The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Page 2 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Beyond Reproach

Post by Fossilfuel on 28.10.11 15:47

They think they are beyond reproach, they feel secure in the comfort of all their toadies, masonic influences, MPs, press officers, Medical collegues et al.
They look down at the average man as less intelligent, they scorn him.
They are living in a big spoilt bubble, totally unaware of reality.
avatar
Fossilfuel

Posts : 21
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-10-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by jd on 28.10.11 15:48

@tigger wrote:
@jd wrote:The so called charity fund was set up in record time of 9 days..this is impossible unless it was started to be set up pre the holiday. Why did they take a memory stick of old photos of Maddie on it on a holiday? Why were posters printed out before the PJ arrived? Why are there no photos of kate with Maddie on the holiday and photoshopped ones of gerry with maddie/twins? why on the PJ official documents are most of the photos retrieved from all Tapas 9 cameras have a question mark MBM, ie they are not sure it is her? Why does their website have the date 2006 on it? Why is Murat up the road from Tanner and Garrods in the UK a week prior?.....These are just a couple of things from the top of my head which imo makes planning something during the holiday not very likely

And why do the McCanns think we're all stupid? Including the PJ? Or more to the point: why do they think they're clever?

By what they have been feeding the public they most certainly do have an arrogant perception that everyone is stupid, but this is also going to be their downfall. I'm not fully up on the ins & outs of creating limited companies but from what has been analysed previously in depth, it was impossible to set this one up in such a short space of time

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare
avatar
jd

Posts : 4151
Reputation : 23
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by jd on 28.10.11 15:48

@Fossilfuel wrote:They think they are beyond reproach, they feel secure in the comfort of all their toadies, masonic influences, MPs, press officers, Medical collegues et al.
They look down at the average man as less intelligent, they scorn him.
They are living in a big spoilt bubble, totally unaware of reality.

Oh yes how true

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare
avatar
jd

Posts : 4151
Reputation : 23
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Bebootje on 28.10.11 15:55

@tigger wrote:I know I read about someone from OC coming over to Chaplin's to tell the McCs that their children were crying.
I also remember something about Mrs. Fenn's daughter either working at Chaplin's or having seen the McCanns there. It's right next to the church which they were unable to find by themselves on the 3rd.
In the book Chaplin's is never mentioned.
Near the church is an apartment that was used of the property of a woman working at the OC. This was one of the witnesses they McCanns tried to speak to, even when they had moved out of the OC.

I'll do some digging, but if the incident happened on the 1st the two crying incidents become one.

I remember it was someone called Vera from essex stated that on the old Mirror forum

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2010/12/chaplins-bar-p.html

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Tinkerbell81 on 28.10.11 16:03

In Amarals book there is a line, paraphrased from one of their meetings, that I believe explains exactly which train of thought the McCanns must have had, planned in advance or not....

Taken from the translation of Chapter three of the forum thread here:
The parents say that
the bedroom window was open and the front door was closed at the time
they became aware of the disappearance.
- And if they are not telling the truth?
-
Put yourself in their place: you are on holiday in a strange place
which you don't know; you leave three children under 4 to sleep alone;
one of them disappears while you and your wife are quietly dining at the
restaurant. You would take on the blame? You wouldn't be afraid of the
reaction from the local authorities?
- OK, but if, in one way or
another, the parents had something to do with the disappearance? They
would inevitably have to invent a story, so logically, lie.
- That's
not right, is it? Don't forget you are dealing with well-educated
people, nearly all doctors, the child's father is a surgeon. What a
ridiculous idea!
- Right, if I understand you properly, you mean that
family dramas are the reserve of the simple-minded and the
underprivileged...

And that is what I think is their capital mistake, they didnt think anyone would dig deeper. Narcissism much anyone??

____________________
Every truth passes through three stages before it is recognized.
In the first, it is ridiculed, in the second it is opposed, in the third it is regarded as self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer
avatar
Tinkerbell81

Posts : 90
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by delly55 on 28.10.11 16:14

@Fossilfuel wrote:They think they are beyond reproach, they feel secure in the comfort of all their toadies, masonic influences, MPs, press officers, Medical collegues et al.
They look down at the average man as less intelligent, they scorn him.
They are living in a big spoilt bubble, totally unaware of reality.

