Re: The creche enquiry

by ROSA 06.07.11 3:59

Stella wrote:
pauline wrote:
And I also wonder what happened to the fake Madeleine.
That one is quite a simple possibility. At 5.30 on the 3rd, when she left the creche, her parents left OC and headed straight for the airport. They could have been in the air just as Kate screamed "She's gone" around 10pm, having had 4.5 hours head start. No one would ever stop and question a family with the correct passports, now would they?

Perhaps this is why abduction day had to be a Thursday. It was the first flight back they could arrange Which could be very simple for the Met to check out. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Stella could this be the secret guests they had asked for a extra bed?
They use a sub Maddie and would want the sub to stay with them to make it look like that child was theres and it was the sub sleeping in Maddies bed and the extra bed was for the subs father ?

by Guest 06.07.11 8:41

ROSA wrote:
Stella could this be the secret guests they had asked for a extra bed?
They use a sub Maddie and would want the sub to stay with them to make it look like that child was theres and it was the sub sleeping in Maddies bed and the extra bed was for the subs father ?

Interesting idea ROSA? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] An extra bed for 'the Father', whilst the sub sleeps in the spare bed in Madeleine's bedroom?? Well, out of all the scenarios I had envisaged ROSA, that wasn't one of them. We do still have this mysterious blonde man seen sheepishly leaving the garden and rear gate of G5B. So who knows??

As for Catriona Baker and if she can be trusted? She was not under oath at the point she was interviewed, so she could say what she likes I guess. But as we can see, what should have happened and what did happen, are miles apart.

by ROSA 07.07.11 1:43

Gerry McCann’s Witness Statement taken in the presence of an interpreter, Natália Carvalho Ferreira de Almeida in 2007, it says ‘When asked, he said that he had already been to Portugal in 1994. He stayed in an apartment on the outskirts of Albufeira. He has only returned to Portugal on this occasion‘

but on page 42 of her book Madeleine, Kate says:

“I’d never been to Portugal, although Gerry had been there on a couple of golfing trips a few years before”

As for the Plymouth stuff – it could be either a coincidence or just extended family stuff. Gerry said he wasn’t related to Ruth McCann – which may be true – but then again Ruth McCann (from the Liverpool area) only married her husband in later life. Her husband, Michael McCann brought up his daughter (now Donna Aldred, nee McCann) in Plymouth – and she was schooled at a nearby convent. This was with his first wife. he married Ruth – his second wife – very late in life. He died several years ago. Donna is in her early 40s. Apartment 5A was actually her and her husband’s apartment. She sold it to Ruth McCann – her stepmother a year or two before Madeleine went missing. Like Rachel Oldfield, Donna went to college in Cardiff.
Shaping up more like a scam, really. Or they simply didn’t want to drag Ruth and Donna McCann into all this – so denied their extended relationship.

by **kikoraton** 07.07.11 10:24

From page 25:
"I'll have to dig out a photo of Mr R and daughter M, just to remind myself if he is tall and thin. I think he is."
Yes, he is! Although the three photos I and my colleague have of his daughter might, in some circumstances, be of more interest to the Met.

by Guest 07.07.11 10:40

Just to confirm, is Mr R the man who owns an apartment/villa out there. Which might mean he has been there many times before and is very familiar with the OC workings and possibly many of the staff ?

Just thinking if this is how he managed to pull off the group booking for the whole week. 9 out of 20 available MW places, guaranteed every night for him, must mean he has some sort of clout !! As there were many other MW guests who might have wanted to dine there.
One might ask why he didn't eat there?, but maybe he did. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Those tapas lists are ONLY for MW guests, NOT for residents.

This could explain the large wine bill. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] A kind of thank you, maybe ?

by aiyoyo 07.07.11 12:04

The sticking point for me is:

IF according to her book she was always known as Kate Healy and became Kate Mccann only post Madeleine disappearance on May4th then why did she sign herself off as K mccann on the creche register?
Which bit is true? The creche register or the book?

by Guest 07.07.11 12:21

If a handwriting expert proves beyond reasonable doubt, that ALL of the entries in the creche sheets that is signed Kate McCann was written by Kate McCann, then Kate must be lying in the book.

