Re: The creche enquiry

by Angelique 14.04.13 18:46

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

EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
25 February 2013

TIME AND TIDE
Lobsters' attendance record, Monday 30 April 2007
"On the Sunday afternoon Ella O'Brien was staying in apartment G5D. The very next morning (30th April) she was staying in 5B, while, in the afternoon, none other than R. O'Brien himself attended the creche, though normally resident in 5D. The following morning (Tuesday 1 May) Emma (afterwards amended to Ella) O'Brien was back in 5B. She must really have liked it there, because it was her given address that afternoon also. And it would have been again on the Wednesday morning (2 May) had someone not altered it to read G5D where she remains for the afternoon and throughout Thursday."

I have just been reading through Dr. Roberts analysis about the creche records and I have read this paragraph many times but something has just made me wonder about the above snippet. Is it possible that Ella's apparent changing of residence is,in fact, the apartment for say, that day, where all the children would be looked after? Either day and/or evening ? Depending on convenience.

I know it's a bit of a stretch but isn't there always one in a crowd who keeps slipping up ? Rob is probably trying really hard to get things right and is actually being honest but then realises he is not meant to be honest in this respect, but in doing so seems to make it all fall apart.

Just saying.

by Guest 14.04.13 20:00

Hm ... there have been very early rumours that in fact all children were together in one apartment.
Add to that, that there was someone indisposed quasi every evening and not attending dinner.
And that the presence of mother-in-law [grandma] DW and her activities during the day were rather vaguely explained.

Just saying, too ...

by Estelle 18.10.13 6:32

I have often speculated that none of the Tapas9 were actually staying where they said they were. But 5A was the apartment they chose on May 3, 2007 to stage the faked abduction as it is close to the road. IMO it was also the scene of Maddie's death (or where her body was brought back to after an accident) which I suspect was earlier in the week and easier to clean up if they were not actually staying there. Perhaps they were all staying in a large villa.

Where is G5D?

I think if the creche and phone records are now forensically examined going back to the beginning of the week, the police can piece together what actually happened.

by concerneduser 18.10.13 13:43

Estelle wrote:I have often speculated that none of the Tapas9 were actually staying where they said they were. But 5A was the apartment they chose on May 3, 2007 to stage the faked abduction as it is close to the road. IMO it was also the scene of Maddie's death (or where her body was brought back to after an accident) which I suspect was earlier in the week and easier to clean up if they were not actually staying there. Perhaps they were all staying in a large villa.

Where is G5D?

I think if the creche and phone records are now forensically examined going back to the beginning of the week, the police can piece together what actually happened.

But didn't maddie go to nursey all week, according to the WITNESS TESTIMONY OF CATRIONA SISILE BAKER
who was looking after her on the day she went missing. Have I miss something?

by russiandoll 18.10.13 14:38

re Maddie's crèche attendance, there are anomalies in the files to do with entries for her also some for Ella O Brien.

There are indications that Gerry signed in 2 girls, not 1, because of giveaways with handwriting strokes. And that he forged the signature of this other girl's father.

The analysis of the phone and crèche records is on the forum and lots done by dewi lennard@ kikoraton on twitter. He has posted his theories here.

His thesis is that M died very early in the holiday and that Gerry signed in another girl as Madeleine and that the girl mentioned above [ not once signed in by her own father if you accept all the signings are by Gerry] , was the friend of the " substitute" Maddie. This was a girl who was always known as Madelene, never Maddie, hence the claim that Maddie McCann had to have her full title.

The early departure of Maddie McCann from crèche after only 15 mins on the Monday afternoon has been explained by Kiko as being necessary because the sub's friend was not at crèche with her and she would not stay.

It is quite a read and while far fetched and many disagree with this theory , I would recommend attention to it, in a case as surreal as this one, nothing is too bizarre to at least consider carefully before dismissing it.

btw Kiko states on twitter that he contacted the father of the subs friend and spoke to him for a few minutes. He asked him if he allowed Gerry to sign in his daughter and this man neither confirmed nor denied it. That could mean of course that the suggestion was so preposterous that he treated it with silent contempt. Who knows, this case is crazy.

by sallypelt 13.11.13 15:35

Could it be that some of these "similarities" in the handwriting, has come from a member of staff filling in the names? For example, where "Robert" has been written in, and then crossed out, this could mean that a member of staff has asked "name" and Robert Naylor thought that he was being asked HIS name. We have all done it, I'm sure. Also, where this mistake is made, it's Robert Naylor himself who has signed the child in. Anne Naylor is often the person to sign the child out.

