|
| Title: How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? | |
| madeleinemccanncontroversy > The NEW HiDeHo CONTROVERSY Group > WELCOME to HDH Controversy & Info | Go to subcategory: |
| Author | Content |
|
HiDeHo
|
|
|
Date Posted:23/01/2018 1:07 AMCopy HTML ![]() See discussions at Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14884-do-you-believe-something-happened-earlier-than-may-3rd-if-so-how-did-the-mccanns-manage-to-deceive-everyone-at-the-creche ![]() DO YOU BELIEVE SOMETHING HAPPENED TO MADDIE BEFORE 5.30PM MAY 3RD? If so, that would mean that she did not attend the crèche during May 3rd or earlier. Have you considered how this could be explained? Catriona, her nanny, claims Maddie was in the crèche during Thursday (and before). For the record, I DO NOT believe Catriona was lying. Is the following scenario possible? Suggesting that something happened to Maddie before Tuesday morning (when the major discrepancies/contradictions/lies started…likely to hide the truth) then Maddie would have only visited the crèche for a day or two. What I feel is important to remember, is that the crèche did not follow the strict guidelines of a school, where children were expected to be present and accounted for during the full day. Children were dropped off and picked up randomly and the register was likely used as a record of where to find the parents if needed as opposed to a record of their use of the crèche (which was free, so no need to establish cost) There were approximately 13 children that used the kids club (3 – 5 yrs old) and were divided into two groups. Lobsters and Sharks. However they all shared the same crèche room and although assigned to specific nannies, were likely interacting together. ![]() We are told that there were several little blonde girls and I doubt for the first day or two the nannies were able to distinguish between them or notice if one or more of the young children were missing for the rest of the week. Children arrived and left randomly, and were the records strictly kept where each nanny greeted the parents at the door as they arrived and signed the register, or was the register a requirement to locate the parents and was left‘on the side’ for them to responsibly sign in case the nanny needed to contact them? Would the nannies scrutinize the register and take special note of who should be there at any specific time during the day? Likely not. Once children arrived and doors were closed, the nannies, at the beginning of the season when everything was new and lprobably not all in place, would likely be focused on keeping the children’s attention and dealing with minor issues between the children. Catriona claims there were bracelets issued to each child and whether used or not, in a room of approximately 13 children, that were only going to be there for less than a week, and sometimes only a couple of hours, remembering their names would likely be secondary to keeping them occupied. There was no expectation for every child to be in attendance every day and so if one or more was missing, I can’t imagine it being of importance. Is this the reason that, whether during the week or only Thursday, it may not have been apparent that Maddie was not there? How could the McCanns have accomplished this deceit? How could Catriona claim to have seen Maddie, even though she was not there? Is it possible that this following scenario explains how the McCanns deceived everyone into believing Maddie was attending the crèche? JaneTanners daughter was similar in appearance to Maddie. She was only 3 months younger and had similar hair colour.. Her shy personality was very different from what we have been told about Maddie but is it possible that Catriona was 'intimidated' by the knowledge, once Maddie disappeared, to learn that SHE had been looking after Maddie until that afternoon. ![]() Did she SPECIFICALLY remember Maddie (by name) as being there or KNOWING (according to the McCanns) that she had been with Maddie that day maybe she was thinking she didn’t recall the name of the child that day (or before) but as far as she was told, Maddie WAS at the crèche and she could have second guessed herself and felt the child that had disappeared must have been the child that resembled who she later learned was Maddie. If she couldn’t remember EXACTLY the child named Maddie was there that day, (or earlier) there is no way she could have jeopardized her job by claiming shedidn’t remember. She had been TOLD Maddie was at the crèche that day and as the ‘abduction’happened from the apartment, the crèche was not involved. However there WAS a BBC Whisteblower program that had criticized a Mark Warner crèche in another location only three weeks prior. Admitting to not SPECIFICALLY remembering Maddie could jeopardize her credibility for the job <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GvjfPZ8dpgY?wmode=opaque" data-youtube-id="GvjfPZ8dpgY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> . She