Re: McCanns Hire Car Contract

by Guest 10.05.14 17:18

With all due respect, but we cannot call Jane T "slim", can we?

by Hicks 10.05.14 18:06

I would refer to her as slim.......as opposed to calling her fat or stocky, or over weight.

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

by mariola 10.05.14 18:17

Hicks wrote:I would refer to her as slim.......as opposed to calling her fat or stocky, or over weight.

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

Agreed Hicks.Not skinny either .Slim works.

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 10:21

I have a feeling the car hire holds one of the keys to the mystery, I was thinking about this whilst the birds
were tweeting merrily very early this morning.

The dogs alerted to the hire car therefore we can theorise the body was carried in the car at some stage.
Kate referred at some point in scornful manner that 'as if they would have transported the body all those weeks later when they hired the car.' I cant remember what exact words she used - but she was trying to say 'as if... we would do that'.

Now understanding how Kate appears to work - twisting things with partial truths - my theory is that the car did indeed transport the body - BUT - that it was done much earlier ... before they 'officially' hired the car. I dont think it was a great idea to plan to transport the body whilst the world's eyes were watching them so I cant imagine that is how they would plan things. No, surely they would have removed the body whilst there were no eyes upon them. Gerry alone. I think that this particular vehicle was hired out to the english golfers on a regular basis and I think that G may have had access to it much earlier and used it to transport the body shortly after death.

The first thing you would surely wish to do in this sort of situation is get rid of the body - it would be of the highest priority. I cant think you would contemplate deferring this task for a number of weeks and then suddenly hire a car. However, I do think they used the car later to create red herrings -e.g. Huelva trip etc.
It would have been top of their list to get the body away and disposed of . Somehow i believe they got access to the car in teh very early days. Also, note that car keys feature in the PJ photos of the apartment.

I dont think it would be that difficult to tamper with the car hire records, with help. It is a coincidence that Ken Walkden hired the same car - too much of a coincidence. I think that car hire is key here... smelly key at that.

by fossey 23.06.14 10:26

@Helenmeg.

You would think that if they did have access to said car, and transported the body before they 'officially hired it' then they would go out their way to make sure they would hire a different car and not be associated with that one. Surely?

by worriedmum 23.06.14 10:29

Helenmeg, I think this is the interview you are referring to-

''Did you kill your daughter?''

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

by End 23.06.14 10:39

Châtelaine wrote:With all due respect, but we cannot call Jane T "slim", can we?

She has changed a lot since 2007.

The first pic of her, I would describe as a hefty lady.

In fact for some odd reason, Myra Hindley popped into my head when I seen that first pic affraid

by fossey 23.06.14 10:42

End wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:With all due respect, but we cannot call Jane T "slim", can we?
She has changed a lot since 2007.

The first pic of her, I would describe as a hefty lady.

The stress of telling a lie and keeping up the pretence can eat away at you. Literally.

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 10:54

fossey wrote:@Helenmeg.

You would think that if they did have access to said car, and transported the body before they 'officially hired it' then they would go out their way to make sure they would hire a different car and not be associated with that one. Surely?

I can understand that point of view, yes.
But I find it hard to accept that having alerted the world to the disappearance of their child - that they then hire a car and transport her body in it at that particular time. In their position - would you do that?
Or would you get rid of the body before you alerted the police / media?

by End 23.06.14 11:14

fossey wrote:
End wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:With all due respect, but we cannot call Jane T "slim", can we?
She has changed a lot since 2007.

The first pic of her, I would describe as a hefty lady.
The stress of telling a lie and keeping up the pretence can eat away at you. Literally.

This was the first pic of her. I think it was just published after the Tanner Man sighting. I think now when I see later pics of her the press were perhaps trying to portay her in a bad light......

But yet, they all looked like penniless poppers rather than Doc's and highflyers at that point. The windfall has sure helped their appearances anyway!

by fossey 23.06.14 11:27

HelenMeg wrote:
fossey wrote:@Helenmeg.

You would think that if they did have access to said car, and transported the body before they 'officially hired it' then they would go out their way to make sure they would hire a different car and not be associated with that one. Surely?
I can understand that point of view, yes.
But I find it hard to accept that having alerted the world to the disappearance of their child - that they then hire a car and transport her body in it at that particular time. In their position - would you do that?
Or would you get rid of the body before you alerted the police / media?

I know what you mean. None of it makes sense. Talk about 'confusion'.

I'm still in 2 minds whether or not 'the body' was actually transported in the car. A leaking fridge or big blue sports bag might be more plausible?

Or, there was another 'disaster' moment and another plan went wrong. They had to move 'the body' at a later date as it was close to being found.

Another decision made where they had no choice but to pick it up and transport it out of PDL for example..

by nglfi 23.06.14 14:27

HelenMeg wrote:
fossey wrote:@Helenmeg.

