Re: Rachael Oldfield interview.

by ultimaThule 20.07.14 10:09

That glossy shot bears little resemblance to the somewhat dowdy looking matron who was seen running downwind of her very good pals on Clapham Common a few months ago, Clay.

by XTC 20.07.14 21:55

tigger wrote:Here is a link with Mirage's brilliant analyses of the RM rogatory.

Well worth a read.

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

Fascinating stuff when read again ( eyes glaze over reading the Rogatories ) and throws a few questions up.

Why would calling James from the BBC near 12pm on the night of the 3rd to see if he could get the info on the British News help in the search for an abducted child carried out in Portugal?

Does this explain the much debated Telegraph 12.01 comunique?

Unless the remover(s) had access to a plane and were heading for Britain what was the purpose of that appeal? Surely you would ask James if he had any Portuguese or Spanish colleagues who could influence their journalists to get it onto their Channels?

Also the question of whether RO was out of PdL that night is interesting. Where did that come from? It was asked for a reason. Could the reason be that her phone was triangulated out of PdL that night for a while?

The non frantic searching beyond 10pm need a little more explaining in respect of Mrs Fenn's 10.30 discussion with GM I think. Were they all searching that quietly that Mrs Fenn didn't hear anything until then?

Re: Carole Tramner ( Mrs Fenns niece ) Leicester police should have asked who this young man was who turned up with a laptop. Mainly because it is an offence to impersonate a police officer. A question never asked like many more amongst the Rogatories I fear.

With all the Rogatory statements it is interesting that as far as I know ( could be wrong though) that Madeleines' parents were never interviewed as well as the so called Tapas 7. Does anyone know the reason why they wer not interviewed by the LP?

As with the Rogatories in total I suspect that because they were asking pre-listed questions on behalf of the PJ and the arguidos themselves that strictly speaking they were possibly not allowed to ask further questions. From what I've read though of the Rogs they went off script on many occasions mainly through the inarticularcy of this supposedly educated group.

I sympathise to a certain extent. Reading them is a hard slog and credit to those who can bear it.

by Justformaddie 11.08.14 23:45

Just reading the mccann files there and, in RO interview it says all shutters were down, window shutters and patio shutters! I've never heard that before. Actually, what made me read it was Dr Martins latest on the mccann files and the interview was on the 15th may! So confusing this case is.
IMO

by **PeterMac** 24.08.14 17:45

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

Very interesting dissection of what she told the Rogatory

by Nina 24.08.14 18:14

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

Very interesting dissection of what she told the Rogatory

Well that was all very well written and extremely damning imo.

by Liz Eagles 24.08.14 18:35

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

Very interesting dissection of what she told the Rogatory

Well that was all very well written and extremely damning imo.

...and here is GM and Matt Oldfield in their 'reconstruction'.

12mins 48 seconds.

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

ETA: This is a video production 2009 involving Gerald McCann, Dave Edgar, Jane Tanner etc and you will find at the end of the video not only mention of the Smith sighting but it's voiced over in a Northern Ireland accent.

by worriedmum 24.08.14 22:05

Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.

I find that very odd.

Look at the cots.

The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.

On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **PeterMac** 24.08.14 22:59

worriedmum wrote:Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.
I find that very odd.
Look at the cots.
The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.
On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You are falling into their trap.

Trying to make it make sense.

It doesn't. Keep your eye on the squirrel. There was no Abduction
Madeleine was not in that bed on 3/5/7.
She was not taken out of that window on 3/5/7. (even they admit that !)
The photo proves it

by palm tree 24.08.14 23:29

Agreed Petermac, maddie wasn't in that bed that night at all, if she was, Eddie would have told us and he didn't. IMO, that's a tidy, neat bed along with her blankey and cuddlecat.

by Liz Eagles 25.08.14 8:24

palm tree wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
worriedmum wrote:Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.
I find that very odd.
Look at the cots.
The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.
On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You are falling into their trap.

Trying to make it make sense.

It doesn't. Keep your eye on the squirrel. There was no Abduction
Madeleine was not in that bed on 3/5/7.
She was not taken out of that window on 3/5/7. (even they admit that !)
The photo proves it
Agreed Petermac, maddie wasn't in that bed that night at all, if she was, Eddie would have told us and he didn't. IMO, that's a tidy, neat bed along with her blankey and cuddlecat.

...and even allowing for the perspective of the photograph i.e. the distance between the bed and chair close to the window it would have taken something like a hurricane to blow full length curtains and make them go 'whoosh'. No mention of a strong wind when GM was having his chat with Jez Wilkins (forget that GM and Jane Tanner can't agree what side of the road they're on).

Did Dave Edgar really believe all this? Did Dave Edgar go into that apartment and try out the McCann's version of events? I believe Dave Edgar also spouted he would present his findings in his 'investigation' without bias (something like that). Did Dave Edgar do that?