presumed that Maddie was the child that may or may not have been called ‘Ella’. Is this the reason that Catriona and many of the other OC staff described ‘Maddie’ as being shy and had the personality of Ella? It goes without question that, even though she may not have remembered Maddie specifically, (especially if Maddie was actually only there during the first couple of days) she would give her statements about the child she now believed must have been Maddie. Once acknowledged Maddie was there she could never retract her statement. There was no turning back. Was this the reason she went through a depressing time a few weeks later (as described to a friend) when she inwardly realized the scope of the case? This brings us to HOW could the McCanns achieve their deceit of Maddie attending the crèche? After scrutinizing the crèche records, and guided by the discrepancies/contradictions starting on TUESDAY MORNING, so with the possibility that they were trying to hide something at this point, Monday MAY have been the day something happened. MONDAY AFTERNOON - Oddly, Maddie was signed into the crèche at 3.15pm and signed out after 15 mins. Approximately half an hour later, Ella was signed in at 4pm, but not signed out. TUESDAY morning, Gerry and Russell walked to the crèche along with Jez Wilkins. Jez makes mention of Gerry telling him about the children being left alone and he responded by talking about children can go to evening crèche and carried home with a blanket. Could this have been the first initial effort to suggest the children would be alone to facilitate an ‘abductor’ being the reason Maddie disappeared? Was it inspiration of bundleman? Jez’ daughter was in the Sharks group but sharing the same room as Maddie’s group,the Lobsters and Russells daughter was also in the Lobster group. At 12.30pm Gerry signed Maddie out but Russell did not sign the register. Was this because there was only ONE CHILD? TUESDAY AFTERNOON Gerry signs ONE CHILD in at 2.30. Ella is signed in at the same time by CAT(Did Russell forget to sign or was there only ONE CHILD?) At 5.30pm only Russell signs out ONE CHILD Maddie is not signed out (Blank) Is that because there was only ONE CHILD? Kate signed the twins out at 5.20pm They were at high tea together. Why did she not sign Maddie out at the same time? Was Maddie there? On WEDNESDAY MORNING both Gerry and Russell sign in their child AT THE SAME TIME(could there have only been ONE CHILD?) but at lunchtime Russell signed out ONE CHILD and it was CAT who signed out Maddie at the same time. 12.30pm. Why and when did CAT sign Maddie out? Kate and Russell both arrived at the same time on Wednesday afternoon. 5.30pm THURSDAY is RIDDLED with discrepancies and one example is regarding picking up the McCann children for the crèche at lunchtime…. Kate and Fiona were SUPPOSEDLY at the rec area together. Fiona claims they went together from the rec area to pick up the children(Maddie and Scarlet) Kate claims she went back to the apartment to prepare lunch before going to the creche. HOWEVER, Gerry claims HE went to the crèche to pick up Maddie and he specifically remembers taking the short cut Kate signs the register at 12.25pm. Did Gerry REALLY pick up Maddie as he claims? Keep in mind that Catriona said she did NOT REMEMBER who picked Maddie up at lunchtime Along with this, neither of them are certain who picked up the TWINS and curiously the twins crèche records for THURSDAY morning are MISSING from the files. Most of the above is from memory and along with the graphic is just an indication of why I feel it’s a POSSIBILTY so if any of the info is to be used elsewhere PLEASE confirm or contact me for a link. As mentioned, for those that believe something happened to Maddie before 5.30pmon May 3rd there needs to be an explanation as to how it can be explained HOW Maddie was ‘missed’ in the crèche. For those that believe something happened in the hour and half they were at the tapas on May 3rd, I would be interested to hear an explanation of how it could be accomplished in such a short period of time. To date I have not heard a a viable explanation. ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#1
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:24/01/2018 3:16 PMCopy HTML This is not NEW research... I have been sitting on this for more than 8 years!
A post from nearly 8 years ago in Missing Madeleine Forum ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#2
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:21 AMCopy HTML Please keep in mind, although the creche records threads had thousands of posts on many different threads, identifying the possible in/out scenario has only been possible since I studied the (easier to read) graphics. Although I recognised this possible scenario a long time ago, it is part of the big picture, which could not be discussed without the possibility of something happening to Maddie earlier in the week.
