The creche enquiry

by Guest 21.06.11 10:08

What do we really know about the creche facilities?

According to Catriona Baker, Madeleine's nanny for the week, there were several different groups.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The age requirements of the various clubs are:

3-11 months (baby Club)

12-23 months (Toddler Club)

24 months to 3 years (Toddler 2 Club)

3 to 5 years of age (Mini Club)

6 years to 9 years of age (Juniors Club)

10 years to 15 years of age (Kids Club)

14 to 17 years of age (Indies Club)

The Baby Club and the Mini Club are situated directly on top of the 24-hour reception.
The Toddler Club is located close to the tapas Bar and the others close to the “Millennium” Restaurant.

by Guest 21.06.11 10:20

If you carefully read the above rogatory interview, what you will see is a few things that just does not tie up with what we can see for ourselves in the files.

1. The Identity Bracelets

Below is a section from Cat's statement where she talks about this. But I challenge you to find one photo of Madeleine wearing one? In fact, I challenge you to find any of the other children in the group wearing one BEFORE May 3rd.

From Cat Baker's Rogatory interview:

“I got to know Gerry and Kate McCann on the Sunday morning, 29.04.2007, in the Minis Club. They brought the children and as it was their first day of holidays the normal procedure was that they were allocated a childcare worker. I had previously written the children’s bracelets which included their name, allergies and relevant information. I stayed with Madeleine, 3 years old, in my group (Minis Club that week) together with E***, daughter of Jane Tanner”.

by Guest 21.06.11 10:23

This is a picture of the Payne eldest child at breakfast.

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

Where is her identity bracelet for the week? They have to be non-removable for the week to ensure each child’s information remains with the child.

All greyscale photo’s, no bracelets visible here either.

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

by Guest 21.06.11 10:27

This is a picture of Tanner's oldest daughter sitting on David Payne's lap.

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

She was also in Cat's group along with Madeleine.

Where is her identity bracelet?

by Guest 21.06.11 10:37

2. The Separate Signature Sheets

Below she describes how the filling in of the creche sheets should work. Followed by how the creche sheets actually looked. Where has the sepate sheet for the afternoon gone?

From Cat Baker’s Rogatory Interview:

Mark Warner has a standard procedure, the signature on a page when a parent leaves or checks-in a child. There is a separate page for the morning and one for the afternoon. The page contains the name of the child, the hour of sign-in and the hour of pick-up for the afternoon. Only the parents have authority to take the children, except when there is some other agreement.

by Guest 21.06.11 10:42

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

by Guest 21.06.11 11:02

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Above is a copy of a MW booking form.

Take a closer look at the reservation for Berry and for Handy and what you will see is a request for their children to attend creche. 1 x Mini Club. 1 x Toddler 2 Club. Reservations that they specifically made prior to arriving at OC.

Now, if we remember how much fuss the tapas group made before arriving in Portugal about the listening service at night, why did none of them think to reserve a place in advance for any of their children at creche during the day. The others did?

They all knew that they intended to have an action packed holiday and would need someone to look after their children.

by Guest 21.06.11 11:08

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

What date was this creche sheet from Stella. The am and pm are on one sheet, perhaps they had run out of sheets that day? Perhaps they hadn't got time to photocopy more?

by Guest 21.06.11 11:18

That creche sheet Candyfloss is for the first full day of their holiday, Sunday the 29th April.

In the library there is a Creche Sheet thread that has a copy of every single sheet.

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

Madeleine's group the Lobsters, am and pm all appears on just one page.

The twins group Starfish & Jellyfish, does have a seperate page for am and pm.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 21.06.11 11:29

candyfloss wrote:
The am and pm are on one sheet, perhaps they had run out of sheets that day?
Perhaps they hadn't got time to photocopy more?

To run out for one day? maybe.

To run out for the whole week? no way.

by Guest 21.06.11 12:24

This is the very worrying bit.

"I had previously written the children’s bracelets which included their name, allergies and relevant information"
Catriona Baker

1. Name
2. Allergies
3. Relevant information

If a nanny took a child to high tea, which as we know happened quite often in the afternoon. How would she know what child had what allergy? None of them were wearing bracelets.

How would she know what any childs correct name was?

by Guest 21.06.11 16:20

Question:

On the afternoon of the 30th of April, Kate signs Madeleine in at 15.15, then signs her out again 15 minutes later at 15.30.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Is there anything anywhere from any of Kate's interviews or book, to ever explain why she did this?

by Guest 21.06.11 16:27

Question:

Why did Stephen Carpenter in his statement say that his daughter and Madeleine were in the same group, yet his daughters name never appears on the same creche sheet as Madeleine? Well apart from one day, the 1st of May, when her name is added but is then scrubbed off.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by guest 60 21.06.11 17:02

Q: HAVE YOU
CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY that Madeleine died on the previous night or even
when mrs. Fenn heard the crying?
Amaral: NATURALLY - the investigation begins
with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist and then,
who was the last person to see her - the investigation shows clearly that she
was last seen around 17.30.

