The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann

Marky wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Marky wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Mr. Gaspar said this:

At the time I did not feel the gesture was referring to Madeleine.

It is my wish that the police are aware of my preoccupation with the gesture made by David Payne.


so it seems although at the time he did not feel it was referring to Madeleine (although he did feel it was in bad taste) - since Madeleine's disappearance he obviously had thought about it some more as he wanted the Police to be aware of -  my preoccupation with the gesture made by David Payne.



It is therefore not correct to say he saw or heard nothing at all. And no reason to discard the statements at all. The statements are very important - hence that could account for the delay in sending them to the Portuguese Police.

cherry, we been over this before. the statements were originally in english, translated into portuguese and then back again for public release. the line you highlight has in the past been interpreted as some kind of written nod nod wink wink when it's more logical to consider it just a bad translation. if memory serves it's the only part of his statement statement that was seized upon. one statement does not support the other although both were at the same table. he did not see or hear what she heard or saw or if you prefer, he did not interpret it the same way. either way it's all the same. and that's enough to disregard them.

Marky, it would appear that he did see the gesture, but interpreted it differently. Even if he had not seen the gesture, it is worth bearing in mind that whatever David Payne did may not have been noticed by everyone sitting at the table. He did say that he had seen it though. Enough now. It is not up to any of us to decided what statements should be disregarded. Gonçalo Amaral felt that the statement by Katarina Gasper was significant and that's good enough for me.

hi anna. it's me who is disregarding them. if amaral felt it significant then fine but as they stand and we have not seen the originals, my view, however unpopular, is that once investigated they'd be filed away. anyways long time no post. been busy?

cherry1 wrote:We will have to agree to disagree Marky, he may have dismissed it at the time but had a rethink and anxious that the Police knew of that concern, I certainly wouldn't dismiss it at all.

AnnaEsse wrote:

Marky wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Marky wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Mr. Gaspar said this:

At the time I did not feel the gesture was referring to Madeleine.

It is my wish that the police are aware of my preoccupation with the gesture made by David Payne.


so it seems although at the time he did not feel it was referring to Madeleine (although he did feel it was in bad taste) - since Madeleine's disappearance he obviously had thought about it some more as he wanted the Police to be aware of -  my preoccupation with the gesture made by David Payne.



It is therefore not correct to say he saw or heard nothing at all. And no reason to discard the statements at all. The statements are very important - hence that could account for the delay in sending them to the Portuguese Police.

cherry, we been over this before. the statements were originally in english, translated into portuguese and then back again for public release. the line you highlight has in the past been interpreted as some kind of written nod nod wink wink when it's more logical to consider it just a bad translation. if memory serves it's the only part of his statement statement that was seized upon. one statement does not support the other although both were at the same table. he did not see or hear what she heard or saw or if you prefer, he did not interpret it the same way. either way it's all the same. and that's enough to disregard them.

Marky, it would appear that he did see the gesture, but interpreted it differently. Even if he had not seen the gesture, it is worth bearing in mind that whatever David Payne did may not have been noticed by everyone sitting at the table. He did say that he had seen it though. Enough now. It is not up to any of us to decided what statements should be disregarded. Gonçalo Amaral felt that the statement by Katarina Gasper was significant and that's good enough for me.

hi anna. it's me who is disregarding them. if amaral felt it significant then fine but as they stand and we have not seen the originals, my view, however unpopular, is that once investigated they'd be filed away. anyways long time no post. been busy?

May not have posted very much, Marky, but I'm usually here for at least part of the day.

Krisy22 wrote:Maybe I am being naïve here...but we are talking about a very professional couple.

I don't believe for one minute this was not discussed up and down and around, by this pair... before going to the police.

I would imagine if there was the slightest doubt in their minds ..it would not have been brought to police attention at all ...bearing in mind the long term friendship.. that must have suffered.