It's basically still a WORK IN PROGRESS research and I appreciate input. Whether it is viable is something that I won' know without input so I can second guess my thoughts. One thing I have learned is to be careful about making overall judgements on a possible situation. It's very easy to make a blanket statement that care workers SHOULD know each child individually, but in reality, when a nanny is surrounded by approximately 13 children between 3 and 5, (7 allocated to Catriona) and as we are led to believe many 'pink and pretty' it's hard to imagine how it was. One care worker (on another thread) has suggested that its more about head count than names, as they spent their time outside and trips to beach etc. I do not mean to suggest in any way that the nannies and the care was not up to the standard suggested, but I do not think the records were scrutinised as being any ore than to assist with location of parents as well as a basic idea of which chidren should be there for a head count. It was not filled in strictly and many blanktimes including CAT filling in herself. What I am suggesting is that IF something happened to Maddie earlier and she only attended on Sunday and for a short time on Monday, would everyone be able to identify her from the photo of a younger child several days later? The suggestion that Jane Tanners daughter would be recognisable after is interesting, but we don't know whether she was at the creche the following week (not within their 'holiday' times which finished on Friday for the creche) and lets not forget that by the following Friday (I believe) the nannies were moved to Greece. That was very strange IMO. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#3
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:22 AMCopy HTML |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#4
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:28 AMCopy HTML <iframe width="425" height="355" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jyr3EFCQJig" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> IF Maddie was only at the creche Sunday and a few hours on Monday, would people easily identify her from a younger pic several days later? Enlarge this image ![]() There are certainly issues regarding the signatures. Whether they were contrived or false I have no way of knowing, but they have been discussed at length in thousands of posts from 3A days Here are a few http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/The-Very-Best-of-the-Old-3A-s/CRECHE-RECORDS-thread-beginning-Sept-2008-1-951148.html Thats why I included the sigs in the graphic. Seems there WERE issues with the validity of the creche records. ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#5
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:32 AMCopy HTML Considering Chris Unsworth and Alice Stanley were the instructors on the beach when Maddie was supposedly attending the mini sail. They were interviewed 'unofficially' according to the files.
One would think their statements would have been important (more so than some of the other staff). One has to wonder whether they DID NOT remember seeing Maddie on Thursday and therefore would have no input, or whether the mini sail DID happen on Thursday morning. These issues move towards the 'Who saw Madeleine' topic. Other nannies do NOT remember seeing Madeleine at some times they were transporting the children to another location (possibly beach) One has to remember that Catriona does NOT claim to have seen Maddie at 'high tea' (from anything I have found...) ![]() Emma Wilding was the other nanny in the same creche room. She does not remember seeing Maddie in a trip they all took to the beach Catriona was very vague about Madeleine and seemed to focus a lot on the TWINS (who were not in her group) Is it possible Catriona was describing Ella? If both children were at mini sail, I would suggest its more likely Ella that would be scared and fearful. I can't imagine Maddie would be scared with no mention that Ella was scared also. I would like to continue to add that this is considered a possibility which supports something happening earlier and according to the research from the files that I have put together in amny other threads creating the 'big picture' I am looking for input as the research isin progress and appreciate your comments. I am NOT claiming this is what happened, only that it is a good explanation of a POSSIBILITY it could have happened in a similar way The similarity between Maddie and Jane Tanners daughter is something to keep in mind (and their different personalities) ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#6
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:36 AMCopy HTML Interesting to note the findings of BBC Whistleblower program that happened 2 weeks prior to the McCanns arriving in PdL. (MW Egypt used in the program)
![]() ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#7
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:40 AMCopy HTML IF something happened to Madeleine earlier in the week, as the DISCREPANCIES started Tuesday morning, it appeared confusing because of the contradictions of probably trying to cover up the truth
What we are 'told' about the truth is not necessarily what actually happened, hence I spent a few years compiling all the statements into timelines and timetables for comparison. Hence I discovered the discrepancies. Remembering Madeleine McCann Research Forum http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#8
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:42 AMCopy HTML I agree that the invitation was 'odd' and coincided with the Secret Meeting at Rothley
This would be the time before the rogatories that I see the possibility that they may have 'reminded' Catriona of some of the details they wanted known. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2007/12/11/tapas-9-in-secret-mccann-meeting-115875-20232103/ |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#9
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:43 AMCopy HTML I maintain that I find anything suggesting Catriona was lying (indicating she was complicit) is very wrong. It's not an opinion, I see it as an accusation and regardless whether I find her rogatory statement questionable I do not for one second see ANY indication that she was complicit during that week.