Just my opinion.

by aiyoyo 25.08.14 8:51

palm tree wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
worriedmum wrote:Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.
I find that very odd.
Look at the cots.
The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.
On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You are falling into their trap.

Trying to make it make sense.

It doesn't. Keep your eye on the squirrel. There was no Abduction
Madeleine was not in that bed on 3/5/7.
She was not taken out of that window on 3/5/7. (even they admit that !)
The photo proves it
Agreed Petermac, maddie wasn't in that bed that night at all, if she was, Eddie would have told us and he didn't. IMO, that's a tidy, neat bed along with her blankey and cuddlecat.

The twins weren't in the cots that night either. Empty cots no beddings and covers.
Kate did not enter the bedroom prove it. No mention of the twins at all by any of the checkers.

by Liz Eagles 25.08.14 9:04

Sorry if I'm drifting off topic but does anyone know what Dave Edgar, Arthur Cowley and Oakley are doing nowadays?

by TheTruthWillOut 25.08.14 9:16

aquila wrote:Sorry if I'm drifting off topic but does anyone know what Dave Edgar, Arthur Cowley and Oakley are doing nowadays?

No idea but a quick company check says ALPHAIG was dissolved in 'Oct 2011.

I'd imagine they both are playing golf or something.

by Liz Eagles 25.08.14 9:20

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
aquila wrote:Sorry if I'm drifting off topic but does anyone know what Dave Edgar, Arthur Cowley and Oakley are doing nowadays?

No idea but a quick company check says ALPHAIG was dissolved in 'Oct 2011.

I'd imagine they both are playing golf or something.

Thanks. Another dissolved company whose client list would be revealing.

by aiyoyo 25.08.14 9:36

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
aquila wrote:Sorry if I'm drifting off topic but does anyone know what Dave Edgar, Arthur Cowley and Oakley are doing nowadays?

No idea but a quick company check says ALPHAIG was dissolved in 'Oct 2011.

I'd imagine they both are playing golf or something.

A fly by night company set up literally overnight just for purpose of taking on the Mcs case and then dissolved after this case indeed raises suspicious and plenty questions.

by **PeterMac** 25.08.14 9:38

But there is loads of work for them.
A quarter of a million children go missing every year, didn't you know ?
Missing People tell us this, so it must be true.
If they charge a tenner for each one, that is quite a nice income.

by Nina 25.08.14 10:27

worriedmum wrote:Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.

I find that very odd.

Look at the cots.

The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.

On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by canada12 25.08.14 10:32

Nina wrote:
worriedmum wrote:Gerry McCann says he (as he touches his ear) that he thought how beautiful Madeline looked when he checked on her and saw her lying in bed with her toy and her 'blankie'. The light was off and the shutter was down.

Matt Oldfield says in that clip that he had 'an unimpeded view' of the twins' cots.

I find that very odd.

Look at the cots.

The one opposite the door has opaque ends. The one further into the room had mesh sides. Remember the ''shutters were down''. There was no light on in the childrens' room.

On her subsequent check Kate tells us that although by now we are told that the shutter is partly open, she cannot tell if it is Madeleine or the blanket on Madeleine's bed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I know it has been mentioned before, but must comment again about the front right leg of the blue cot, not correctly and securely placed imo.

Does it look to you as if the brown cot is holding the bedroom door open?
If this is where the brown cot was always located, then how could the door have been closed, or opened, or anything? The brown cot seems to be placed in such a way that it prevents the door from closing at all.
I suppose it could have been moved. But why?

by worriedmum 25.08.14 10:35

Admin, as we seem to be going off topic, please could you start a new thread with these posts and the picture please?
Called something like ' The children's bedroom'?

by palm tree 25.08.14 11:46

worriedmum wrote:Admin, as we seem to be going off topic, please could you start a new thread with these posts and the picture please?
Called something like ' The children's bedroom'?

That's a good idea worriedmum, because I've never noticed that door being held open by the cot.

by aiyoyo 25.08.14 12:11

This seems to be another pic of the children's bedroom.
The curtains were hanging free from constraint, not held down by a bed as seen in the other officially marked "specimen" photo.
This photo isn't stamped "specimen".
How many pictures of the children's bedroom were there.
It's apparent the furniture had been moved around.

by aiyoyo 25.08.14 12:55

PeterMac wrote:But there is loads of work for them.
A quarter of a million children go missing every year, didn't you know ?
Missing People tell us this, so it must be true.
If they charge a tenner for each one, that is quite a nice income.

They had it on records the Mcs were their one and only client.
They appeared in the Mockumentary in May 2009 but company was registered a month later in June 2009.
Clear indication company was tailored made for the mcs.
The company was liquidated in Oct 2011 apparently before their contract with Mcs was terminated.
It appears they continued to work for the Mcs even after the liquidation date if reports are anything to go by. Again, clear indication the company was tailored made for Mcs case only.

by Doug D 25.08.14 16:45

Alphaig Ltd was incorporated 10 June 2009, although the first media reports related to the investigative company were dated May 2009.