So, could it be that the handwriting for Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann was written by MW staff? If one looks as other examples of the handwriting on various days, one can see many similarities with the handwriting on the 3rd May, for Madeleine and Elizabeth.

by **PeterMac** 13.11.13 15:48

sallypelt wrote:Could it be that some of these "similarities" in the handwriting, has come from a member of staff filling in the names? For example, where "Robert" has been written in, and then crossed out, this could mean that a member of staff has asked "name" and Robert Naylor thought that he was being asked HIS name. We have all done it, I'm sure. Also, where this mistake is made, it's Robert Naylor himself who has signed the child in. Anne Naylor is often the person to sign the child out.

So, could it be that the handwriting for Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann was written by MW staff? If one looks as other examples of the handwriting on various days, one can see many similarities with the handwriting on the 3rd May, for Madeleine and Elizabeth.

Which is another hole in the "Madeleine was alive and well on 3rd May" theory.
what is left ?

by sallypelt 13.11.13 15:50

PeterMac wrote:
sallypelt wrote:Could it be that some of these "similarities" in the handwriting, has come from a member of staff filling in the names? For example, where "Robert" has been written in, and then crossed out, this could mean that a member of staff has asked "name" and Robert Naylor thought that he was being asked HIS name. We have all done it, I'm sure. Also, where this mistake is made, it's Robert Naylor himself who has signed the child in. Anne Naylor is often the person to sign the child out.

So, could it be that the handwriting for Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann was written by MW staff? If one looks as other examples of the handwriting on various days, one can see many similarities with the handwriting on the 3rd May, for Madeleine and Elizabeth.
Which is another hole in the "Madeleine was alive and well on 3rd May" theory.
what is left ?

Petermac, this is one hell of a tangle.

by sallypelt 13.11.13 15:57

sallypelt wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
sallypelt wrote:Could it be that some of these "similarities" in the handwriting, has come from a member of staff filling in the names? For example, where "Robert" has been written in, and then crossed out, this could mean that a member of staff has asked "name" and Robert Naylor thought that he was being asked HIS name. We have all done it, I'm sure. Also, where this mistake is made, it's Robert Naylor himself who has signed the child in. Anne Naylor is often the person to sign the child out.

So, could it be that the handwriting for Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann was written by MW staff? If one looks as other examples of the handwriting on various days, one can see many similarities with the handwriting on the 3rd May, for Madeleine and Elizabeth.
Which is another hole in the "Madeleine was alive and well on 3rd May" theory.
what is left ?
Petermac, this is one hell of a tangle.

Petermac, I have reread what you've typed here. I think I got the wrong end of what you were saying at first. My thoughts on the crèche records, if it is MW staff writing in the names of the children, then there's nothing untoward going on. I have worked in many places where one has to sign in and out, and it's not unusual for others to do it for you, when one is there beside the person doing the signing, of course.

by sami 13.11.13 16:12

It all falls back to how reliable the "crèche" was. It is in effect no more than a drop in centre, very transient. A child might attend one morning for their whole holiday or for the whole week. No obligation, come and go as you please.

As for the staff, so long as they give out the same number of children as they took in, they are happy, all present, not necessarily correct.

So if for example Madeleine Beth was signed in for three days, then on day four another small blond girl answering to Madeleine was signed, even if she looked different in some respects, how likely were the staff to question it ? Would they really say Mr McCann why does your child seem different today ?

How interested were they really ? Not at all the same as a well run, proper childcare facility used by working mothers at home in UK.

Just opinion of course

by Guest 14.11.13 13:14

ROSA wrote:KIDS CLUB STAFF interviewed 4 May 2007 by Inspector M.Pinho

Processo Vol I pages 86 to 90; pages 91-103 being passport photocopies.

