Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

The McCanns...


Chris
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, TK421 said:

There are a lot of issues with that sighting.  Gerry McCann was questioned about it and gave details which were inconsistent with Kate's account of the afternoon in her book.  The witness statements of the creche nannies are also inconsistent with the McCanns and with each other. 

I'm struggling with this "sighting" TK. If I collect my kid from school at 230, firstly I wouldn't call it a sighting and I would expect 25 kids and a teacher could confirm her presence there that day. She was either there or she wasn't, not many things about this case are black and white, this one is so I'd appreciate you shedding some of your wisdom on this?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, No2 said:

I'm struggling with this "sighting" TK. If I collect my kid from school at 230, firstly I wouldn't call it a sighting and I would expect 25 kids and a teacher could confirm her presence there that day. She was either there or she wasn't, not many things about this case are black and white, this one is so I'd appreciate you shedding some of your wisdom on this?

I agree she was either there or she wasn't.  I don't think she was.

 

I will reply in more detail but it will take a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Anubis said:

 

My understanding is that a close relative of the McCann’s knew a close relative of Gordon Brown and reached out to get him involved. He did until he was informed that the Portuguese police were looking at them as potential suspects, when he distanced himself. I don’t think it gets any deeper than that.

Unlike Michael Jacksons tongue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No2 said:

I'm struggling with this "sighting" TK. If I collect my kid from school at 230, firstly I wouldn't call it a sighting and I would expect 25 kids and a teacher could confirm her presence there that day. She was either there or she wasn't, not many things about this case are black and white, this one is so I'd appreciate you shedding some of your wisdom on this?

Basically, this concerns inconsistent statements made by the McCanns and the creche nanny, Katriona Baker.  Baker says she can prove that she saw Madeleine on 3rd May at 5:30pm. 

 

When asked by police, Kat Baker says it was always the parents who brought and fetched Madeleine from the mini club at the creche.  She also said that there was a high tea at 5:30pm at which parents, children and creche nannies were all present.  She says this took place at the Tapas Bar area.  However, other witnesses do not confirm whether this practice of regular high tea took place so there is doubt about it.

 

In her book , Kate McCann says the following:  "having arranged for Gerry to meet the children, I opted to go for a run along the beach... I had finished my run by 5:30pm at the Tapas area, where I found Madeleine and the twins already having their tea with Gerry".   However, the written creche records show that Kate McCann signed the twins out of their creche group at 5:25pm that day.  The creche records for Madeleine's group, known as "the Lobsters", show Kate McCann's signature signing out Madeleine at 5:30pm that day.  How is that possible if, as Kate claims in her book, she found Gerry and all of the children sitting having their tea at the Tapas area at 5:30pm?  And if she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect the kids from the creches, why is it her signature on the record for that day and not Gerry's?  These are clear contradictions.

 

Gerry McCann does not mention anything in his various statements given to the police about collecting the twins and Madeleine from their respective creches and then returning to the Tapas area.  Either the McCanns are not being truthful about what happened during this period of time or the creche records are wrong, or both.  

 

Kat Baker's statement about that day is vague.  Asked who dropped Madeleine off at the creche that morning, she says she "doesn't know".   Asked who picked Madeleine up for lunch from the creche that afternoon, she answers "I can't remember".  Asked who picked up Madeleine from the creche that afternoon, she says it was Kate, and not Gerry, which contradicts what Kate says in her book.  

 

None of the other witness statements from the various witnesses at the holiday resort mention anything about a high tea that afternoon.  None of the waiters working in the Tapas area at 5:30pm can recall serving anyone resembling Madeleine.  No other parent on holiday at the complex that week mentions having high tea in the Tapas area that day.

 

When Gerry McCann was questioned for the second time by Portuguese police on 10th May (he had said nothing about it in his first statement), he said that the meal started at 5pm and ended at 5:30pm.  He says that the creche nannies brought Madeleine to him at the Tapas area at 5pm.  This contradicts what Kate said in her book, and also contradicts the creche records which say that Kate picked the kids up.  Kate says she was running on the beach at 5:15pm, but in Gerry's second statement he says he was with Kate at the tennis courts at 4:45pm and that they both went to the Tapas area together to meet the children for the meal.  Gerry does not mention Kate's long jog at the beach in his statement.  

