kates signatures

by russiandoll 12.10.11 18:03

cant photocopy and post here but

Signature on witness statement as KM Healy identical to that on creche sheet sign out [where at the sign in she had signed McCann as usual.]
The McCann signature dispalys same handwriting characteristics as the Healy signature
Just curious as why on this one occasion she signed Healy?
Thought she might have been cheesed off with her husband if so seems this happened between pm sign in and out.
If its 2nd May sheet she says on night of 2nd in her book that she was hurt by his actions and this was when she slept in childrens room.....so this is after this sheet was signed. but wasnt the 1st the night of the quiz mistress?
anyway if so she would have been more cheesed of in the morning of 2nd..I think.
where there 2 incidents when Gerry upset her as I read one in her book and this was wed not tues quiz night?
any ideas as to why the sudden and one-off change?

by Guest 13.10.11 8:00

I'm thinking she had work on her mind when she signed Healey and all the other times as McCann, it was on the family.

Had she just taken a call from someone at work, minutes before signing the register ? That might have thrown her !!

by Guest 26.10.11 12:16

Stella wrote: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?

Looks like David is enjoying a Sagre beer in the early morning? I guess its breakfast they are eating in this picture. What a good father.. How drunk was he/they when the evening came?

by Daisy 26.10.11 16:44

What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

by Guest 26.10.11 16:48

Daisy wrote:What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

Well it was the Yoghurt making me think it was breakfast...Atleast where im from thats normal for breakfast and not evenings..

Does anyone know why I cant edit my posts`? I wrote bear instead of beer :) And thats two complitly different things :)

by Guest 26.10.11 16:52

Moa wrote:
Daisy wrote:What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

Well it was the Yoghurt making me think it was breakfast...Atleast where im from thats normal for breakfast and not evenings..

Does anyone know why I cant edit my posts`? I wrote bear instead of beer :) And thats two complitly different things :)

Hi Moa,

You can only edit your posts for a few mins after posting, don't know exactly how long around 5/10 mins I think, it gives you a chance to see it posted and alter it for mistakes etc, after that only a moderator can do it.

by Guest 26.10.11 16:59

candyfloss wrote:
Moa wrote:
Daisy wrote:What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

Well it was the Yoghurt making me think it was breakfast...Atleast where im from thats normal for breakfast and not evenings..

Does anyone know why I cant edit my posts`? I wrote bear instead of beer :) And thats two complitly different things :)

Hi Moa,

You can only edit your posts for a few mins after posting, don't know exactly how long around 5/10 mins I think, it gives you a chance to see it posted and alter it for mistakes etc, after that only a moderator can do it.

Ah I understand :) Thank you for the explenation :)

by Guest 26.10.11 17:06

I've edited it for you Moa thumbup

by Guest 26.10.11 17:07

candyfloss wrote:I've edited it for you Moa

by Daisy 26.10.11 17:14

Moa wrote:
Daisy wrote:What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

Well it was the Yoghurt making me think it was breakfast...Atleast where im from thats normal for breakfast and not evenings..

Does anyone know why I cant edit my posts`? I wrote bear instead of beer :) And thats two complitly different things :)

I thought that what's you were thinking. Yoghurt isn't soley a breakfast food in the UK though, it's normal to eat it at other times too - as a healthy desert option. Sandwiches like that are not traditonally a breakfast item.
Don't worry about the typo, we all knew what you meant. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 01.11.11 11:51

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”.

No pictures of children wearing identity bracelets (before the 3rd) yet then. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Nina 01.11.11 13:57

Stella wrote:
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”.

No pictures of children wearing identity bracelets (before the 3rd) yet then. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Stella, it is the parents who wear the labels,

Name.... Gerry McCann

Allergies......Wife and family

Relevant Information.... Not here to enjoy myself, but will try very hard.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Sorry couldn't resist

by Guest 01.11.11 14:27

Nina wrote:
Stella wrote:
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”.

No pictures of children wearing identity bracelets (before the 3rd) yet then. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Stella, it is the parents who wear the labels,

Name.... Gerry McCann

Allergies......Wife and family

Relevant Information.... Not here to enjoy myself, but will try very hard.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Sorry couldn't resist

How would it help the nannies if the parents using bracelets telling the allergy of their child? Do we have any pictures of G + K using them?

by Guest 01.11.11 14:34

Daisy wrote:
Moa wrote:
Daisy wrote:What makes you think it's breakfast Moa? Just curious.

Well it was the Yoghurt making me think it was breakfast...Atleast where im from thats normal for breakfast and not evenings..

Does anyone know why I cant edit my posts`? I wrote bear instead of beer :) And thats two complitly different things :)

I thought that what's you were thinking. Yoghurt isn't soley a breakfast food in the UK though, it's normal to eat it at other times too - as a healthy desert option. Sandwiches like that are not traditonally a breakfast item.
Don't worry about the typo, we all knew what you meant. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I saw your reply now :)

Where im from thats more a typical breakfast, Yoghurt and sandwiches.. Anyhow, I do not think its fine on holidays to drink beer in front of the children. They could atleast (if they absolutly have to drink) wait until the children goes to bed.

by Nina 01.11.11 16:31

Moa wrote:
Nina wrote:
Stella wrote:
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”.

No pictures of children wearing identity bracelets (before the 3rd) yet then. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Stella, it is the parents who wear the labels,

Name.... Gerry McCann

Allergies......Wife and family

Relevant Information.... Not here to enjoy myself, but will try very hard.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Sorry couldn't resist

How would it help the nannies if the parents using bracelets telling the allergy of their child? Do we have any pictures of G + K using them?