As I have explained many times she was a young girl doing her job and I OFFERED a suggestion how it MAY have happened. I am not expecting everyone to agree with me, in fact I may be wrong, but I prefer that anyone that disagrees, offers an alternative to show how it MAY have happened. I do not have an agenda on this case. Its not important to me if I am right or wrong because the TRUTH of what happened to little Maddie surpasses any need to boost an ego. I did many years of research and am offering what I have put together to try to make sense of the situation. For those that believe something happened to Maddie earlier in the week then its IMPORTANT to base that belief on what we know from the files and HOW it was accomplished to deceive everyone about how Maddie was presumed to be in the creche when she wasn't. Just 'guessing' she was not around the Ocean Club does not give credibility to something happening earlier. It needs to be explained HOW it was accomplished, apart from T7 statements that were contrived and suggested she was seen. I believe something happened earlier so I am attempting to back up that thought with the research I have done.... and the POSSIBILITY of how the creche could be explained. The police files tell us that Maddie died in the apartment and the parents hid her body and faked an abduction. Could all that be accomplished in an hour and half? I don't believe so. I would be interested to hear a timeline of that hour and half to explain it and all we have learned from the statements and facts from the case. It is my responsibility to back up my thoughts with an explanation of how it was all accomplished. I certainly could not explain how it happened during the dinner that night. I welcome someone that can, take the time to explain it to me. I am not here to presume guilt for someone who may be innocent.... I am here to help make sense of what happened by using the files.... I would be interested in hearing from someone that DOES feel the OP could have some possibility. This is research in progress... It's not a fully fledged conclusion. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#10
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:44 AMCopy HTML There are some people that believe she died between the times they were at the tapas. Some believe it was after 5.30pm Some believe it was Wednesday. Others believe she died earlier in the week.
Personally I have seen nothing to indicate when she died. Ella was 'Ella' at the creche as I tried to explain in the OP. As far as Alice Stanley and Chris Unsworth... One would have thought they were just as important to interview as all the other OC staff. I have done my best to offer a possible scenario... Just as it is possible that, eg, Catriona knew ALL the childrens names, but that would need an explanation about how (if Maddie WASN'T in the creche) it can be explained that the McCanns were able to deceive everyone. I'm not seeing anything offered to suggest HOW it could have happened if that is the case, based on what we 'know' from the files. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#11
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:46 AMCopy HTML
|
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#12
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:48 AMCopy HTML This is the reason I compiled an easier to read 'creche records, so we can see exactly the drop off and pick up times and whether the statements coincide.
If a nanny claims to have seen Madeleine at specific times, I needed to know whether the 'logic' of the creche times fited with their statements or whether they could have been mistaken as to which child they saw and thought was Maddie. http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Creche-Records-Timeline/Nanny-Info-Statements-Highlighted-1-930240.html ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#13
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:53 AMCopy HTML I'm not sure if the reference about 'everyone' is from something I have said, but if so, it was likely referring to their statements which really has nothing to do with them being in separate locations. Not sure if Ive responded correctly, just let me know.
Cat was allocated 7 children for the LOBSTER group 5 girls 2 boys Madeleine McCann Emma O'Brien Jessica Berry Tia Patel Elizabeth Naylor William Topman Alexander Mann + SHARKS (approx 7) She shared the room above main reception with the SHARKS (Emma Wilding) and the Baby Club (Charlotte Pennington) so there would have been approximately 13 children mixing together and likely interacting with all the children, as well as possibly sharing the same activities. It would likely be a room similar to this with approx 13 children and two Nannies looking after them (Catriona and Emma) Enlarge this image ![]() Enlarge this image ![]() Enlarge this image ![]() Enlarge this image ![]() Emma Wilding ![]() ![]() I don't know if Catriona stayed with them but she was certainly with them on November 25th, the day after (what is likely) the Secret Meeting in Rothley ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#14
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 5:56 AMCopy HTML I'm not sure I understand the reason to highlight the clubs are in four different locations with the baby club as per Charlotte Pennington) '....the physical space where the children groups are located is contiguous; '
I'm confused why 4 locations is relevant ![]() ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#15
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:00 AMCopy HTML There was an area above the main reception that was for the Baby Club and the Kids club