Q: Have you any doubt as to the validity of
Madeleine attending the creche on 3/5?
Amaral: NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER

by GARTH 21.06.11 20:22

lol that put paid to that one then! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Good effort Stella, but getting a little carried away me thinks! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by guest 60 21.06.11 21:24

PJ Final Report....... What
happened during the time lapse between 5.30 p.m. (the time at which
MADELEINE was seen for the last time by a person that differs from her
parents or siblings) and the time at which the disappearance is reported by
KATE HEALY (at around 10 p.m.).

by Guest 22.06.11 10:04

guest 60 wrote:Q: HAVE YOU
CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY that Madeleine died on the previous night or even
when mrs. Fenn heard the crying?
Amaral: NATURALLY - the investigation begins
with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist and then,
who was the last person to see her - the investigation shows clearly that she
was last seen around 17.30.

Q: Have you any doubt as to the validity of
Madeleine attending the creche on 3/5?
Amaral: NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER

IN MY OPINION
As Goncalo Amaral has explained, "the investigation begins with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist".
The McCann's and their friends say that she did. The creche worker agrees wtih them. So she must have, right? Wrong. The McCann's and their friends are not independent witnesses and the creche worker can only testify that 'a' child called Maddie or something sounding like Madeleine was brought into the creche and that to the best of her knowledge, she believed it was the child born as Madeleine Beth McCann. That's all. This does not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the child taken to the creche every day was indeed Kate and Gerry's 'real' daughter.

Goncalo then says, "who was the last person to see her"?
Yes, who was the last independent person to see her exactly? Surely not another member of the same group, David Payne at 17.30? An independent witness?, I think not. Remember, this is a group who had a pact to remain silent. So going back a bit further, we then have the nanny in the creche. Considering that this nanny claimed to have put identity bracelets on all of the children, yet clearly she did not. Then she claimed that every afternoon a separate sheet was used to sign all the children in, but that never happened either. So why should we believe her when she says that she actually saw Madeleine Beth McCann in the creche every day? (for the record, I am not suggesting in any way that she is deliberately covering anything up here)

Goncalo says, "the investigation shows clearly that she was last seen around 17.30".
All this means is, that someone has gone on record and made a statement to validate that they did. That's all. It does not prove that they are telling the truth.

When asked to confirm the validity of Madeleine attending creche on the 3rd, Goncalo Amaral says, "no doubt whatsoever".
If the creche worker said that she did and the registration sheet also suggests that she did, why would he think otherwise? But surely this is only working on the proviso that a child the creche worker believed to be Madeleine Beth McCann, was the little girl to attend creche that day?

In my opnion, until such a time as a thorough forensic investigation takes place into every written entry, for every child, on every single day, to rule out any possibly forged entries, we cannot assume anything is correct on those sheets. This is where the Met needs to focus all of their attention right now, as it could save them a lot of hard work and wasted time in other areas.

by Guest 22.06.11 10:10

GARTH wrote:lol that put paid to that one then! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Good effort Stella, but getting a little carried away me thinks! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It put paid to nothing Garth. As explained in my last post. Everything that Goncalo Amaral has said, is open to interpretation and sometimes you have to read between the lines and think outside the box.

by Guest 22.06.11 10:17

guest 60 wrote:PJ Final Report....... What
happened during the time lapse between 5.30 p.m. (the time at which
MADELEINE was seen for the last time by a person that differs from her
parents or siblings) and the time at which the disappearance is reported by
KATE HEALY (at around 10 p.m.).

Again guest 60, that report is based on what was known in 2007/2008. It is now 2011 and a fairly recent discovery in the creche records could lead to the investigation having to be reopened, to re-examine them.

I'm quite sure the McCann's would be very happy about that don't you think ? It's what they have longed for, the re-opening of the investigation, yes ?

by Me 22.06.11 10:57

Stella wrote:
GARTH wrote:lol that put paid to that one then! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Good effort Stella, but getting a little carried away me thinks! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It put paid to nothing Garth. As explained in my last post. Everything that Goncalo Amaral has said, is open to interpretation and sometimes you have to read between the lines and think outside the box.

Stella, whilst it's always "nice" to welcome Garth back after his frequent little sabaticals, don't you find it amusing that he and others like him who constantly label Amaral a liar,corrupt and claim that the theory in his book is worthless, then use quotes from him to back up their counter points.

Seems to me they can't have it both ways.

by Guest 22.06.11 12:40

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Yes Me, I did think that was a little odd. Goncalo Amaral would be proud of them.

by Guest 22.06.11 13:12

Question:

On the 1st May, Russell O'Brien signs in his eldest daughter as 'Emma' O'Brien, which is then crossed out by someone and replaced with the correct name of Ella.

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

How could Russell have got his daughter's name wrong? perhaps it would suggest that;

1. That Russell forgot the name of his eldest child for some reason on that particular day.

2. That someone who was not Russell, got confused and signed her in as Ella and used Russell's signature to do so.

As I cannot see him forgetting his own daughter's name, I think this clearly shows that someone else had entered that information.

by puzzled 22.06.11 13:20

Stella wrote: This does not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the child taken to the creche every day was indeed Kate and Gerry's 'real' daughter.