Today we, I and my colleague L.Madeira, spoke with Mrs Silvia Maria Correia Ramos B., director of maintenance and services for the company "GREENTROUST", which manages the "OCEAN CLUB" company, contactable by mobile phone 964....

Through her, we contacted Donna Louise R.H. (contactable by mobile phone number 964...) manager of the creche staff for the "MARK WARNER" company, [who were] responsible for Madeleine and the twins for several periods each day after the McCann family arrived in Portugal.

The latter advised us that all these employees are English nationals and that they came to work in Portugal from
March/April until November; that there are 13 people who work in the creche, their names and telephone numbers being as follows: [NOTE: Phone numbers withheld]
- Pauline Francis M.
- Emma Louise W.
- Sarah Elizabeth W.
- Susan bernadette O.
- Leanne Danielle W.
- Shinead Maria V.
- Jacqueline Mary W.
- Kirsty Louise M.
- Lynne R.F.
- Catriona Treasa Sisile B.
- Stacey P.
- Lyndsay Jayne J.
- Amy Ellen T.

--- It was determined further that all these girls live outside the complex [resort], although quite close to it, and that Catriona B. was responsible for Madeleine during the day yesterday.
--- Stacey P. was the staff member responsible for the McCann twins.
--- Usually, it is always the same young woman who cares for the same child.
--- The latest arrivals in Portugal were Sarah W. and Charlotte Pennington who arrived last Saturday, April 28th 2007. --- The informant, responsible for coordination, distributed the children between the various girls, taking care that each child was unknown to their carer.
--- The informant noticed nothing abnormal up to today and that no one was absent from work except those who were on their day off.
--- All the carers have made themselves available to speak with the police.

Apologies for digging up old posts but this struck me as a bit odd. It says there are 13 people who work in the creche, then follows a list of 13 names. Then it goes on to say " The latest arrivals in Portugal were Sarah W. and Charlotte Pennington who arrived last Saturday, April 28th 2007." Sarah W. is in the list of 13. So where did Charlotte Pennington work, and how come she is the only one named in full?

I am fully aware of the various "issues" surrounding Miss Pennington BTW.

by Guest 14.11.13 16:53

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
ROSA wrote:KIDS CLUB STAFF interviewed 4 May 2007 by Inspector M.Pinho

Processo Vol I pages 86 to 90; pages 91-103 being passport photocopies.

Today we, I and my colleague L.Madeira, spoke with Mrs Silvia Maria Correia Ramos B., director of maintenance and services for the company "GREENTROUST", which manages the "OCEAN CLUB" company, contactable by mobile phone 964....

Through her, we contacted Donna Louise R.H. (contactable by mobile phone number 964...) manager of the creche staff for the "MARK WARNER" company, [who were] responsible for Madeleine and the twins for several periods each day after the McCann family arrived in Portugal.

The latter advised us that all these employees are English nationals and that they came to work in Portugal from
March/April until November; that there are 13 people who work in the creche, their names and telephone numbers being as follows: [NOTE: Phone numbers withheld]
- Pauline Francis M.
- Emma Louise W.
- Sarah Elizabeth W.
- Susan bernadette O.
- Leanne Danielle W.
- Shinead Maria V.
- Jacqueline Mary W.
- Kirsty Louise M.
- Lynne R.F.
- Catriona Treasa Sisile B.
- Stacey P.
- Lyndsay Jayne J.
- Amy Ellen T.

--- It was determined further that all these girls live outside the complex [resort], although quite close to it, and that Catriona B. was responsible for Madeleine during the day yesterday.
--- Stacey P. was the staff member responsible for the McCann twins.
--- Usually, it is always the same young woman who cares for the same child.
--- The latest arrivals in Portugal were Sarah W. and Charlotte Pennington who arrived last Saturday, April 28th 2007. --- The informant, responsible for coordination, distributed the children between the various girls, taking care that each child was unknown to their carer.
--- The informant noticed nothing abnormal up to today and that no one was absent from work except those who were on their day off.
--- All the carers have made themselves available to speak with the police.
Apologies for digging up old posts but this struck me as a bit odd. It says there are 13 people who work in the creche, then follows a list of 13 names. Then it goes on to say " The latest arrivals in Portugal were Sarah W. and Charlotte Pennington who arrived last Saturday, April 28th 2007." Sarah W. is in the list of 13. So where did Charlotte Pennington work, and how come she is the only one named in full?