But why are all these people covering for them? It puts me in mind of the way the scottish judicary have hushed up the Hollie Greig abuse!
avatar
delly55

Posts : 42
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-10-10
Location : in my high heels...

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Tinkerbell

Post by tigger on 28.10.11 16:22

But Gerry is not and never has been a surgeon, he is a consultant, doesn't do surgery at all as far as I know.I've checked his very few publications, mediocre at best. But I never saw him in a hurry to correct that, neither is Kate a practicing anaethetist, I suppose it upped their status a little. Wouldn't trust them with as much as an ingrown toenail myself.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

covering

Post by tigger on 28.10.11 16:24

@delly55 wrote:
@Fossilfuel wrote:They think they are beyond reproach, they feel secure in the comfort of all their toadies, masonic influences, MPs, press officers, Medical collegues et al.
They look down at the average man as less intelligent, they scorn him.
They are living in a big spoilt bubble, totally unaware of reality.

But why are all these people covering for them? It puts me in mind of the way the scottish judicary have hushed up the Hollie Greig abuse!

Not because they like the McCanns so much, that's asking too much imagination! To save their own sorry skins perhaps?

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by delly55 on 28.10.11 16:28

to save their skins how? Sorry If I seem a bit thick....I know Brown got very personally involved, but why?
avatar
delly55

Posts : 42
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-10-10
Location : in my high heels...

View user profile

Back to top Go down

It's the most likely explanation.

Post by tigger on 28.10.11 16:41

@delly55 wrote:to save their skins how? Sorry If I seem a bit thick....I know Brown got very personally involved, but why?

The fake abduction was amateur, badly executed and full of lies and misdirection, which is to be expected when you involve so many people with different levels of information. The Fund was a well prepared venture. Even the title: no stone unturned comes from a Scotland Yard publication.

The protection was in place unbelievably fast, Ambassador, Sky and Gordon Brown, F.O., lawyers, their very own spokeman! UK police were pretty well all there from the start.
Why did Gordon Brown say it was a matter of 'National Security?'.
It can only have been self interest. Powerful motive. The cover up in the main was done very professionally and by the looks of it, mostly from the top.

For the McCanns it was clearly the money. They didn't need money to look for Maddie, the whole world was looking for her (although the photograph bore little resemblance to her), Interpol, etc. all free of charge.

So can't give you an answer, we can guess but we'd all like to know.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by pauline on 28.10.11 17:47

@tigger wrote:
@pauline wrote:
@jd wrote:The so called charity fund was set up in record time of 9 days..this is impossible unless it was started to be set up pre the holiday.

an ordinary limited company (which is what the Fund is) can be set up in 24 hours.

The issue here is why set up a Fund so soon when she could have been found deal or alive at that time. Why pay out significant fees to lawyers to drop everything and set up this company at that time? If later on, when it was looking less likely that she'd be found, they could have set up the company and incurred the costs. the fee to Company's House for registering the company is about £50-100.

Ltd. company can be set up in one day if you buy an off the shelf name. If you want to register a specific name it takes two to three weeks to register.
The Fund is not even a simple ltd. but a different type of company. (limited by guarantee , no shares co)
The 7th of May 2007 was a Bank holiday, which should have delayed registration but didn't.
I'll try and look it up. But the contact with the Charity Commission also had to be fitted into that time schedule. The myth that the CC turned them down is widely believed. The CC simply told them that they would be obliged to submit full accounts and I think milking it for paying the family and mortgage was also not counted as Charity. Gosh!
Below is the link for the Fund timeline.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3606-madeleine-s-fund-timeline?highlight=fund

No there's no delay if you want a specific name providing it is not the same or very similar to an existing company name.
Limited by guarantee is a common kind of limited company - thats what I meant by simple limited company. They will have opted for limited by guarantee rather than have a limited company with share capital of £2/nominal sum because limited by guarantee is the standard company format of charities and not for profit organisations. They wanted to confuse the public, and they did..
avatar
pauline

Posts : 548
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 8:45

@tigger wrote:Ltd. company can be set up in one day if you buy an off the shelf name. If you want to register a specific name it takes two to three weeks to register.
That is a very good point tigger. Which means if it was an off the shelf name and they changed it, the previous name will be on their registration details. If there is no previous name, then it was set up as a new name, which as you quite rightly say, would have taken longer. I must take a look at the online registration.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 8:52

Previous Names:
No previous name information has been recorded over the last 20 years.