However it is interesting that:

‘In fact, one of Brian Kennedy’s right-hand men, Andrew Dickman, (who later registered the company) registered the domain name [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on 12 January 2009, some four months before the McCann Team misled the media and the public into thinking that Dave Edgar ran a prestigious-sounding company called ‘Alpha Investigations Group’.’

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

I have always suspected that the name was chosen to ‘big-up’ the company and create the impression that they were something to do with the Man Utd shirt sponsorship deal of the time with AIG, as most of ‘Joe Public’ probably had no idea who AIG actually were, although I have no evidence to back this up.

This sponsorship went pear-shaped in Jan 2009, but by then AIG was well known from three years on the front of United’s shirts.

Only one set of accounts were submitted, which show virtually nothing and an application for striking off was made on 29 June 2011.

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

by j.rob 25.08.14 17:13

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

Very interesting dissection of what she told the Rogatory

Rachael Oldfield:

The door to the bedroom, the twins bedroom and Madeleine's bedroom, erm and I mean afterwards you know, he said he thought that was unusual because he thought the door would be shut, cos I mean we always shut Grace's bedroom door, erm or at least if we did, I mean we always shut it but yeah I know some people would kind of probably just pull the door to, but he didn't expect it to be as wide open as it was, erm so he, well he said you know from kind of standingclose to the doorway, he could see that the twins were in their cots and there was no sound, erm so he just assumed everything was alright, he didn't put his head round the door to see if Madeleine was in her bed, but he said he did wonder where she slept, erm poked his head, well you know kind of looked into Gerry and Kate's room, just saw there was a double bed there, so you know, assumed they were all in together or, I mean I think he knew that they were all in together, erm but he didn't actually look to see whether Madeleine was there or not'.

Why on earth would Rachael say this in her rogatory? Why would Matt look into the parents' room, but not into the children's bedroom? That simply doesn't make any sense. Why look into the room where he "knows" that Madeleine is not, because Matt "knows" - as pointed out above by Rachael - that all the children were in together (or not, as they case may be!)?

All this detail is just so weird. Why go into it at all? Why not just have Madeleine 'disappear' overnight, for instance? That would actually be a more believable story than the one the McCann's concocted? It allows for a much bigger time-frame. All night to 'jemmy shutters' or whatever.

I am just wondering if the Matt "check" at 9.30pm was possibly to check that Madeleine "had been taken (away)"? And/or to check that the twins were soundly asleep - and breathing. Or possibly, even, to do some 'taking away' himself. (Jane Tanner is also away from the table at this time which had allowed her to make the 'Tannerman sighting' at 9.15pm).

If the earliest eyewitness reports are reliable in terms of times, a 'commotion' (related to the discovery of a child missing presumably) was heard by at least one OC staff member as early as 9.10pm on Thursday evening. And certainly other witnesses have reported hearing commotion and uproar that a child had gone missing well before the 10pm that Kate alleges was the time of her 'check' and the first that anyone first knew of Madeleine being 'missing'.

So who raised this earlier alarm, then?

I can only presume it was *someone* or several people who was reading from a pre-arranged script. The pre-arranged script that contained the 'jemmied shutters' that the McCann relatives so excitedly told the media about in the earliest hours/days.

So what happened to mess up the 'pre-arranged' script, then?

A theory, as always.

by jeanmonroe 25.08.14 17:38

Her aunt Trish Cameron, who lives in Glasgow, said she felt certain her niece had been abducted.

"They last checked at half past nine and they were all sound asleep, sleeping, windows shut, shutters shut.

"Kate went back at 10 o'clock to check. The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open or whatever you call it and Madeleine was missing..."

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

Memo to Trish Cameron:

Madeleine, in the pre-prepared 'script', WAS TO to have 'disappeared' between 9:10/9:15/20 and JT was 'supposed' to SEEN, witness, the 'abductor' carrying Madeleine off!

THAT 'scenario' IS the WHOLE BASIS that the McCanns are/were RELYING ON!

THEIR FRIEND, not a 'stranger' actually SEEING the 'abduction'!

Their ONLY 'evidence'! (of an 'abduction') I repeat, THEIR 'ONLY' EVIDENCE! ( conveniently supplied by their 'friend'!)

I'm just wondering WHEN the 'abductor' brought Madeleine BACK, after 'abducting', carrying her off, at 9:10/15pm, as SEEN by JT, and put her back in her bed, to be 'sound asleep, sleeping', and CLOSED the window and re-lowered the shutters, for the 'scene' to be ;described' as 'windows shut, shutters shut', AT 9:30pm as Gerry McCann sister, Trisha, SAYS!

AND 'TOLD' THE WHOLE WORLD THAT!