Oh Moa sorry I was joking that it was the parents wearing them. Joke collapsed, admin please remove.

by **PeterMac** 01.11.11 16:34

Moa wrote:... Anyhow, I do not think its fine on holidays to drink beer in front of the children.

Indeed not. The children should aways have theirs first.

by Guest 15.11.11 10:43

Pertinent questions 'I think' should be asked, concerning the crèche sheets:

1. Are the Lobster crèche sheets the originals? - which could easily be confirmed by forensically examining all of the signatures on each of the sheets, namely McCann, O’Brien, Berry, Naylor, Mann, Totman and Patel and also by getting these individuals sworn statements to the contrary.

If NO, then who gave the PJ given fake ones and for what reason?

If YES, then Gerry McCann needs to be asked the following questions?

2. Is that your signature beside every entry that says Gerry McCann?

3. Have you ever signed in the child Elizabeth Naylor?

4. Have you ever signed in a child as Elizabeth Naylor?

4. Did you know Robert and Ainne Naylor prior to the 28^th April 2007?

5. If YES, how long have you known them and where did you first meet?

6. Did you know any friends or relations of Robert and Ainne Naylor prior to the 28^th April 2007?

7. If YES, how long have you known them and where did you first meet?

8. Did you on any occasion sign into the Lobster crèche group, two children at the same time?

9. If YES, what are the actual names of these children?

10. If YES, on what date did this first start?

Ten very simple little questions that could help explain the discrepancies in the crèche sheets.

But will Scotland ask them? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 15.11.11 10:49

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

by beejay 15.11.11 14:08

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

You may well be right that someone signed in 2 of the girls but that would not indicate any wrongdoing, on the contrary it probably happened on a regular basis given the Tapas 9 were on a group holiday.

I fail to understand the logic behind the theory that Madeleine died several days before and the group then embarked on a cunningly thought out plan to cover their tracks. The fact is that one of the key indicators that the poor girl did die on the holiday is the chaotic and contradictory statements from the Tapas 9 and the subsequent changes in their stories which suggest that they were making it up on the hoof.

These are intelligent people and if they had been given sufficient time to contrive a cover-up I'm sure they could have made a better fist of it.

For example, writing up the supposed timeline of parental checks on a kiddies notepad which is then passed to the police is hardly indicative of a carefully conceived plan - it is a desperate act of panic because they think their neglect could be discovered.

by pennylane 15.11.11 14:40

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

You may well be right that someone signed in 2 of the girls but that would not indicate any wrongdoing, on the contrary it probably happened on a regular basis given the Tapas 9 were on a group holiday.

I fail to understand the logic behind the theory that Madeleine died several days before and the group then embarked on a cunningly thought out plan to cover their tracks. The fact is that one of the key indicators that the poor girl did die on the holiday is the chaotic and contradictory statements from the Tapas 9 and the subsequent changes in their stories which suggest that they were making it up on the hoof.

These are intelligent people and if they had been given sufficient time to contrive a cover-up I'm sure they could have made a better fist of it.

For example, writing up the supposed timeline of parental checks on a kiddies notepad which is then passed to the police is hardly indicative of a carefully conceived plan - it is a desperate act of panic because they think their neglect could be discovered.

I agree beejay, and think it an enormous leap to accept this as proof Madeleine had already met her demise.

The McCanns not searching with the rest of the folks on the night their 3 year old daughter disappeared from her bed, also implies this was a hastily hatched plot! This glaring omission on their part was enormously detrimental to their façade, but my guess is they had far more crucial priorities that night.... like getting their haphazard story straightened out between them before being required to answer questions the next day. A story that has been revised over and over, so much so that it almost no longer resembles the original.

by Guest 15.11.11 14:50

What you both fail to see, intentionally, or unintentionally, is the significance of those questions.

If and it's a big IF, with lots of ????????? Gerry McCann was signing in 2 children all week, something that he failed to mention to the PJ, something that started from the 29th and potentially immitating another persons signature, you have to ask yourself why? If indeed he did do this of course. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] All hypothetical at this stage until proven by the PJ and Scotland Yard.

by Guest 15.11.11 14:58

It's been mentioned before - IF the signature is Gerry's, why was he signing in the Naylor child? I could understand if it was one of the other Tapas 9 children but doesn't he claim to have known nobody else there? You would hardly hand over your child to a complete stranger in this way.

by Guest 15.11.11 14:59

pennylane wrote:I agree beejay, and think it an enormous leap to accept this as proof Madeleine had already met her demise.

Then please tell us Pennylane how you would explanation these possible events, we would love to hear a different view.

The McCanns not searching with the rest of the folks on the night their 3 year old daughter disappeared from her bed, also implies this was a hastily hatched plot!

I disgree. They needed to remain there to sort out the GNR/PJ when they arrived, plus the tracker/sniffer dogs. Even criminals who plot things months in advance are NOT guaranteed a smooth run of events on the day.

by Guest 15.11.11 15:00

Marian wrote:It's been mentioned before - IF the signature is Gerry's, why was he signing in the Naylor child? I could understand if it was one of the other Tapas 9 children but doesn't he claim to have known nobody else there? You would hardly hand over your child to a complete stranger in this way.

They lied about the abduction, what makes you think they would tell the truth about knowing other people out there?

by Guest 15.11.11 15:06

Sorry Stella, I seem to have implied that I thought Gerry was telling the truth but that wasn't my intention! I agree with all the questions you raised in your post at 10.43.