I am fully aware of the various "issues" surrounding Miss Pennington BTW.

Good question. And why was it thought necessary to stress that care was taken to distribute each child so that it was unknown to its carer?

If that was really the case, doesn't that then mean that Maddie, being relegated to Catriona B could in fact have been known to any of the other crecheworkers, as for instance Charlotte Pennington?

Why check if there's someone who knows her, and then avoid handing her over to precisely that person she would be familiar with?
What purpose would that serve? Why unsettle such a small child unnecessarily, by choosing a complete stranger, when you have someone around she is familiar with?

And what remains now of the McCs stated claim they couldn't put Maddie in the babysitting service because there she would have been among strangers?

Not much, as with so many other claims, I'm afraid

by NickE 21.12.13 14:00

Is there any explanation why Russell O'Brien signed in his daughter as "Emma" in the first place?

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

by Rasputin 21.12.13 14:07

NickE wrote:Is there any explanation why Russell O'Brien signed in his daughter as "Emma" in the first place?

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

Looks more like Ella to me ...just sayin

by Guest 21.12.13 14:07

I'd hazard a guess that someone else wrote the name originally and Russell then corrected it.

I'd say that he is the writer of the correct name nearer to the end of the list; that and the other name appear to be from two different writers.

by Guest 21.12.13 14:14

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I'd hazard a guess that someone else wrote the name originally and Russell then corrected it.

I'd say that he is the writer of the correct name nearer to the end of the list; that and the other name appear to be from two different writers.

Ella at the end of the list is signed in by Cat Nanny

by Rasputin 21.12.13 14:33

Portia wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I'd hazard a guess that someone else wrote the name originally and Russell then corrected it.

I'd say that he is the writer of the correct name nearer to the end of the list; that and the other name appear to be from two different writers.

Ella at the end of the list is signed in by Cat Nanny

My bad ...thankyou Portia :-)

by bobbin 21.12.13 18:12

Which playgroup was Lilli Payne in. The thing that has me thinking is, what did 'Dianne Webster' mean when she said, that on the last day (3rd May) when they all went to the beach, she could not remember seeing Madeleine that day.
This is the day that Kate had gone jogging, waved to everyone at the tea rooms, had collected Maddie at 5.30, yet had joined Maddie at 5.30, already apparently in the tea rooms, and Kate hadn't, in her words, known about the beach visit and Madeleine had apparently been left alone in her playgroup and Kate had asked Maddie, who was so tired that Kate eventually had to carry her home, if she had been upset or didn't mind not going to the beach with all the others.
Now in that same statement, Dianne Webster said that because they didn't have 'the kid' with them that day, when they had gone to the beach....
Now, I thought that it was only the McCanns who got rid of their children morning and afternoon, by dumping them at the creche and that the other families, barring the odd Jane Tanner child going sometimes in the afternoon, especially the Paynes, claimed that their children slept in the afternoon, and didn't go to afternoon creche.
Is Dianne Webster referring to Lilli Payne as being 'the kid' who was not with them, and if so, was Lilli signed into her playgroup for that afternoon.
I cannot see Lilli Payne in the 'lobsters' group, and consider it odd that as friends, who had travelled together, these two children would not have been in the same playgroup.
Effectively, there is a photograph of Lilli Payne and Madeleine, and you would scarcely be able to tell the difference.
Was Lilli being used as the stand in.
If anyone can help to bring the playgroup pages up to see if Lilli attended elsewhere and if she was ever present at the afternoon creches, then this thought can be eliminated. Thanks in advance.