Interesting stuff here, but I have a few questions. If the child brought to the creche wasn't Madeleine McCann, who was she? Also, if she died before May 3rd,or even before May1st, who was the child heard crying on the night of MAy 1st? Also, how is the Smith sighting to be explained? Surely they wouldn't wait several days before trying to dispose of her?

by pauline 22.06.11 13:51

Like puzzled I am not yet convinced about the creche signing in sheets.

Were the actual parents/guardians meant to sign in their own children? It could be a requirement for insurance reasons.

If there was such a rule, this would sometimes be inconvenient so you might ask someone else to drop in your child and sign YOUR name. This would explain different handwriting styles. And maybe also confusing the child's name with a similar one.

Or two sets of parents (who know one another) could arrive together and the parent closest to the signing in book would sign in both sets of children for convenience to allow the other parent to get to the tennis court or wherever.

Personally I don't take signing in generally that seriously. I am often asked to sign in to buildings and I would often sign in a colleague with me for example. My writing could vary considerably as I would scribble to minimise the delay at the reception desk. And I've noticed that those in charge of signing in books don't always bother too much with what you put.

Are we overanalysing the creche records?

Are we over analysing these creche records.

by Guest 22.06.11 13:52

puzzled wrote:
Stella wrote: This does not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the child taken to the creche every day was indeed Kate and Gerry's 'real' daughter.

Interesting stuff here, but I have a few questions. If the child brought to the creche wasn't Madeleine McCann, who was she?
It is believed that she is the daughter of another family staying out there, who was not a Mark Warner guest. A poster on here by the name of Kiko has seen her picture and her name is very similar to the spelling Madeleine.

Also, if she died before May 3rd,or even before May1st, who was the child heard crying on the night of MAy 1st?
We must not forget it was just the one child that was heard. If all 3 McCann children had been in that room, more than one child would have been heard crying. As I believe that all of the children were being looked after in one room, not in G5A, but in another apartment elsewhere. The single child heard could have been one of the twins being transported between rooms. Or it could have just been any one of the children in the group left to scream the place down for over an hour, so that someone nearby heard them to verify that the children were being left alone.

Also, how is the Smith sighting to be explained? Surely they wouldn't wait several days before trying to dispose of her?
The Smith sighting could have been a dummy run, to ensure that someone saw a child heading for the beach at just the right time, to make everyone think she left the area by boat. The faked abduction run.

by Guest 22.06.11 14:10

pauline wrote:Like puzzled I am not yet convinced about the creche signing in sheets.

Were the actual parents/guardians meant to sign in their own children? It could be a requirement for insurance reasons.
Please see entry in red at the bottom of this post.

If there was such a rule, this would sometimes be inconvenient so you might ask someone else to drop in your child and sign YOUR name.
There is nothing wrong with dropping someone elses child off to creche, but if you had arranged to do so with the nanny, you should use your own name and signature not someone elses.

This would explain different handwriting styles. And maybe also confusing the child's name with a similar one.
It certainly does explain why some of the handwriting does not belong to the name beside it. What it does not explain is why none of them mentioned it in any of their statements.

Or two sets of parents (who know one another) could arrive together and the parent closest to the signing in book would sign in both sets of children for convenience to allow the other parent to get to the tennis court or wherever.
Perhaps this explains why Madeleine and the Naylor child is signed in frequently at exactly the same time or very nearly the same time. But why did Gerry never mention knowing Robert Naylor? and how did any of them know how the other persons signature went?

Personally I don't take signing in generally that seriously.
This was not an entry book into a public building. This was for the safety and security of very young children.
I am often asked to sign in to buildings and I would often sign in a colleague with me for example. My writing could vary considerably as I would scribble to minimise the delay at the reception desk. And I've noticed that those in charge of signing in books don't always bother too much with what you put.
If they knew you, they obviously trusted you.

Are we overanalysing the creche records? No

Are we over analysing these creche records. Definitely not. This is a missing persons/murder investigation and as such every single avenue that can be explored, needs to be explored. You may not think it is important, but a great many people do.

Catriona Baker said;

"Mark Warner has a standard procedure, the signature on a page when a parent leaves or checks-in a child. There is a separate page for the morning and one for the afternoon. The page contains the name of the child, the hour of sign-in and the hour of pick-up for the afternoon. Only the parents have authority to take the children, except when there is some other agreement".

by Guest 22.06.11 14:26

Question:

On the afternoon of April 30th, just when Madeleine had been signed in and out again after just 15 minutes. Russell O'Brien comes along at 16.00 and signs his daughter in for the first time that afternoon. The session should end at 17.00.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Why did he have to sign his daughter in for the last remaining hour?

by Guest 22.06.11 14:39

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

Whose writing is this from the 30th April ?

by Guest 22.06.11 14:47

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

Who wrote this entry on May 2nd ?

I thought Kate said in her book that after May 3rd she suddenly became Kate Healy?

by Guest 22.06.11 14:56

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

Who wrote these entries on Apr 30th?

It would appear that Russell now thinks he was in apartment G5B, instead of G5D according to the MW booking sheets.