Either someone has connections is high places to push this through in record time, or ???
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Bebootje on 29.10.11 9:29

@tigger wrote:
Stella wrote:
@tigger wrote:I'll do some digging, but if the incident happened on the 1st the two crying incidents become one.
I think death on the 1st can be excluded on the basis that 'a' Madeleine first went to creche on the morning of the 29th, then all day on the 30th and the 1st. That's 3 full days, for everyone linked to the creche to see Madeleine McCann. So if something happened to her on that day, how did they pull off replacing her for the following 2 days, without anyone noticing it? I don't think they could somehow.

Kiko's theory still seems the likeliest, at this stage.

Well, I like the 28th/29th a whole lot better, it's just the crying incident that blocks the flow as it were. I've suggested that it might even have been a recording, I still think the bond between Kate and Maddie couldn't be that good if she only cried for Daddy. Unusual to say the least.
I can also not believe that they actually recorded a crying episode with this purpose in mind, so we're really stuck with it, because I believe Mrs. Fenn.There's also the strangely missing 2nd of May which Kate skates over and Gerry skips altogether. Obviously a difficult day they don't like to remember - also the day the cleaner would come in? Cleaner came on Sundays and Wednesdays I believe.
If we can have a solution to the evening of the 1st (I don't believe for a second it was Kate crying as some people have suggested). I'll have to go back to HideHo's site for correlations and Kiko's work.
Did another girl cry for hours? That doesn't fit with the baby sitting of one of the T7.
But one thing favours the 'recording' theory, the McCanns knew about the crying before Mrs Fenn made a statement. Mrs. Fenn never mentioned it to them directly? Could it even have been part of the plan- crying heard the night before the abduction so when that got moved from the 2nd to the 3rd so did the crying? Because the 'dry run' theory of the abductors on the night before was there pretty quickly?

I too believe Fenn. And from the crying she believed it was an older child. The McCanns were aware of Mrs Fenns' statement firstly because the crying stopped when they came in via the sliding doors as Fenn stated. Secondly Fenns statement was extensively in the news. The statement of the McCanns of the crying incident happened in 2008 and came (for me out of nothing). At the time I asked myself what could be the reasing for them mentioning this at that time (cause the situation didn't make them look good, and the McCanns have a habit to avoid situations that doesn't make them look good). So they must have had a strong reasong for mentioning. What the McCanns maybe didn't know was that Fenn was out on May 2. There could be 2 reasons imo for the McCann statement: 1. To indicate Madeleine was alive on May 2, or 2. to give an explanation for the crying in case someone overheard it.

Concerning the creche records and Kiko's theory i'm puzzeled. That something isn't right there is clear. But do we have samples of Gerry's handwriting on other papers then the creche records. Dit Gerry really sign in and out or could it be that one of the nanny's did. And maybe parents did sign in for eachother occasionally f.i.when someone was in a hurry and had to catch a tennis lesson.
The creche records overall were a bit of a mess. And Cat Baker clearly wasn't accurate enough. And not only Cat. The nanny's weren't licensed child care workers but merely "holliday" workers having a good time. Can Cat Bakers statement that Madeleine was in fact in the creche be born out of the fear to be sacked if the aswer must have been that she wasn't sure?

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Bebootje on 29.10.11 9:34

@tigger wrote:I know I read about someone from OC coming over to Chaplin's to tell the McCs that their children were crying.
I also remember something about Mrs. Fenn's daughter either working at Chaplin's or having seen the McCanns there. It's right next to the church which they were unable to find by themselves on the 3rd.
In the book Chaplin's is never mentioned.
Near the church is an apartment that was used of the property of a woman working at the OC. This was one of the witnesses they McCanns tried to speak to, even when they had moved out of the OC.

I'll do some digging, but if the incident happened on the 1st the two crying incidents become one.

