfloss wrote:

admin wrote:

mama wrote:Can any one clear this up for me. The why did you not come when we where crying story. I am trying to find where the parents started embellishing the basics story to 'was it in the bath' I think it was in an interview. I am not sure how the bath fits in - where the children left alone in the bath? I will keep trying to find the exact wording from the interview. thank you your help

You might find what you're looking for here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also, don't know if you've seen my blog but if you click on the pics in the side bar it will take you to the source of the quote (providing it hasn't been whooshed) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also this from 163 questions leaflet.............

39. The McCanns have already admitted that on the morning of 3 May 2007 Madeleine told them that she and Sean had been crying the previous night whilst they were on their own, Madeleine apparently asking: “Why didn’t you come when me and Sean were crying. Given that admission, why did Dr Kate McCann say, in a TV interview: “Was it maybe when we were bathing them that they had cried?”

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

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

And let's not forget the stupid look on her stupid face when she was talking about Maddie crying.

And if you think that was a one-off then think again cos here it comes again.

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

thank you very much for that answer - it worried me
1 if they where crying in the bath and the parents were not there then
a] were they unattended
b] being bathed by someone else. this is disturbing to me in the light of the company present

i still believe this is a red herring - to cover any witness that came forward with the crying in a statement.

mama wrote:thank you very much for that answer - it worried me
1 if they where crying in the bath and the parents were not there then
a] were they unattended
b] being bathed by someone else. this is disturbing to me in the light of the company present

i still believe this is a red herring - to cover any witness that came forward with the crying in a statement.

Goncalo Amaral said this: "It would be interesting to know the reason why Mr David Payne is not taking part in the reconstitution. He might explain for how long he bathed the children and at what time."

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

Re those photos of Kate apparently pulling a stupid face (5.54 yesterday), try as I might I can't achieve such a look - to be fair, could this be an involuntary gesture such as a tic or spasm?

I can do it

They not tics. I don't have the links to the videos, but no they were repeated sneers while talking about her daughter's heartbreak of not getting help or comfort when they were crying. In a way you can say they were involuntary: it is like Gerry's nose scratching: he can't stop himself of doing it. Likewise Kate can't help her face giving away what disdain she feels about her daughter's suffering.

Thanks LJ, I accept what you say. It was just a thought, sometimes a camera angle can be deceiving.

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

Nope no camera angle either: 2 or 3 different interviews, in each of them repeatedly.

Sorry mods, for discussing, I can't find the "blushing" smiley....

And yet again, but this time both are from the book.
p. 84 "Although Jane had never seen or known about Madeleine's Eeyore pyjamas, her description of this child's night clothes - light coloured pink or white pyjamas with a 'trailing' or floral pattern and turn-ups on the bottoms - matched Madeleine's almost exactly. "
and then
p. 171 ]i] "We were able to show a pair or pyjamas like Madeleine's on the programme, which was particularly important since at the time it had been incorrectly stated in some press reports that her pyjamas were white."[/i]

We know the pyjama bottoms were white, we can see them in the photos, and we know that JT says that she saw only the legs and feet of the alleged child being carried away by the alleged abductor on the alleged night, so why on earth is Katey pretending that they were not?
What is going on here. She is protesting too much, over something which should not be important, but clearly is.
Just as she does with Madeleine / Maddie, - Sean / Seany, - Gerald / Gerry. There is an agendum here which we have not yet understood.

P. 56 “It wasn't until a year later, when I was combing though the Portuguese files, that I discovered that the note requesting our block booking was written in a staff message book, which sat on a desk at the pool reception for most of the day. This book was accessible to all staff and, albeit unintentionally, probably to guests and visitors, too. To my horror, I saw that, no doubt in all innocence and simply to explain why she was bending the rules a bit, the receptionist had added the reason for our request: we wanted to eat close to our apartments as we were leaving our young children alone there and checking on them intermittently.”

P 325 “It was here [combing through the files] I found the receptionist’s note in the Ocean Club staff message book explaining that we wanted to book the Tapas restaurant for the rest ot that week because we were leaving our children alone in our apartments. I was dismayed. This was a green light to a child-taker - and yet no mention of it is made in the files until December 2007.”

In what language was this note written ?
If in English it may rule out a Portuguese, or ‘foreign’ abductor. Unless he is skilled at reading English handwriting, upside down across a desk. And A desk. Which desk ?

Or are we to believe that the staff notebook was left on the reception desk in full view, and open at the McCann’s special page for the entire week, and facing guests and visitors.

It was on a desk in reception. Is there a receptionist on duty during the day ?
If so, did that receptionist not notice the spotty, smelly, mumbling, stooping person with bad breath and funny clothes, walking with a limp, smelling of garlic and being ‘Stereoypically Foreign’ as he tried to read the book upside down across the desk in case it contained details of a perfect blonde child abandonded every evening by its parents, with details of which doors in which apartment would be left open, and how often checks would be done.