Better add.. all in my opinion of course. lol

Krisy22 wrote:Maybe I am being naïve here...but we are talking about a very professional couple.

I don't believe for one minute this was not discussed up and down and around, by this pair... before going to the police.

I would imagine if there was the slightest doubt in their minds ..it would not have been brought to police attention at all ...bearing in mind the long term friendship.. that must have suffered.



Better add.. all in my opinion of course. lol

comperedna wrote:I am just delighted that Marky, higher up the thead, has seen fit to print some of his his own opinions for once, like that there was no cover up and so on... a perfectly reasonable viewpoint to take, even if many would disagree with it. Why don't you do that more often, Marky? Defend your viewpoint, so much more constructive than sneering. I did not know for sure what you thought. How could I if you do not say. If you believe others on here are not worth the bother of discussing, arguing, or disputing with, why come on here at all?

jassi wrote:There was also the involvement of Special Branch who acted as chauffeurs to the McCanns when they made their final return to UK.
What conversation were they perhaps having in the privacy of a car?

Marky wrote:come on jassie or are you waiting for winjoy, maybe judge dread. hunting with the hounds?

AnnaEsse wrote:

Marky wrote:come on jassie or are you waiting for winjoy, maybe judge dread. hunting with the hounds?

Marky, you have reduced a serious discussion to sarcasm, gibes and snide remarks. Any more of this and I start deleting.

Claudia79 wrote:I'm getting a weird déjà vu feeling.

Krisy22 wrote:To be honest, I really cant think of much that could shock me now after all that's  transpired over the years.

Always hopeful of a new breakthrough though. Think this can only come from someone at the scene.  
2015 must bring something new or final to the table. Surely it cannot go on indefinitely.. can it?

jassi wrote:

Krisy22 wrote:To be honest, I really cant think of much that could shock me now after all that's  transpired over the years.

Always hopeful of a new breakthrough though. Think this can only come from someone at the scene.  
2015 must bring something new or final to the table. Surely it cannot go on indefinitely.. can it?

Unless Ms Wall can nail it, why not ?  The McCanns can't afford to give up.

comperedna wrote:I am just delighted that Marky, higher up the thead, has seen fit to print some of his his own opinions for once, like that there was no cover up and so on... a perfectly reasonable viewpoint to take, even if many would disagree with it. Why don't you do that more often, Marky? Defend your viewpoint, so much more constructive than sneering. I did not know for sure what you thought. How could I if you do not say. If you believe others on here are not worth the bother of discussing, arguing, or disputing with, why come on here at all?

Marky wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:I'm getting a weird déjà vu feeling.

only this time i'll beat you to it. please delete my account. thanks.

Lioned wrote:Blacksmith has promised a resolution to this case on or around the 25th Jan 2015. So not long to wait now according to him !

Claudia79 wrote:

Marky wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:I'm getting a weird déjà vu feeling.

only this time i'll beat you to it. please delete my account. thanks.

Since with you we never know, can you just confirm that you are indeed not making another one of your jokes and that is your true desire? We are here to please you, evidently: you want to join, you get in. You want to leave, your wish is our command. You want to come back, we open the door for you. You want to go again, and here we are to fulfil your wishes. I just need to be sure they are, in fact your wishes.

ETA: I never banned you so the 'this time I'll beat you to it' thing doesn't make any sense.

winjoy wrote:

Lioned wrote:Blacksmith has promised a resolution to this case on or around the 25th Jan 2015. So not long to wait now according to him !

That is going to be my 'New Year Wish' tomorrow night when the clock strikes midnight!!  In any event, I do know that I cannot stomach this case for very much longer!

Let us all pray that Blacksmith knows something the rest of us don't.....

AnnaEsse wrote:

Marky wrote:come on jassie or are you waiting for winjoy, maybe judge dread. hunting with the hounds?

Marky, you have reduced a serious discussion to sarcasm, gibes and snide remarks. Any more of this and I start deleting.