But if some of Kate's entries, was not written by Kate, then it's no wonder someone else signed her in as Kate Healy.

by Guest 07.07.11 12:59

IF Madeleine died on the night of the 28th, I can think of a really strange coincidence.

Wasn't it MO who was sick on the first night, that might have been watching over all the children in one room? and wasn't it MO again, who was the only one to enter the McCann's apartment on the night of the 3rd, for the first time that week?

by ROSA 07.07.11 13:48

Dont forget Stella if the creche records are fake so are the T9 statements the checks who did what and when all lies

by **kikoraton** 07.07.11 16:30

How many of the T9 statements say "I saw Madeleine McCann asleep in her bed"?? Any at all? One? Two?
I don't think the Sub Madxlene would sleep in a strangers' apartment. She'd sleep either with her parents, or with her friend Elizabeth Naylor. She'd be picked up by GM to be taken a short distance to creche. No, I don't think her dad is actually owner of an apartment at the OC. If he were, he'd be known to the OC booking system as "Donos" meaning "Owner". I think an unidentified owner may have made the booking on his behalf. Just my hunch.

by ROSA 08.07.11 5:00

kiko
what if the mccanns are not strangers to the sub and her dad

by **kikoraton** 08.07.11 8:20

That is exactly what the Met should investigate, ROSA. I can/shall supply them with a name of a person who could be the father of a substitute, if my theory based on handwriting and signatures is correct. The Met will then need to investigate legitimately (no unlawful phone-hacking required!) if there were indeed relationships between GM and two London couples who, I think, might have been involved in some wrong-doing.
If such an investigation takes place, and it is found that there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for the handwriting and the dodgy signatures, then I shall have done my bit to solve the case and I shall be out of here.

by Guest 08.07.11 8:35

If anyone was signing in someone elses child, why did none of them mention it ?

Quite a simple question for Ms Baker to answer also..

by ROSA 08.07.11 9:22

Stella and kiko They cover up the truth that M is dead by using a sub with help from her(sub) dad yes but i think these 2 are good freinds of mmcanns not strangers the sub is too young to know she is being used this way
The creche records could break the case
Cat Baker has i think helped the mccanns to hide the truth did cat and mccanns become freinds in PDL in 2007 or did they have past relations they are hiding and the T7 are all in on the cover up
If the Met see the creche records as forged and see Madeleine Mccan never went to creche what will happen

by **kikoraton** 08.07.11 10:39

Yes, according to this scenario, of course the T7 must have known what was going on. That's why I'm interested if any of them actually said "I saw Maddie McCann tucked up in/ready for bed on such-and-such a date. DP did, I suppose, when he said he saw all three (did he actually name Maddie?) "looking like angels". Of course, if as I believe there was a sub called Madeleine or a variant of the name, anyone could keep their fingers crossed and say "I saw them with Madeleine".
First, the relationship McCann/Naylor/ANOther needs investigating. Then we might find out who has perjured themselves.

by Guest 08.07.11 10:54

kikoraton wrote:Yes, according to this scenario, of course the T7 must have known what was going on.

Which is why no one had any current photos of her. We've seen quite a few of all the other children in various locations.

Didn't Dianne state at the airport that they needed 6 car seats for 5 children ? Did they have a spare child ?

by Guest 08.07.11 11:18

Remember the 30th, the day Madeleine was signed in at 15.15 and out againg at 15.30 ?

This was the afternoon that the 'other' child, for the first time, did not attend that creche session.

Was she missing her friend and asked to leave ?

Why else would she have to leave after only 15 minutes ?

Kate and Gerry never mentioned this episode.

by **kikoraton** 08.07.11 13:19

Quite correct. And what was this about arriving at 1515? I thought the McCs had an unvarying routine - they always had her back by 1430 or 1445 latest (and we all know that was because they were taking the pool photo)!! So 1515 ought to have received some explanation, when asked by the PJ. (Who probably didn't think to ask).
I'm longing to display my three photos of the "subby", but I shan't till I have a legitimate purpose to do so. Or perhaps the photo of her dad would do - somebody who was there might recognise him (like the receptionist, for example).

by **kikoraton** 08.07.11 13:22

Perhaps her friend EN didn't turn up, because her parents wanted not to be always at Gerry's disposal. The very next day was also a near-disaster for Gerry - he had to sign "Madeleine" in, out and in again for the afternoon, without having EN to prop him up.

by Guest 08.07.11 16:44

The one very compelling piece of evidence we have to support this theory, apart from the handwriting on the creche sheets, is the fact that the tapas receptionist claimed that a man who was NOT Gerry, made the group booking accompanied by Madeleine McCann.