You would think that if they did have access to said car, and transported the body before they 'officially hired it' then they would go out their way to make sure they would hire a different car and not be associated with that one. Surely?
I can understand that point of view, yes.
But I find it hard to accept that having alerted the world to the disappearance of their child - that they then hire a car and transport her body in it at that particular time. In their position - would you do that?
Or would you get rid of the body before you alerted the police / media?

Unless they first put the body in what they thought was a suitable place, but then realised that it would have to be moved. I agree that it would have been incredibly risky and stupid to move a body when the world was watching, but what choice did they have? If it was either that or have the body discovered, I'd take the risk. Whilst they must have considered the possibility that cadaver dogs would be brought in, they must have also known that without a body it is incredibly difficult to prove anything, and that on that basis alone they'd be unlikely to end up in court.

by Latetothecase 23.06.14 14:33

Yes but the world was watching the couple.

Film crews at the Vatican and diverse other locations.

They don't necessarily bother watching people whose existence we'd have been none the wiser to, except now in retrospect, and following Pj files being published.

I believe there was also some confusion between parties as to whether they had been driving a Renault Espace, or a Scenic. I mean, if you deliberately said you didn't want a certain model of vehicle, and you accidentally got what you thought you didn't want, you'd be thinking you were involved in an enormous cock up wouldn't you...

by Miraflores 23.06.14 14:46

I would imagine that the McCanns didn't expect cadaver dogs to be brought in, and didn't know much about them or the scent of cadaver. Hence the silly stories about being with six dead bodies in your holiday clothes in the weeks before, taking cuddle cat to work, and the dogs being primed to bark to please their owner.

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 15:05

Yes, agree with everyone really - the only known facts are the dogs alerted to the key fob and the specific area in spare wheel area.
Assume someone retrieved a body from a resting place and then placed body in boot spare wheel well, drove somewhere and carried body out car and placed it in 'new resting place'.
Perhaps carried out body still holding key fob in hands. Perhaps initial place was fridge / freezer so car had to have driven first to house with freezer. I guess body was wrapped well and potentially in large bag. Not easy
and presumably very very stressful.

Also whoever did it probably went out in one set of clothes and came back in another.

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 15:15

Portia wrote:
Inspectorfrost wrote:@ David/JD, thats probably correct.

@MM the previous driver had a different pass number.

For general reference, this is a graph which shows who had the car and when. I think the top box shows when the car was rented and by who and the bottom boxes show when it was returned. The car lay unbooked from 12th April to 8th May, the longest unbooked period. probably nothing, I just noticed it.

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

ETA

JD/Bristow, the hire of the car from 8th May for a week was by a John Brown with additional driver MW, the two MWs having different driving licences so they can't be the same person.

Wasn't a John Brown a brother of Gordon? The one GM worked with on the nuclear research thing? Comare, or what was it?

And why, if GM can be supplied with 2 passports, as it seems, could not a Michael Wright be fitted out wth 2 drivers licenses?

Looking back, the car lay unbooked from the 12th april - 8th May (the longest unbooked period - as stated above) then by John Brown and Michael Wright. Again a coincidence that it was a Michael Wright, but apparently not the same M Wright. Maybe it doesnt mean anything but there are many coincidences involving this car hire.. too many for a car that was found to have cadaver odour in it

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 15:17

I cant understand why the car wasn't seized by the PJ and was allowed to be 'homed' by John Geraghty. I am assuming that whilst in his garage it was expertly de-contaminated.

by HelenMeg 23.06.14 15:34

Just examining for days when body could have been driven elsewhere..

8th June 2007:
[color:ba3a=000000]Quieter day today. This was a good chance to catch up with campaign e-mails and phone calls after the trips to Berlin and Amsterdam. At lunchtime we went to the release of 1000 yellow balloons at the beach carrying cards with Madeleine’s picture on it and information in 5 different languages including arabic. There were similar launches in Manchester and Madrid. The event was organsied by the Sun who, like almost all of the media, have been incredibly supportive. I told Nick, the Sun journalist, that we are happy to support all strategies which increase the chances of finding Madeleine. Later in the afternoon we went down to the beach and had dinner in one of the restaurants which Sean and Amelie really enjoyed. Sean, in particular has acquired a taste for sea-bass! Kate and I did a short interview for BBC East Midlands to thank everyone for their support and it is likely that this will be shown around most of the regions, certainly Northwest and BBC Scotland. Kate and most of the family headed down to the church for the regular Friday night vigil but I was just too shattered. Tomorrow will largely be a family day although I am not sure what we will be doing yet.

[color:ba3a=000000][color:ba3a=000000]9th June - the[color:ba3a=000000]y appealed to Irish contingent to see iof anyone had seen Smithman!

