The creche enquiry

PeterMac wrote:

Stella wrote:As yet, I cannot find one single creche worker who saw Madeleine on the 28th, the day they arrived, at the welcome meeting.

Tanner said there was someone there specifically to talk about child care, but who was this?

from another thread some time ago

Re: Remarkable children
PeterMac on Fri 17 Jun 2011 - 20:50

According to p. 47 as soon as they had been allocated to their apartment.

"After reorganising the sleeping arangements and unpacking some essentials, we went down to the pool area at the back of the apartment to join the rest of the holiday group. ... Madeleine immediately wanted me to go swimming with her. I was not exactly keen. But she was so excited about the pool. I took one look at her eager little face and went off to put on my costume."
Went off where ? Where was her costume, and her towel ? Madeleine must already have been in her costume, to be able to jump in ahead of the adults, and into water so cold it stops her breathing for a couple of seconds, and causes serious hypothermia, which they are still suffering three hours later.

"Even if it did take us both the best part of three house to warm up afterwards.
We were still shivering when we went off to a 'welcome' meeting with the Mark Warner team, who outlined the facilities and events on offer."

Exaggerating ? Surely not. If Madeleine really were still shivering after 3 hours she should have received medical attention. Katey was an anaesthetist. She is specially trained to deal with this sort of thing.

Stella wrote:You know what, this nanny Pauline McCann was only ever asked if she knew Kate & Gerry, but what if she knew someone in the wider McCann family?


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

Questioned, states that she also does not know Madeleine's parents, and the twins did not frequent the Baby Club given their age.

PeterMac wrote:

Stella wrote:
What does she mean by "reorganising the sleeping arrangements" ? That kind of suggests that original plans had to be changed. If she means moving one cot, she should have said so.

from p. 45 and 47 paraphrased. Mark Warner had put the two travel cots in the "back bedroom" the one with the full length doors opening onto the baclony, so they put the cots in the "front" bedroom, overlooking the car park and took the "back room" for themselves.

Stella wrote: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”.

Willo wrote:Madelienes death was not expected and her body for whatever reason could not be allowed to go to a post mortem. Thus a hurried plan was evolved that a bunch of highly intelligent people thought they could pull off. They were wrong.

kikoraton wrote:"one of the elements of the group arrived [on the evening of 29 April] with the child Madeleine McCann, she does not know his name and can only say that he was male and tall and thin and that he approached her to request a booking for the whole group"
I thought this happened in the morning of the 29th, was it in the evening?

Given that I have concluded firmly that there was a 3yo substitute for Maddie, who had to satisfy the staff of the OC that she was in fact Madeleine McCann, then I feel obliged to attempt to fit this event into what I believe was going on. Don't take it as gospel - I'm simply trying to work my way through the maze.
The possibility exists that this appearance of a tall thin man (unidentified by name) with a girl who was introduced to the receptionist as Madeleine McCann, was a ruse to imprint the features of the substitute on a member of staff other than the creche workers.
All the receptionist said was, that Madeleine was not with her father. What we need to know is, how did she know this? Did Mr Tall say to her this is Madeleine McCann. I don't think she said this in her statement. Could Mr Tall when leaving the reception area say to his daugther, 'come on Madeleine we need to go and see ...' and this is how she connected the two, being called Madeleine and later seeing the released picture. Either way, Mr Tall must have been someone outside the normal group and his identity is being witheld for a good reason.
Someone else who would be able to say "yes, of course Madeleine McCann was around until 3 May". Yes.

By the morning of 29 April, the subby (according to my theory) would have made her debut in the Lobster Group. What better, then, than to introduce her more widely? But who was the fella with her?
Mr Tall has to be the real Father of the child. Simple.

Not Gerry, by the physical description. I have no reason whatever to believe she would have tagged along with the two tall thin "Tapas", Oldfield or O'Brien. Might it have been her real father, YES who I believe was staying incognito at the OC? A risky strategy if so. But not unthinkable, if it was considered a risk worth taking.
It depends on why they were all out there? Did they all need to protect a BIG secret? If so, that is motive to all stick together.

Willo wrote:In my opinion one thing that grates against the theory of a Madeleine stand in being used that early on in the piece is the total balls up they made a few days later when annoucing to the world about the alleged abduction. Surely if they were that organised and plans were in place days earlier you would think that they would have had a better plan for the end game.
What if certain members of the group got cold feet last minute and pulled out of something they agreed to do? Would that cause mayhem and upset the apple cart? Have you ever rehearsed something in your head about how you would hold a meeting say and then when you went in, you completely forgot what you were going to do and say and made a right hash of it? Having more days to think about something, does not necessarily mean it will run smoother on the day.

There would have been hundreds of ways to lose Madeleine in a way that would safeguard the group from the questions of neglect, abuse, accidental death or even murder.
Something only be known to them decided on abduction by a paedophile, which ensured there was no body left to autopsy. I cannot think of any other way there would be no body left to examine.

The cover up attempted was so shambolic there is no way it was premeditated. Madelienes death was not expected and her body for whatever reason could not be allowed to go to a post mortem. Thus a hurried plan was evolved that a bunch of highly intelligent people thought they could pull off. They were wrong. I agree about them not being able to pull it off, but will not comment on reasons for possible premeditation.

The Tapas being on the whole law abiding citizens were not able to think or act like the criminals they were forced to be by the circumstances and they made so many mistakes between them that damage control spun out of control. Thus disinformation at every turn.
I think a bunch of Doctors would be very good at covering mistakes up personally.