You mean Vera of Essex's statement. You can find it here
http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2010/12/chaplins-bar-p.html

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Bebootje on 29.10.11 9:42

And here Dumbfounds post on Have your say on Daily mail

http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/07/theauthor-dumfounded-by-chaplins/


LIARS! LIARS! LIARS!


The McCanns dined out every night of their holiday while their poor
children slept alone. They are lucky that this happened on the night
they chose to dine in the tapas
bar and not Tuesday for example when they dined in Chaplins, below
their beloved church, near the beach, 8 times the distance away. They
never once checked on their children as they claim, ask the staff! Talk
to elderly Mrs. Senn [sic] who lives above and she’ll tell you on that
particular Tuesday night she had to sit listening to one of the children
“screeming [sic], crying” from 22:30 till 23:45. They went to dinner
around 19:00h. Those poor, poor children. Yes, they should be
prosecuted. How DARE they preach to other parents and try to teach us
safety measures to ensure our children are safe from predators? How DARE
they take the positions of heroes? How DARE they commit this crime upon
poor Madeleine? Yes, they did it.

Bebootje

Posts : 86
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-07-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 9:49

@Bebootje wrote:Concerning the creche records and Kiko's theory i'm puzzeled. That something isn't right there is clear. But do we have samples of Gerry's handwriting on other papers then the creche records.
Yes. All over the files is examples of Gerry's signature. All of his statements. Documents the PJ asked him to sign. His Passport etc., not to mention the fact that 'he' claimed to have signed the creche sheets where he did.

Dit Gerry really sign in and out or could it be that one of the nanny's did.
Cat nanny's handwriting is so distinctive, very rounded and child like, that it could never be confused with Gerry's handwriting. Whenever Cat signed a child out, she always wrote 'Cat nanny'.

And maybe parents did sign in for eachother occasionally f.i.when someone was in a hurry and had to catch a tennis lesson.
Then someone would sign it using their own name on the other persons behalf, with their permission and not try to reproduce another persons signature. How did they know what their signature looked like in the first place? There was a new sheet for every day.

The creche records overall were a bit of a mess. And Cat Baker clearly wasn't accurate enough.
Very true. She claimed that all children had to wear identity bracelets containing allergy information, yet none are seen on any child in the group.
And not only Cat. The nanny's weren't licensed child care workers but merely "holliday" workers having a good time. Can Cat Bakers statement that Madeleine was in fact in the creche be born out of the fear to be sacked if the aswer must have been that she wasn't sure?
At high tea, other nanny's children were also there and would have seen a little girl they believed to be Madeleine, so I doubt very much that she would have lied about 'a' Madeleine being there.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 9:53

@Bebootje wrote:And here Dumbfounds post on Have your say on Daily mail

http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/07/theauthor-dumfounded-by-chaplins/


LIARS! LIARS! LIARS!


The McCanns dined out every night of their holiday while their poor
children slept alone. They are lucky that this happened on the night
they chose to dine in the tapas
bar and not Tuesday for example when they dined in Chaplins, below
their beloved church, near the beach, 8 times the distance away. They
never once checked on their children as they claim, ask the staff! Talk
to elderly Mrs. Senn [sic] who lives above and she’ll tell you on that
particular Tuesday night she had to sit listening to one of the children
“screeming [sic], crying” from 22:30 till 23:45. They went to dinner
around 19:00h. Those poor, poor children. Yes, they should be
prosecuted. How DARE they preach to other parents and try to teach us
safety measures to ensure our children are safe from predators? How DARE
they take the positions of heroes? How DARE they commit this crime upon
poor Madeleine? Yes, they did it.
That's just someone trying to perpetuate the abduction scam. They did not dine in Chaplins on the Tuesday, as they were in the tapas restaurant, according to the tapas records.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stella, creche and Chaplin's

Post by tigger on 29.10.11 10:40

I am in favour of dismissing the creche records altogether. As you say, untrained girls, not long out of school, having a good time. One thing though, Catriona had been in PdL the year before which she didn't say in her earlier statements.

Chaplin's was never for food I think, Happy Hour there was between 11.00 and ? p.m. Cheap drinks, must appeal to Gerry! I think they may have gone there after the Tapas sometimes.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 12:07

I think the creche records are more important than some people realise.