Really ?

Are we also to assume that this person visits reception regularly throughout the year trawling for details of this sort. And that the staff message book was left open at the relevant page for the entire week, with nothing else being written in it.

As with most of these post hoc explanations of what might have happened, when we start to look at them more closely...

I used to think that, out of all the silly reasons and excuses that the McCanns have come up with, those involving Cuddlecat were the most unbelievable. I've now decided that "the note left through no fault of our own which advertised to the world that our home alone children were up for grabs" is even more stupid.

Sorry if I may have missed it, but has anyone seen this note about leaving the kids alone in the PJ files? I can't remember seeing it. Perhaps I have missed it, or it is one of the things that hasn't been translated or appear on the copies we have?

p. 301 "At 1am on Wednesday, 27 February 2008, Gerry and I were woken suddenly from our sleep."

Even the earth tremor is fiction. You can find all earthquakes at
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
and there isn't one round their area that day

It is more likely to have been the British Geological Survey, who are based at Kegworth, not a million miles from Rothley.

 
 
Not fiction then.

 
 
 

Tried posting a link to bbc.co.uk/leicester but it wont work.There was indeed an earthquake in Leicester on 27th Feb 2008 as was correctly stated in the book.

summer wrote:Tried posting a link to bbc.co.uk/leicester but it wont work.There was indeed an earthquake in Leicester on 27th Feb 2008 as was correctly stated in the book.

Unfortunately posting links won't work for guests summer, but thank you for letting us know.

If there was, then I stand corrected. The worldwide date base does not seem to have recorded it. The BBC may know more or better.

It was recorded in detail on the USGS website that you used as your own reference.
 
It is extracted below.
 
As you sure you were a policeman?   [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] 
 
__________________________
 
Magnitude 4.8 - ENGLAND, UNITED KINGDOM


2008 February 27 00:56:45 UTC

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Earthquake Details

• This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
  

4.8

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 00:56:45 UTC Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 12:56:45 AM at epicenter

53.321°N, 0.314°W

10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program

ENGLAND, UNITED KINGDOM

40 km (25 miles) S of Kingston upon Hull, England, UK 75 km (45 miles) NE of Nottingham, England, UK 80 km (50 miles) E of Sheffield, England, UK 210 km (130 miles) N of LONDON, United Kingdom

horizontal +/- 6.8 km (4.2 miles); depth fixed by location program

NST= 50, Nph= 50, Dmin=291.4 km, Rmss=1.02 sec, Gp= 54°, M-type=body wave magnitude (Mb), Version=7

British Geological Survey, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

us2008nyae

• Report shaking and damage at your location. You can also view a map displaying accumulated data from your report and others.
  

Earthquake Summary

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

Felt Reports


One person injured and buildings damaged in Lincolnshire and South Yorkshire. Felt (V) at Barnsley, Bedworth, Beeston and Stapleford, Bentley, Beverley, Bicester, Boston, Brigg, Brighouse, Chesterfield, Chorley, Doncaster, Droitwich, East Retford, Eaton Socon, Failsworth, Grantham, Grimsby, Heywood, Hinckley, Ilkeston, Kingston upon Hull, Leicester, Lincoln, Long Eaton, Loughborough, Mablethorpe and Sutton, Mansfield, Matlock, Melton Mowbray, Mold, Morley, Newark, Rotherham, Scunthorpe, Sheffield, Skegness, Sleaford, Spalding-Pinchbeck, Stamford, Whitefield and Worksop. Felt widely in the United Kingdom, north to Arbroath, southwest to Falmouth-Penryn and east to Great Yarmouth. Also felt at Douglas, Isle of Man; Antwerp, Brussels and Gent, Belgium; Aniche, France; Letterkenny, Ireland and Haarlem, The Netherlands.




Earthquake Maps

• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Earthquake Location
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Location Maps
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Did You Feel It? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Historical Seismicity
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Seismic Hazard Map
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  EQ Density Map
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Google Map
  
• [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  Google Earth KML
  (Requires )
  

Scientific & Technical Information

• 
  
• 
  

Additional Information

• 
  
• 
  

---

• Preliminary Earthquake Report
  
• 
  for Seismology, Denver
  

Yes, here is the link to the site.

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

Is this an example of the work of the "research group"?   [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] 

I stand corrected.
Having seen clear evidence of the occurrence, I now accept that this was true.

Fair enough.   [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] 
 
However, it does not bode well for other "revelations" does it.   
 
 

S_S, assuming that you are a new member, welcome. I hope that you will not let what was a genuine error cloud your opinion of the other information that is available on this site.

At least error are being admitted here. I know someone who had them printed, with some extra vulgar lie-sauce over it, and is making millions.

Whoever can you mean LJ?! The thing that's getting me most at the moment (and there are so many things about this case which have caused me to be "got") is the complete reversal in the "eye defect" story. This has always been such a vital and well-publicised issue but now suddenly any defect Madeleine may have had is being described as hardly noticable.