Nothing can change that fact.

Either Madeleine McCann went out with a stranger. Or,

Another child believed to be Madeleine McCann was out with her own Father. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **kikoraton** 08.07.11 20:05

Just a thought: could that be why every night, one of the tapas group cried off with a poorly tummy? Because Madxlene the Substitute's dad had to be at the table? But why would he have to be? Wouldn't it be better if, as I was surmising, he kept a very low profile?

by ROSA 09.07.11 2:04

Who has permissions to make a group booking

by Guest 09.07.11 9:46

kikoraton wrote:Just a thought: could that be why every night, one of the tapas group cried off with a poorly tummy? Because Madxlene the Substitute's dad had to be at the table? But why would he have to be? Wouldn't it be better if, as I was surmising, he kept a very low profile?

We know that there were a lot more seats available to eat in the tapas restaurant, than the 20 allocated for MW guests. The Substitute's dad could easily, being a non-MW guest have pitched up every night to eat dinner there (plus his guests) and pulled a table up close to the Tapas 8's table. The amount of wine consumed may suggest this. In one of the interviews, Gerry sits at another group's table (the Carpenter's one I think from memory ?) for a chat, which to me suggests that table swapping, chatting and drinking happened often there.
He did keep a low profile. His name was not on the MW tapas lists. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by pauline 09.07.11 10:02

Does anyone have the info for wine consumption other than on Thursday May 3rd when they had 14 bottles of wine. Kate says on P.55 of the truthful book that 'our alcohol consumption could hardly be described as excessive.' But she does not say what that consumption was. Its has been suggested that possibly some of their wine was shared with adjourning tables.

If they were drinking 14 bottles of wine every night (+ pre dinner drinks) between 9 people they must have been hungover every morning and not in the best shape for all the tennis?

by Guest 09.07.11 10:34

ROSA wrote:Who has permissions to make a group booking

That is a good quesiton ROSA. Surely not someone they have never met before. Surely not someone either who only ever goes there but once a year.

He must have been someone who had a bit of authority don't you think, or at least thought he did ?

There is something else in the recepionist's statement I think tells us that it was the sub's Father who made the booking. Instead of using 'his' group this, or 'our' group would like to do that, being part of the group. He talks about 'the' group. Which I think kind of distances himself from them slightly.

"The man justified his request by saying that the group had many small children whom they would leave alone when they went to dine"

by ROSA 09.07.11 10:56

i dont know who he is but yes he had permissions so the group all know him i think

by **kikoraton** 09.07.11 17:42

What a daft request to make of a stranger, if indeed that is what he said. It's tantamount to inviting trouble. Maybe that was his intention - to let it be known that the kids would be left alone, so that the theory of a pervy "abductor" became more easily accepted.
Would any of the Tapas lot have gone up to reception and said "we're going to leave them on their own"? Surely, they would expect reception to say "oh no you don't, not on our premises. There are plenty of ways to take care of them properly".
Whether this makes it any more likely that the stranger was the substitute's father, I'm not sure. If it was indeed the man I have in mind, Mr R., then I still believe he would have kept a low profile, instead of drawing attention to himself as "the man who makes demands on behalf of the Payne/McCann Group".

by ROSA 09.07.11 23:22

kiko was Mr R booked into one of the apartments ?

by **kikoraton** 10.07.11 8:39

Not by name, no. But I'm guessing that there was a family at the OC who assisted in the handwriting (two girls by one hand) scam. I'm not thinking of the Naylors, although they were also in on it. There must also have been a family who provided the substitute called madxlene. I.e. there were three males involved. Mr M., Mr N., and one whom I call Mr R. because it's more original than Mr X.
Anyway, why not? How many men do we know whose surname begins with X? winkwink

by ROSA 10.07.11 10:12

Lots of info thankyou kiko
smilie

Latest topics