by Nereid 21.12.13 18:53

bobbin wrote:Which playgroup was Lilli Payne in. The thing that has me thinking is, what did 'Dianne Webster' mean when she said, that on the last day (3rd May) when they all went to the beach, she could not remember seeing Madeleine that day.
This is the day that Kate had gone jogging, waved to everyone at the tea rooms, had collected Maddie at 5.30, yet had joined Maddie at 5.30, already apparently in the tea rooms, and Kate hadn't, in her words, known about the beach visit and Madeleine had apparently been left alone in her playgroup and Kate had asked Maddie, who was so tired that Kate eventually had to carry her home, if she had been upset or didn't mind not going to the beach with all the others.
Now in that same statement, Dianne Webster said that because they didn't have 'the kid' with them that day, when they had gone to the beach....
Now, I thought that it was only the McCanns who got rid of their children morning and afternoon, by dumping them at the creche and that the other families, barring the odd Jane Tanner child going sometimes in the afternoon, especially the Paynes, claimed that their children slept in the afternoon, and didn't go to afternoon creche.
Is Dianne Webster referring to Lilli Payne as being 'the kid' who was not with them, and if so, was Lilli signed into her playgroup for that afternoon.
I cannot see Lilli Payne in the 'lobsters' group, and consider it odd that as friends, who had travelled together, these two children would not have been in the same playgroup.
Effectively, there is a photograph of Lilli Payne and Madeleine, and you would scarcely be able to tell the difference.
Was Lilli being used as the stand in.
If anyone can help to bring the playgroup pages up to see if Lilli attended elsewhere and if she was ever present at the afternoon creches, then this thought can be eliminated. Thanks in advance.

Lily would have been in the Toddler Group with Amelie and Sean, but wasn't signed in on the afternoon of the 3rd of May.
[url=http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118 [112-120]/processopdf01page119-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There is no record of the morning Toddler session on the 3rd of May. Not that I can see anyway.

Sorry, I can't seem to put the link in right.

by Rasputin 21.12.13 19:12

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

by bobbin 21.12.13 21:54

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

So it looks as though Lily was not at any afternoon playgroup.
So what did Dianne Webster mean by saying that because the 'kid' was not with them/ presumably Fiona/David and herself, they could go to the beach. Which kid was she referring to and 'where was this kid' if not with them and not in playgroup, if it was Lily being referred to.

by NickE 21.12.13 22:37

bobbin wrote:Which playgroup was Lilli Payne in. The thing that has me thinking is, what did 'Dianne Webster' mean when she said, that on the last day (3rd May) when they all went to the beach, she could not remember seeing Madeleine that day.
This is the day that Kate had gone jogging, waved to everyone at the tea rooms, had collected Maddie at 5.30, yet had joined Maddie at 5.30, already apparently in the tea rooms, and Kate hadn't, in her words, known about the beach visit and Madeleine had apparently been left alone in her playgroup and Kate had asked Maddie, who was so tired that Kate eventually had to carry her home, if she had been upset or didn't mind not going to the beach with all the others.
Now in that same statement, Dianne Webster said that because they didn't have 'the kid' with them that day, when they had gone to the beach....
Now, I thought that it was only the McCanns who got rid of their children morning and afternoon, by dumping them at the creche and that the other families, barring the odd Jane Tanner child going sometimes in the afternoon, especially the Paynes, claimed that their children slept in the afternoon, and didn't go to afternoon creche.
Is Dianne Webster referring to Lilli Payne as being 'the kid' who was not with them, and if so, was Lilli signed into her playgroup for that afternoon.
I cannot see Lilli Payne in the 'lobsters' group, and consider it odd that as friends, who had travelled together, these two children would not have been in the same playgroup.
Effectively, there is a photograph of Lilli Payne and Madeleine, and you would scarcely be able to tell the difference.
Was Lilli being used as the stand in.
If anyone can help to bring the playgroup pages up to see if Lilli attended elsewhere and if she was ever present at the afternoon creches, then this thought can be eliminated. Thanks in advance.

And why did Gerry sign in Robert Naylors daughter Elizabeth??
I would like to see a picture of this girl,I have a feeling that she looks like Maddie.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
The "GCHQ" man "Kiko" have analyzed this and sent it to PJ.

by OOPSIDAISY 22.12.13 1:10

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

by NickE 22.12.13 22:36

Statement Catroina Baker
"She states that her contract started on March 21st 2006 and ends on November 7th 2007, the date on which she will return to her own country".

"......Mark Warner moved me from the Ocean Club about one week after—13th of May, I believe".