There were TWO groups for the 3 - 5 year olds. One was called LOBSTERS with Catriona looking after them and the SHARKS had Emma looking after them. I don't know the name of the Baby groups (three of them) Outside the Main Reception Enlarge this image ![]() Entrance to Mini Club and Baby Club Enlarge this image ![]() Directions from Main Reception to Mini Club and Baby club up the stairs Enlarge this image ![]() I have attempted several times to explain the likely volume of children in the creche of children between the ages of 3 - 5 with Emma Wilding having SHARKS (which included Jez Wilkins daughter) and Catriona with children (5 girls and two boys) Emma's SHARKS group played mini tennis on THURSDAY (the mini tennis that Rachael claimed to have seen Maddie) Catriona's LOBSTER group played TUESDAY morning I can see that the misunderstanding has led to confusion. Hopefully it can now be recognised that there was likely (approx) 13 children in the creche room (with Baby's club in an adjoining room) Both groups spent times together as we can see from Emma ![]() Approx 13 children likely sharing the same area. Unlike school, only there to be kept occupied during the random times they attended. I showed the video as an EXAMPLE of how it may feel in a room full of 13 children and tryng to keep them occupied. ie the REALITY of how it may feel. This video is from BBC Whistleblower investigating the creche in this portion of the program (Buttons) as well as Mark Warner in creche in Egypt) <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GvjfPZ8dpgY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"></iframe> We can see from the program that its not always as organised as presumed (not to say there were any issues with PdL but this thread is about a POSSIBILITY, not what is known) ![]() I hope that explains all the misunderstandings and to show why this thread is something that I feel is important to address. Please let me know if there are still issues that you disagree with. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#16
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:03 AMCopy HTML Jez Wilkins DAUGHTER is in the SHARKS mini club and his SON is in the baby group located in the same area above the Main reception.
Regarding 'no interest' (which of course is your prerogative) I would like to point out that this is NOT the same old subject. Its a topic that has NOT been discussed before, but it does rely on full understanding of how many children were in the creche room with Maddie which could explain how the McCanns were able to manipulate the creche records to indicate Maddie was there when she wasn't I tried very hard to explain it all in the OP and the subsequent posts, but, as I mentioned earlier, maybe members dont have the full knowledge of all the details (and thats understandable) that need to be understood before it is recognised how IMPORTANT it is to understand the concept of this thread It is IMPORTANT to this thread to recognise that there could have been 13 children playing together in the one room and until that is recognised as a possibility/probability I can see where the concept of the thread makes no sense. Glad we have it sorted! (Hopefully) Just one thing to recognise skyrocket...and thank you for confirming the creche photo is from the brochures available in 2007 its not a photo of the creche above the main reception, (which is where the mini club Sharks and Lobsters were) but does give us an idea of what the creche may look like Enlarge this image ![]() This is the outside view of the Main reception and the creche is on the floor above... Enlarge this image ![]() This is the Toddler 1 and 2 location next to the tapas bar... Enlarge this image ![]() This is the map showing locations of the two creche and the Millenium Restaurant Enlarge this image ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#17
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:12 AMCopy HTML I ABSOLUTELY believe this is one of the most important threads as it may help explain, (if something happened to Madeleine before Thursday) HOW they managed to dupe everyone into believing she attended the creche until Thursday pm.
Becausse I believe Maddie was not around the OC starting earlier in the week, I feel it is my responsibility to justify my thoughts by offering a possibility of how they managed to deceive everyone and how it could have been achieved. Its important to offer the possible explanation of the creche and how it may have been achieved to give the claim credibility. This thread has offered MY suggestion. I have welcomed OTHER suggestions but have not seen an alternative (so far anyway) --------- The amount of children in the creche with Catriona is critical for this suggestion to explain HOW she may not have remembered seeing Maddie after (approx) MONDAY.. I emphasise its a POSSIBILITY for this thread. If there is NO possibility then there HAS to be another explanation, or the claim of something happening earlier would not be credible. You agree with the suggestion that it was more about head counts and keeping the children occupied than it was about ensuring all children were in attendance as with a school scenario, where they would also likely teach the children about interactions etc. which would require names to be known. ---------- Yes, I am in agreement about the picture which I have addressed many times... As with everything they do... they NEEDED to make sure that the photo used RESEMBLED one of the other children. We were told by Miguel Matias at the Paraiso that he was CERTAIN that Maddie was at the restaurant dancing with her daddy when we know for a FACT she wasn't there. This tells us that ONE OF THE TAPAS CHILDREN RESEMBLED MADDIE! ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#18
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:14 AMCopy HTML Something I could use some help on please...
|
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#19
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:16 AMCopy HTML
Is it POSSIBLE that he was talking to Emma at that time and mistakenly wrote down her name as it was so similar? A bit far fetched, maybe, but it IS a possibility (especially if mind occupied) We can see that Alexander Mann was signed in as 'Richard' in the afternoon. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#20
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:17 AMCopy HTML |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#21
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:20 AMCopy HTML I agree that much of Catrionas statements were subject to discrepancies and contradictions, relevant to the issues with 'Discrepancies' and other issues but regarding THIS thread I am trying to find how the McCanns managed to sign the creche records if Maddie wasn't there.