 

In summary, there is no credible evidence that this high tea actually took place at all, so it can't be treated as confirmation that Madeleine was alive at that time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Basically, this concerns inconsistent statements made by the McCanns and the creche nanny, Katriona Baker.  Baker says she can prove that she saw Madeleine on 3rd May at 5:30pm. 

 

When asked by police, Kat Baker says it was always the parents who brought and fetched Madeleine from the mini club at the creche.  She also said that there was a high tea at 5:30pm at which parents, children and creche nannies were all present.  She says this took place at the Tapas Bar area.  However, other witnesses do not confirm whether this practice of regular high tea took place so there is doubt about it.

 

In her book , Kate McCann says the following:  "having arranged for Gerry to meet the children, I opted to go for a run along the beach... I had finished my run by 5:30pm at the Tapas area, where I found Madeleine and the twins already having their tea with Gerry".   However, the written creche records show that Kate McCann signed the twins out of their creche group at 5:25pm that day.  The creche records for Madeleine's group, known as "the Lobsters", show Kate McCann's signature signing out Madeleine at 5:30pm that day.  How is that possible if, as Kate claims in her book, she found Gerry and all of the children sitting having their tea at the Tapas area at 5:30pm?  And if she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect the kids from the creches, why is it her signature on the record for that day and not Gerry's?  These are clear contractions.

 

Gerry McCann does not mention anything in his various statements given to the police about collecting the twins and Madeleine from their respective creches and then returning to the Tapas area.  Either the McCanns are not being truthful about what happened during this period of time or the creche records are wrong, or both.  

 

Kat Baker's statement about that day is vague.  Asked who dropped Madeleine off at the creche that morning, she says she "doesn't know".   Asked who picked Madeleine up for lunch from the creche that afternoon, she answers "I can't remember".  Asked who picked up Madeleine from the creche that afternoon, she says it was Kate, and not Gerry, which contradicts what Kate says in her book.  

 

None of the other witness statements from the various witnesses at the holiday resort mention anything about a high tea that afternoon.  None of the waiters working in the Tapas area at 5:30pm can recall serving anyone resembling Madeleine.  No other parent on holiday at the complex that week mentions having high tea in the Tapas area that day.

 

When Gerry McCann was questioned for the second time by Portuguese police on 10th May (he had said nothing about it in his first statement), he said that the meal started at 5pm and ended at 5:30pm.  He says that the creche nannies brought Madeleine to him at the Tapas area at 5pm.  This contradicts what Kate said in her book, and also contradicts the creche records which say that Kate picked the kids up.  Kate says she was running on the beach at 5:15pm, but in Gerry's second statement he says he was with Kate at the tennis courts at 4:45pm and that they both went to the Tapas area together to meet the children for the meal.  Gerry does not mention Kate's long jog at the beach in his statement.  

 

In summary, there is no credible evidence that this high tea actually took place at all, so it can't be treated as confirmation that Madeleine was alive at that time.

But she was signed in and out of the creche?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anny Road said:

But she was signed in and out of the creche?

She was signed in and out, but it doesn't tally with Gerry's witness statements or Kate's account of "the truth" in her book.  So either the records are wrong, the McCanns are lying or both. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anny Road said:

Or thier recollection of events after thier daughter was abducted is somewhat foggy.

Not wanting to fall out or argue just taking an objective view.

Again non of that is evidence it is conjecture.

It's not somewhat foggy, there are clear contradictions.

 

When you say "none of that is evidence", you do realise a witness statement given to the police is evidence and is admissible in court don't you? 

 

It's not conjecture on my part, it's on the record statements and none of them tally with each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TK421 said:

It's not somewhat foggy, there are clear contradictions.

 

When you say "none of that is evidence", you do realise a witness statement given to the police is evidence and is admissible in court don't you? 

 

It's not conjecture on my part, it's on the record statements and none of them tally with each other.

I think you have provided enough evidence for me that she did not die on the 29th as you claimed. Inconsistencies around the dinner/running/tennis etc don't explain away her being signed in and out of the creche days after.