Why was Maddie´s nanny,Catroina Baker moved from the "Ocean Club" 10 days after Maddie disappeared?

by russiandoll 30.12.13 23:46

tired so not making sense maybe, but niggling me is no record of twins crèche attendance morning of May 3rd as far as I have looked.
The only day Kate picked up Maddie at lunch time....12.25. sign-out.

At the same time Gerry was on his phone........
At 12.24 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK Mobile xxxx1746. Again there is no clue in the file to the subscribers name.

Was this all to do with the agenda for the afternoon and did it have any bearing on the odd signings in and out that afternoon ?

will look closely again tomorrow...sorry if caused confusion.

by Doug D 31.12.13 5:09

RD.
The twins creche records for that morning are 'missing' from the files.
There is no record of who the .....1746 number is that I can see.

by russiandoll 31.12.13 10:45

thanks DougD, thought that had to be the case when I could not find it anywhere, also twins crèche sheet for morning 29th missing. Why would that be?

There was def a call taken by Gerry at exact time Kate did the lunchtime Maddie pick-up, creatures of habit and that was the only day the routine changed and Gerry did not pick up Maddie for lunch. There were other changes in routines on abduction day, a massive red flag.

Did Gerry pick up the twins while Kate went for Maddie? According to Fiona Payne, yes, she was with Kate and Gerry picked up the twins.

Kate could not be in 2 places at once, but did she then pick up the twins while Gerry was busy on this call and is this why the sheet is missing?

I hope this incoming number lunchtime 3rd is known to police now.

THE SIGN INS FOR ELLA O BRIEN 3RD ARE VERY STRANGE, LINE DIVIDING PRE AND POST LUNCH, WITH THE LATTER LOOKING VERY LIKE GERRY'S HAND WHICH I HAVE STUDIED CLOSELY, THIS AND THE INITIALS ARE NOT IMO MADE BY THE SAME PERSON BOTH SESSIONS.

by russiandoll 31.12.13 17:47

Yes Kate did pick up the twins 5 mins after she picked up Maddie according to the twins' crèche nanny, who was interviewed by police 4th May :

*STACEY P.*

In informal conversation with Stacey P., she stated:

1. That it is she and her colleague, Shinead, who usually cares for the twins;
2. That yesterday, it was the informant who cared for the twins, her colleague was on her day off;
3. That the children were dropped off by their parents at 9.30 and that the mother picked them up at 12.30.

Gerry's call was 1 minute before Maddie pick up . Significant?

FP clear that Gerry picked up twins and that her husband was with him. Maybe so, but not at the crèche if the above is true and there appears to be no doubt from SP that Kate was at the twins' crèche at 12.30

and here is the McCann phone activity for 3rd : highlighted =simultaneous. Interesting that after Gerry's lunchtime call, silence all afternoon and evening, even though he was away from 5a at tennis for an hour after 6pm and that he and Kate were apart after joint tennis in the afternoon, she went running. Am surprised not in touch re children's tea time pick up, to see if an agreed arrangement was still on....Kate might have had another dog bite, Gerry might have had a tennis injury....separate locations for late afternoon and early evening, but no contact. Strange, that.

Both McCanns had zero phone activity that afternoon. Not needed if they were together. Maybe they were.

GM	KM
03-May	03-May
	8.23
	8.24
12.24
	12.31
	13.34

23.14	23.14
23.17	23.17
23.40
23.52

by Doug D 01.01.14 14:08

Jellyfish 29^th April (pm Sheet)

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

Page 110

Shows Amelie & Sean booked in by KM at 14.35 & signed out by GM at 12.30!!!!! No am sheet on files.

The other records shown make sense for the afternoon session.

On the sheets around this date, the MW staff also get confused as to whether it’s called the ‘starfish’ or the ‘jellyfish’ crèche, so what hope is there of them knowing & remembering what kids they were looking after.

by IKNOWWHATHAPPENED 07.01.14 18:10

Great thread. Without meaning to disrupt the flow of the thread.

Referring back to a post by Guest at the bottom of page 42, on the Tapas list at 7pm a name was removed by covering it up. Was it ever established whose name this was ?

Latest topics