I think there is no question that Catriona was 'guided' and 'reminded' what to say and who knows what went on in the Secret meeting (which she likely attended) It seems she was possibly 'helped' after and though the McCanns refused to say where she was, it was no secret she went to New York with a dramatically changed appearance. HOWEVER, this is about the signatures and HOW the McCanns managed to have everyone believing that Maddie attended the creche. I do NOT believe that Catriona knew ANYTHING prior to the disappearance and was likely (imo) a victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I have tried to explain what I believe could have happened. I am still asking for an alternative that is based on what we are aware of. Catriona was (likely) in a creche room with both SHARKS and LOBSTERs intermingling together and her job was to look after them and keep them occupied for whatever time they were in the creche. My thoughts are that if something happened to Maddie before Tuesday then she wouldn't have seen her in the creche but after beig TOLD Maddie was there she second guessed herself and related her comments to a child she THOUGHT could have been Maddie. She could NOT say she didn't remember seeing her.... All the names of those that were asked to give a statement are very interesting and like Sharon says... worthy of another thread. Would they know this Secret Rothley Meeting that Catriona likely attended, be made known and have the approximate date published? Catrionas visit and the Secret Rothley meeting were likely the same weekend. I think it will be a very interesting thread. |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#22
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:21 AMCopy HTML |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#23
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:22 AMCopy HTML I TOTALLY understand why most people wouldn't agree. Thats why I have 'sat' on this topic for more than 8 years, but what I would REALLY like to know, is whether, even though you dont agree it happened, whether you think its POSSIBLE.
As mentioned before, this is NOT a solution to what likely happened, it a RESEARCH thread to discuss and gather input to see (if something happened to Maddie earlier in the week) the McCanns managed to convince everyone that Maddie was at the creche until Thursday. That is something that HAS to be explained if one believes she was not around the resort after a couple/few days. To have the creche issues remain unchallenged gives credibility to Madeleine DYING on THURSDAY. Thats why I felt it was TIME to discuss and find an answer as to how it was accomplished. Not to give a scenario and have everyone decide whether they agree or not. I CONSIDER THIS (HOPEFULLY) A RESEARCH THREAD I think its one of the most important topics that NEEDS to be addressed if one is to believe something happened earlier and I am attempting to put as much effort into explaining and posting all the info that I have on the subject. ---------------------------------------- I SUSPECT, although I haven't seen anyone post it, that some may consider Catriona COMPLICIT because her statements give some credibility to Madeleine being present in the creche until Thursday... If her early statements claim that, are some people thinking that she was 'in it' from the start otherwise her early statements would not have the detail about Madeleine? I have made it CLEAR that my thoughts do not head in that direction. I do NOT believe she was complicit in 'helping' the McCanns during the holiday. As I have explained many times, I DO believe she was 'intimidated' 'reminded' and details 'suggested' to her at a later date, particularly during her stay visiting the McCanns and possibly attending the ROTHLEY SECRET MEETING. An example could be 'Ohh yes Catriona, remember at high tea I was wearing a sporting outfit and don't you remember Gerry was at Tennis' (Gerry claims to have BEEN there and not playing tennis) 'Do you remember how tired Madeleine was especially at high tea.' etc. etc. Or maybe a contrived discussion of everything they wanted her (and others?) to 'remember'? There had to be SOME way they managed to have the statements show some of the details they wanted known. For those that believe the early statements tell the REAL story, you may be interested to learn that she was able to be REMINDED of what she said in her early statements and change them accordingly. CATRIONA'S EARLY STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN CHANGED! Thanks to Joana Morais for this news article Source: TvMais, paper edition only 18.11.2008 Please visit to see Comments https://joana-morais.blogspot.ca/2008/11/tvmais-at-what-time-did-maddie-leave.html |
|
|
HiDeHo
|
Share to:
#24
|
|
Re:How did McCanns deceive about Maddie in CRECHE. Is THIS scenario POSSIBLE? Date Posted:29/01/2018 6:23 AMCopy HTML |