 

If the parents done it and had her playing in the creche like Bernie Lomax then they derserve to get away it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, No2 said:

I think you have provided enough evidence for me that she did not die on the 29th as you claimed. Inconsistencies around the dinner/running/tennis etc don't explain away her being signed in and out of the creche days after.

 

If the parents done it and had her playing in the creche like Bernie Lomax then they derserve to get away it.

The creche records can't be relied upon, though, as far as 3rd May is concerned.  Kate says Gerry picked the kids up, but it's her signature on the creche records.  That means she's lying or the creche records are wrong, or both. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anny Road said:

I would have thought that day 1 lesson 1 when running a creche is to know who and how many kids are under your care.

Agreed.  However, that doesn't explain the numerous contradictions arising from the statements of Gerry, Kate and Kat Baker.  Gerry said he was with Kate at 4:45 and together they walked to the Tapas area to meet the kids.  Kate says she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect the kids from the creche and went for a long run on the beach.  These two accounts are wholly at odds with each other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Agreed.  However, that doesn't explain the numerous contradictions arising from the statements of Gerry, Kate and Kat Baker.  Gerry said he was with Kate at 4:45 and together they walked to the Tapas area to meet the kids.  Kate says she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect the kids from the creche and went for a long run on the beach.  These two accounts are wholly at odds with each other. 

What do you think happened mate? 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Agreed.  However, that doesn't explain the numerous contradictions arising from the statements of Gerry, Kate and Kat Baker.  Gerry said he was with Kate at 4:45 and together they walked to the Tapas area to meet the kids.  Kate says she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect the kids from the creche and went for a long run on the beach.  These two accounts are wholly at odds with each other. 

Agreed but the crucial evidence in this is she was signed in the creche. We know the parents are negligent at best and it comes as no suprise that they have no idea who was doing what. That is a given.

Nothing however leads us to concluded Maddy was dead or indeed missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bjornebye said:

What do you think happened mate? 

I think she died earlier in the week and the McCanns hid the body.  I think she probably died by accident, from a fall or something similar.  This would explain the blood and cadaver odour alerts from the dogs.  I believe that sedatives were probably involved.  The fact that there are no photos of her alive after Sunday 29th April makes me think she probably died on that day, or shortly thereafter.  This would give the McCanns plenty of time to sterilise the apartment, wash Maddie's pyjamas/other clothes and formulate their abduction hoax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anny Road said:

Agreed but the crucial evidence in this is she was signed in the creche. We know the parents are negligent at best and it comes as no suprise that they have no idea who was doing what. That is a given.

Nothing however leads us to concluded Maddy was dead or indeed missing.

It would be easy for them to forge the creche records.  The fact that Kate's signature appears on the records when she says in her book that she pre-arranged for Gerry to collect them on 3rd May, for me that gives rise to a presumption that the records have been forged. 

 

The McCanns are on very friendly terms with Catriona Baker.  Here's a photo of them all larging it up in England.

 

25nov273.jpg  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again not to sound like broken record but in court I would be sick of shouting ‘Objection, opinion not fact’ you are linking things together which admittedly have some question marks and using them as evidence to reinforce the outcome you have already decided happened.

I assume the relevance of the above photo of them’larging it up’ means she is part of the conspiracy too.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I think she died earlier in the week and the McCanns hid the body.  I think she probably died by accident, from a fall or something similar.  This would explain the blood and cadaver odour alerts from the dogs.  I believe that sedatives were probably involved.  The fact that there are no photos of her alive after Sunday 29th April makes me think she probably died on that day, or shortly thereafter.  This would give the McCanns plenty of time to sterilise the apartment, wash Maddie's pyjamas/other clothes and formulate their abduction hoax.

Oh right ok 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Spring said:

Whether she was abducted, murdered, wandered off, the undercurrent of this is sheer negligence. They left their children unattended with a door unlocked and planned to do this every night of the week.

 

If they did that in the UK, the parents would have been flagged to social services and there would be real concerns about their professional practice which may prevent them from working with children. There's no excuse for placing alcohol and social entertainment above your parental responsibilities.

I've said it loads of times before. If this was a low income family from a council estate on holiday in benidorm, they'd have lost their other 2 kids too as soon as they got home. It's hard to know if the McCann's literally got off with murder, but they have certainly got away with child negligence because they're a couple of middle class doctors. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...