Marian wrote:Whoever can you mean LJ?! The thing that's getting me most at the moment (and there are so many things about this case which have caused me to be "got") is the complete reversal in the "eye defect" story. This has always been such a vital and well-publicised issue but now suddenly any defect Madeleine may have had is being described as hardly noticable.

I hope you were sarcastic, like me.
Sorry, I still have to wake up. I am stuck behind the computer waiting on some messages and haven't seen coffee yet.

Yes LJ that was indeed my attempt at sarcasm or perhaps humour - get that brew going soon!

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

Differing version from PJ files to that of Kate's book.............


At 10pm I went back to the apartment myself.....snipped

When I realized Madeleine wasn’t actually there, I went through to our bedroom to see if she’d got into our bed. That would explain the open door. On the discovery of another empty bed, the first wave of panic hit me. As I ran back into the children’s room the closed curtains flew up in a gust of wind. My heart lurched as I saw now that, behind them, the window was wide open and the shutters on the outside raised all the way up. Nausea, terror, disbelief, fear. Icy fear. Dear God, no! Please, no!
On Madeleine’s bed, the top right-hand corners of the covers were still turned over, forming a triangle. Cuddle Cat and her pink princess blanket were lying where they’d been when we’d kissed her goodnight. I dashed over to the second bed, on the other side of the travel cots where the twins slept on, oblivious, and looked out through the window. I’ve no idea what I expected to see there.
Refusing to acknowledge what I already knew, and perhaps automatically going into a well-practised medical-emergency mode, I quickly scoured the apartment to exclude all other possibilities, mentally ticking boxes that I knew, deep down, were already ticked. I checked the wardrobe in the children’s room. I ran into the kitchen, throwing open all the cupboard doors, into our bedroom, searching the wardrobes, in and out of the bathroom, all within about fifteen seconds, before hurtling out through the patio doors and down towards Gerry and our friends. As soon as our table was in sight I started screaming. ‘Madeleine’s gone! Someone’s taken her!’ Everyone seemed frozen for a split second, perhaps unable, as I’d been, to process this information. Then they all jumped up from their chairs and ran towards me. I remember Gerry saying, ‘She must be there!’ By now, I was hysterical. ‘She’s not! She’s gone!’
Everybody sprinted back to our apartment, except for Dianne, who remained in the Tapas area, and Jane, who was away from the table seeing to her kids. I remember feeling frustrated when David said, ‘Let’s just check the apartment.’ I’d done that, and I knew, I knew, that Madeleine had been abducted. I ran out into the car park, flying from end to end, yelling desperately, ‘Madeleine! Madeleine!’ It was so cold and so windy. I kept picturing her in her short-sleeved Marks and Spencer Eeyore pyjamas and feeling how chilled she would be. Bizarrely, I found myself thinking it would have been better if she’d been wearing her long-sleeved Barbie ones. Fear was shearing through my body.
In the children’s room, Gerry lowered the shutter at the open window. Rushing outside, he made the sickening discovery that it could be raised from this side, too, not just from inside as we’d thought. Gerry, David, Russell and Matt split into pairs and dashed around the adjacent apartment blocks, meeting back at our flat within a couple of minutes. Just after ten past ten, Gerry asked Matt to run to the Ocean Club’s twenty-four-hour reception to get the staff to call the police.
　
At 10.35 the police had still not arrived, so Gerry asked Matt if he would go back down to the twenty-four-hour reception and find out what was happening. John Hill, the Mark Warner resort manager, came up to the veranda behind our apartment. I remember screaming at him to do something. ‘Where are the police?’ I yelled at him. He tried to reassure me they’d be with us soon but I could tell that he, too, was finding the waiting difficult. Minutes felt like hours.




And yet the police didn't recieve the call until 22.50?

**********************

22:50 - First call to GNR Lagos precinct (Guarda Nacional Republicana, rural police); The first call to Police Precinct of GNR (Portuguese Rural Police) in Lagos, reporting a missing child and asking for Police help was made at 22:50 and a patrol was sent, arriving at Ocean Club 12/15 minutes later, according to Lieutenant-Colonel Costa Cabral, Head of Public Relations of GNR.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]





Firstly, if you look at the description in the book, from KM leaving to check at 10 pm and all the things she does, searching the apartment, and taking into account the walk to the apartment, and then running back which initself would take around 5/6 minutes then her searching the apartment, then they all rushed back to the apartment, and Gerry tried the shutters from inside then rushed outside to try them, then they all split into pairs and dashed around adjacent blocks and then met back at the apartment and then JUST AFTER 10.10 pm Matt was asked to go to reception to call the police?? All that happened in 10 minutes??

Then Matt is asked again to go back and find out why the police hadn't arrived at 10.35 - and yet the call to the police didn't happen until 10.40/10.50 pm??