I think the majority of the Tapas rue the day they ever set eyes on the McCanns and the misplaced loyalty they agreed to give to them and the big brothers who were behind them trying desperatly to clean up.

pauline wrote:
And I also wonder what happened to the fake Madeleine.

ROSA wrote:Did Kate have Maddies IB the police would ask for this what do these look like and how is it removed the creche gives these to the children why dont they record the IB info on paper if cat bakerhad written the childrens Bracelets allergies etc did she say what Madeleines allergies were or did she forget

I really don't get this idea that the abduction scene was a total
c***-up. Why? It has flummoxed two police forces for four years!

Stella wrote:

Willo wrote:In my opinion one thing that grates against the theory of a Madeleine stand in being used that early on in the piece is the total balls up they made a few days later when annoucing to the world about the alleged abduction. Surely if they were that organised and plans were in place days earlier you would think that they would have had a better plan for the end game.
What if certain members of the group got cold feet last minute and pulled out of something they agreed to do? Would that cause mayhem and upset the apple cart? Have you ever rehearsed something in your head about how you would hold a meeting say and then when you went in, you completely forgot what you were going to do and say and made a right hash of it? Having more days to think about something, does not necessarily mean it will run smoother on the day.
I can see some merit in that. But even if some were that cagey, worried and scared of involvement about the whole thing surely they would have informed the authorities and fessed up to distance themselves. They didn't. Or didn't need to. So why would they destroy a perfectly good plan and then agreed to partake in a poorly organised one. Why?
Again if they had just forgot their lines on the night then why were they scribbling timelines down. This list surely would have been prepared and committed to those Doctor's sharp memories already. I think they were all/some put on the spot and despite their collective brilliance, they could not keep it together enough to create a plausible course of action and explaination.

There would have been hundreds of ways to lose Madeleine in a way that would safeguard the group from the questions of neglect, abuse, accidental death or even murder.
Something only be known to them decided on abduction by a paedophile, which ensured there was no body left to autopsy. I cannot think of any other way there would be no body left to examine.
Why not just go for a disappearence. Lost on a walk in the bush. Lost on a beach while backs were turned. Lost anywhere of a hundred places. Getting an ice cream. At the airport etc etc. If she didn't exist (e.g. not in Portugal) or was already dead it didn't matter where it was. No stand in needed. No DNA at the scene. No witnesses. If she died in the apartment. The same bullshit could apply. They could have said she had vanished from a hundred places miles away from the apartment on any day early on in the holiday. Why even put her in the creche? Why use a meal time to 'discover' the disappearence? Leaving the need to fabricate a complicated set of lies about who went where, did what and at what time redundant. Then the clean up team would have had time to clean the apartment properly maybe even expecting the dogs at sometime.

The cover up attempted was so shambolic there is no way it was premeditated. Madelienes death was not expected and her body for whatever reason could not be allowed to go to a post mortem. Thus a hurried plan was evolved that a bunch of highly intelligent people thought they could pull off. They were wrong. I agree about them not being able to pull it off, but will not comment on reasons for possible premeditation.
There is no need to comment on the obvious. They chose a senario in haste. A bad one. Maybe with a skinful of wine/coke? that blurred their judgement. They panicked and once they played their cards they had to stick to them. Maybe realising Big Brother was there to clean up gave them a false confidence and their stories were not as tight as the stories trained operatives would have concocted.

The Tapas being on the whole law abiding citizens were not able to think or act like the criminals they were forced to be by the circumstances and they made so many mistakes between them that damage control spun out of control. Thus disinformation at every turn.
I think a bunch of Doctors would be very good at covering mistakes up personally.
Maybe in a hospital situation to avoid getting sued yes but out in the field away from the op theatre they would struggle. Struggling more perhaps under the influence of whatever they imbibed. I have heard through the football grapevine here in NZ that Gerry liked a drink and was a leader, part time captain I believe of his Napier team and a very aggresive talented player too. We have all seen his liking for control over the years. If he was making all the decisions with a few drinks in him would he give anyone else a look in. I doubt a bombastic control freak? would/could relinquish control. And even if there were any street wise Tapas members would they have been listened too?
Or have the balls to contest the plan. No my opinion would be that none, excepting maybe DP, would have any criminal bones or intent in their body. They were sheep following the man who shouted loudest and was most confident.

I think the majority of the Tapas rue the day they ever set eyes on the McCanns and the misplaced loyalty they agreed to give to them and the big brothers who were behind them trying desperatly to clean up.

Willo wrote:
But it's just my story one of many. Stella has a valid story too. As do almost all the posters I imagine. But from whatever angle or aspect you look into this opening gambit or indeed the middle game it's all so corrupt. It is so full of cover ups, lies, deceit, mis and dis information, fraudulence, heresy, purgery and damned ignorance that sooner or later the end game has to explode into action. A end game I'm thinking in which the King and Queen will become expendable pawns, a bishop or two will have their cassocks ruffled and parlimentary castles will be under siege. And that guy Clarence with the horse teeth will never become a Knight. Maybe a few existing Knights should/would be worried too!!

Stella wrote:

ROSA wrote:Did Kate have Maddies IB the police would ask for this what do these look like and how is it removed the creche gives these to the children why dont they record the IB info on paper if cat bakerhad written the childrens Bracelets allergies etc did she say what Madeleines allergies were or did she forget

I think the children's identity bracelets would be along the lines of hospital bracelets. Which is exactly the type hotels use on an all inclusive basis to determine who the guests are. You cannot get them off unless they are cut off. There is a picture of one of the twins wearing one somewhere. I will see if I can find it.