[color:ba3a=000000]There are a lot of Irish tourists in and around Praia da Luz and although the awareness of Madeleine’s disappearance in Ireland is extremely high, we want to ensure that everyone is aware of the appeal and we want the Irish public to come forward with photographs of people who they do not know who were in and around Praia da Luz in the 2 weeks leading up to the 3rd May. The address to upload photographs is: to [color:ba3a=000000][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] We have also asked for people to contact their local police if they have seen a man matching the description of the suspect carrying a child seen around the time of Madeleine’s abduction. He is 30-40 years, 1.70-1.80m (5’7”-11”), caucasian and was wearing a dark jacket, beige or mustard coloured trousers with dark shoes. No major news on the investigation front- we still believe it is just a single phone call away.

[color:ba3a=000000][color:ba3a=000000]14th June [color:ba3a=000000]-Kate and Gerry picked up JC (i presume
[color:ba3a=000000][color:ba3a=000000][color:ba3a=000000][color:ba3a=000000]) from airport:

[color:ba3a=000000]Kate and I picked up a friend from Faro airport who has been instrumental in helping with the campaign. He has been fantastic, producing the DVD of Madeleine to ‘Don’t you forget about me’ which has been shown at many sporting events and concerts as well as producing the look for maddie logo and various posters. We spent most of the day updating each other and discussing future campaign ideas.

by DurhamGuy1967 23.06.14 15:46

You might move the body if you thought there was a high chance of it being discovered. Using the car might have seemed safe and it would allow you to move it a long way, after all why would the PJ let the dogs at the car? It wasn't hired for ages after 3rd May. Come to think of it why did the PJ check the car?

A neighbour said the boot was left open at night , does any one know when this "boot open at night" started?

by Latetothecase 23.06.14 16:02

In other words, you want to know if there are any photographic records of people YOU don't want people to see, perhaps?

Send to Uncle Jim Gamble.....

Beggars belief.

Every person who has even been on a school trip once in their lives probably has a photo containing people THEY don't know in the background.

by Latetothecase 23.06.14 16:16

DurhamGuy1967 wrote:You might move the body if you thought there was a high chance of it being discovered. Using the car might have seemed safe and it would allow you to move it a long way, after all why would the PJ let the dogs at the car? It wasn't hired for ages after 3rd May. Come to think of it why did the PJ check the car?

A neighbour said the boot was left open at night , does any one know when this "boot open at night" started?

Exactly DurhamGuy1967! high5

And as to the last sentence, who knows if anyone actually did see the boot open at night? Could be another way of saying 'we know what you lot have been doing with these vehicles'.

For all we know, the poor child is frozen still in a private government morgue or burial place somewhere that no one has access to, awaiting her final place in the scheme of things.

by Guest 23.06.14 22:56

Latetothecase wrote:
DurhamGuy1967 wrote:

A neighbour said the boot was left open at night , does any one know when this "boot open at night" started?

And as to the last sentence, who knows if anyone actually did see the boot open at night? Could be another way of saying 'we know what you lot have been doing with these vehicles'.

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

The neighbour was a lawyer who signed a statement alluding to this but the PJ never took it further. Sections 40-42 in link to mccannfiles above.

by Guest 24.06.14 0:22

Relevant part from above link:

"40.04 – The witness who lived near the McCanns' second home, in Aldeia da Luz, who says she witnessed an uncommon fact about the McCanns' hire car, where the dogs detected cadaver odour and remains that may belong to Maddie, was not heard, either. This neighbour has signed a document authorising the broadcast of her deposition that identifies her, but fearing threats and pressures, she doesn't show her face.

40.30 – This is an interesting matter, when I left the Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, in October 2007, nothing was known about this vehicle, about this issue of the open car boot. We knew that inside the vehicle cadaver odour and bodily fluids had been found, where Madeleine McCann's DNA profile was extracted from, with 15 alleles. Months later, there is a lawyer, who lives nearby, who came to report that after the McCanns arrived at this villa, they saw the car boot open from then on.

41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."

41.33 – It's important to report the following: that lady, that lawyer, was never heard at the Polícia Judiciária because her deposition was not considered to be relevant, which is strange. While she was not heard, while a rogatory letter was sent to England, relatives of Gerald and Kate McCann came out to say that they had transported, inside this car boot, food from the supermarket, namely a meat package that leaked blood.

42.09 – The great question is how the family heard about the witness, despite the fact that she was not heard by the PJ, and tried to reply to the observed facts."

by **tigger** 24.06.14 6:01

So the car boot was left wide open as from the date they moved to the villa - around 1/2 July.

Before that the car must have been parked somewhere around OC and imo it would have needed airing as from around 10th June. Which date links to the barn, Sagress, a two day absence of the McCanns and the curious statement about grieving.

Very interesting the answer to a question which wasn't asked. Must be a leak from the PJ? Via LP?

But as we saw in the Payne topic, Gerry's entry in his blog on the 11th gives more than a hint of things starting to unravel.

Btw. I detect some Clarrie input here and there in the blogs - possibly they were censored and very necessary that would be too, Gerry's foot in mouth tendencies have given us a lot of information.