It does not matter if the girls were qualified to be a nanny or not, where the records are concerned. Every day 'a' parent signed in and out 'their' child. This is an important document, a record of everyones daily movements. It contains the parents handwriting, which shows they were there at a given time. It is the people who signed these sheets who are the important ones here, not the nanny.

If a handwriting analysis expert confirms that one man was singing in two children every day and this man never mentioned it when asked, I think he will find himself in deep, deep, trouble and will have lots of explaining to do.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Didn't quite mean that

Post by tigger on 29.10.11 15:21

Stella wrote:I think the creche records are more important than some people realise.

It does not matter if the girls were qualified to be a nanny or not, where the records are concerned. Every day 'a' parent signed in and out 'their' child. This is an important document, a record of everyones daily movements. It contains the parents handwriting, which shows they were there at a given time. It is the people who signed these sheets who are the important ones here, not the nanny.

If a handwriting analysis expert confirms that one man was singing in two children every day and this man never mentioned it when asked, I think he will find himself in deep, deep, trouble and will have lots of explaining to do.

I meant dismiss the entries for Maddie as being true accounts of her use of the creche. The records are hugely important because they are proof that some statements or entries must be incorrect, due to the fact that no-one can be in two places at once.
I find some of the nannies unreliable, because the subsequent press coverage alone made them famous for fifteen minutes. They wouldn't be likely to contradict McCann's statements and it's clear they only have a very sketchy idea of what Maddie looked like. It may also be that the poster girl was more like the stand-in, although early on one of the staff told the press that Madeleine had white-blond hair.
It is wonderful what a little confusion can do. Nobody suspects the parents, therefore what they say must be right and with her photograph everywhere, you believe you know exactly what she looked like, overwriting any memory that doesn't fit.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by Guest on 29.10.11 16:02

Oh, I'm with you now, sorry. blushing1 I agree, the nannies, especially Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington should be brought into a Police Station and questioned in depth. The sooner the better.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Catriona Baker

Post by tigger on 29.10.11 16:39

Stella wrote:Oh, I'm with you now, sorry. blushing1 I agree, the nannies, especially Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington should be brought into a Police Station and questioned in depth. The sooner the better.

Catriona Baker MM’s child minder was in PDL at MW in 2006 she stated that in her UK statement of 18/04/2008 but told the JP on 06/05/07 she only started in 2007.


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Crying incident, was it taken seriously?

Post by jd on 29.10.11 16:43

Stella wrote:Oh, I'm with you now, sorry. blushing1 I agree, the nannies, especially Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington should be brought into a Police Station and questioned in depth. The sooner the better.

Oh yes especially Charlotte Pennington.....All those amazing sightings of Murat in the shop, on the beach in the dark etc to put him in it is simply, amazing. She also just happened to be first on the scene too. This one certainly had the knack of being at the wrong place at the wrong time lol! She started at OC in April 2007, a month before, so imo was nicely prepared for events a month later

In yet another coincidence, Miss Pennington lives in Kingston, South West London, and guess who is a doctor at Kingston Hospital...Its Mr Matthew Oldfield...all these coincidences with these Tapas 9 people is amazing

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare
avatar
jd

Posts : 4151
Reputation : 23
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Must have been like one big reunion

Post by tigger on 29.10.11 16:52

@jd wrote:
Stella wrote:Oh, I'm with you now, sorry. blushing1 I agree, the nannies, especially Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington should be brought into a Police Station and questioned in depth. The sooner the better.

Oh yes especially Charlotte Pennington.....All those amazing sightings of Murat in the shop, on the beach in the dark etc to put him in it is simply, amazing. She also just happened to be first on the scene too. This one certainly had the knack of being at the wrong place at the wrong time lol! She started at OC in April 2007, a month before, so imo was nicely prepared for events a month later

In yet another coincidence, Miss Pennington lives in Kingston, South West London, and guess who is a doctor at Kingston Hospital...Its Mr Matthew Oldfield...all these coincidences with these Tapas 9 people is amazing

One amazing big reunion, like all the VIP's you could have knocked down with a feather when they ran into x, y, z and the rest of the alphabet.
Conjures up quite an amusing scene.

Pennington is the wannabee actress/fairy queen kind of thing? Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum