Re: McCanns/Amaral

**fred** Thu 9 Sep - 12:03

Did anyone see Sofias interview last night. She was clear and articulate, not an umm...errr.. in sight(or should that be sound?)

**Keela** Thu 9 Sep - 12:05

DavidA wrote:
sans_souci wrote:
DavidA wrote:
sans_souci wrote:
Wallflower wrote:Sans souci, do you think what Sofia said about the McCanns' peadophile friends is libellous?

As it stands, no. - ie on the basis of a report in a tabloid paper. If she repeated it in a more direct medium, then possibly.

It is merely a rather stupid and vindictive allegation to make on the basis of a vague and rather hysterical statement by Dr Gaspar, and not backed up by her husbands statement. Says more about Sophia Amaral, in my view.

You are over-playing your defense of the them here. There is no logical assumption nor reason that leads to the statement by Dr Gasper as being labeled 'vague' or 'hysterical'. Given the serious nature of the statement and the potential impact, I would say it was actually quite well explained. I would not want to have to make a statement like that.

Your final comment can equally apply to your post - that your rather vague and hysterical response to Sophia says more about you, ..... or your intentions more precisely.

A couple of examples from the statement:
_____________________

I am absolutely certain that he said what he said and that he made the gestures I referred to, but that could have occurred in the restaurant in Leicester, even though (page five) I believe that it was later on, in Majorca. When I heard Dave saying and doing this a second time, I took it more seriously.

I remember thinking whether he looked at the girls in a different way from me or from the others. I imagined that maybe he had visited Internet sites related to small children. In short, I thought that he might be interested in child pornography on the internet.
_____________________

Now come on - quite well explained? Really? Have you actually bothered to read her husbands statement?

And on the basis of this you think that allegations of paedophilia against an individual are justified?

I think I see what you are referring to, but I do not think that justifies the comments, especially 'hysterical'. This is the way the statements are. Remember this is a transcript of a spoken statement. Compared to the other statements made (especially from the Tapas group) in this whole affair, I would not call this vague at all. And most definitely not hysterical. This is a very difficult subject, and the impression I get from the statements are simply reports of only what was seen, not embellishing it, from people who want to be a fair as possible given the potential outcome of such a suggestion.

Regarding what Sophia said, if we put bias aside, she has a right to be extremely angry with G+K. Whatever is the truth, what Amaral said was already in the public domain, was suspected by many already, and was inferred in the PJ's actions and questioning later. He wrote a book that expressed a theory that, in all fairness, was fairly well substantiated given the vagueness of the whole case. G+K want to destroy them for it. Should they be looking for a little girl? Does it not make you suspicious how much they like to put all their attention on such things, when it should be directed towards the search for Madeleine? What good does this do for Madeleine, when the book has already been stopped, and what became Amaral's theory was being discussed long before his book anyway?

If I were Sophia, I would wonder why G+K were going after my house and therefore my family. I would probably put 2 and 2 together. I would probably assume they had something more serious to hide. That the action against my family was to take attention away from other issues. So from that point of view, I can understand why she may have come to those conclusions, therefore making the statement she did. I do not think this is only about Dr Gaspers statement.

i believe that this could be so. McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 307691

Bebootje Thu 9 Sep - 12:18

“My husband and I have never abandoned our daughters, or allowed paedophiles in our circle of friends.", says Sophia.

I can imagine that Sophia can say what her husband maybe cannot. This statement suggests IMO that Amaral has evidence that (supposedly Payne, whoelse?) is a pedofile, or has a pedofile history.

**Panda** Thu 9 Sep - 12:26

Sorry, but I think you are making too much of the Gaspar statement, if it was up to most of you Payne would have been hung drawn and quartered, McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

Even Dr. Gaspar"s Husband did not share her concern and they had lunch back in Leicester with the McCanns which suggests that they still continued their friendship and that
Gaspar"s fears were unfounded.

Similarly, Yvonne Martin"s request for a search of records to see if Payne was on any list proved fruitless.

If the Tapas Group were swingers and indulged in pedophilia, would they have gone to a small family
orientated Resort........no, they would have rented a Private Villa.
Similarly I see nothing untoward in Fiona Payne reading the Statement outside the Courthouse, she is
probably the more outgoing of the Group.

I do however share the ? about O"Brien. He was reportedly off work for several weeks after the Holiday, was
noticeable by his absence at the Courthouse, would not have had to leave a Steak in such a hurry when JT
as the Mother was already in the Apartment. Couldn"t she, as a Mum cope with her daughter"s sickness? Why
would O"Brien wash the sheets, all he had to do was ring Reception at OC, they would have sent someone with
clean sheets who would take the soiled ones away. If anyone was involved with helping the McCanns on that
night it would have been O"Brien IMO

**margaret** Thu 9 Sep - 12:43

Panda wrote: If anyone was involved with helping the McCanns on that night it would have been O"Brien IMO

I agree with this bit and l think he's suffering because of it.

I wish with all my heart he feels strong enough to do the decent thing however, he may have already done so hence his absence from the courthouse..... It's just with the lack of concrete proof of anything charges can't proceed, yet.

**Panda** Thu 9 Sep - 13:14

margaret wrote:
Panda wrote: If anyone was involved with helping the McCanns on that night it would have been O"Brien IMO

I agree with this bit and l think he's suffering because of it.

I wish with all my heart he feels strong enough to do the decent thing however, he may have already done so hence his absence from the courthouse..... It's just with the lack of concrete proof of anything charges can't proceed, yet.

Margaret, isn"t he one of the Tapas Murat is suing for saying he was watching outside 5a on the night Madeleine
went missing.?

**Carolina** Thu 9 Sep - 13:24

fred wrote:Did anyone see Sofias interview last night. She was clear and articulate, not an umm...errr.. in sight(or should that be sound?)

Was she on Portuguese television? Right now I am in Germany and would not have been able to see it anyway. Could you give summary?

Judge Dread Thu 9 Sep - 13:42

Panda wrote:Sorry, but I think you are making too much of the Gaspar statement, if it was up to most of you Payne would have been hung drawn and quartered, Even Dr. Gaspar"s Husband did not share her concern and they had lunch back in Leicester with the McCanns which suggests that they still continued their friendship and that
Gaspar"s fears were unfounded.

Similarly, Yvonne Martin"s request for a search of records to see if Payne was on any list proved fruitless.

If the Tapas Group were swingers and indulged in pedophilia, would they have gone to a small family
orientated Resort........no, they would have rented a Private Villa.
Similarly I see nothing untoward in Fiona Payne reading the Statement outside the Courthouse, she is
probably the more outgoing of the Group.

I do however share the ? about O"Brien. He was reportedly off work for several weeks after the Holiday, was
noticeable by his absence at the Courthouse, would not have had to leave a Steak in such a hurry when JT
as the Mother was already in the Apartment. Couldn"t she, as a Mum cope with her daughter"s sickness? Why
would O"Brien wash the sheets, all he had to do was ring Reception at OC, they would have sent someone with
clean sheets who would take the soiled ones away. If anyone was involved with helping the McCanns on that
night it would have been O"Brien IMO

On the contrary, I don’t think enough is being made of Mrs Gaspar’s statement.

And as for Mr Gaspar not concurring with what Mrs Gaspar saw. Take a look at this…

Taken from the statement of Arul Savio Gaspar…

During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne.

I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue. This happened during a meal, at the end of the day in the villa, I do not remember the time or the date, but we would usually dine between 19.30 and 21.00 every day. I think this happened in the middle of the holiday.

I remember that when I saw this gesture I immediately thought it to be in very bad taste, independently of the context of the conversation they were having. We were sitting around a white plastic table in the villa. I don’t know if anyone else saw the gesture, apart from my wife Katherina. After this gesture, we did not notice any others and as far as I know, the gesture was not repeated.

We never commented on this gesture during the rest of the holiday and I thought no more about it.

Taken from the statement of Katherina Zacharias Gaspar…

One night, when we were on holiday, the adults, in other words, the couples that I mentioned were on a patio outside the house where we were staying. We had been eating and drinking.

I was sitting between Dave and Gerry whom I believe were both talking about Madeleine. I don’t remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like “she”, referring to Madeleine, “would do this”.

When he mentioned “this”, Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, whilst with the other hand he circled his nipple, with a circulating movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner there being an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing.

I remember that I was shocked at this, and looked at Gerry, and also at Dave, to see their reactions. I looked around (page 4) to see “did anyone else hear this, or was it just me”. There was a nervous silence noted in the conversations of all the others and immediately afterwards everyone began talking again.

I never spoke to anyone about this, but I always felt that it was something very strange and that it wasn’t something that should be done or said.

Not too far apart, are they.

And what is significant is that they both witnessed Payne’s sexual gestures.

So, it doesn’t matter that Mr Gaspar did not appear to share the same concerns as his wife. What matters is that her concerns were such that she made a statement which refers to sexual gestures made by Payne during a conversation with Gerry McCann that could relate to child sex abuse, and this must be taken very seriously and followed up and investigated by the police.

Was Payne the subject of a thorough police investigation?

As far as I am aware, he wasn’t. (Perhaps someone would be kind enough to enlighten me on that).

What concerns me most is that Dr Payne has, to this date, made no moves to defend himself against what is essentially a terrible accusation. Nor has he threatened legal action to clear his name. He has chosen instead to remain behind the T7’s wall of silence pact.

In my humble opinion, this is not the actions of a wholly innocent man but more the actions of a man who has something to hide.

**Panda** Thu 9 Sep - 13:51

Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

**margaret** Thu 9 Sep - 14:00

Judge Dread wrote:
I was sitting between Dave and Gerry whom I believe were both talking about Madeleine. I don’t remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like “she”, referring to Madeleine, “would do this”.

When he mentioned “this”, Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, whilst with the other hand he circled his nipple, with a circulating movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner there being an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing.

There was a nervous silence noted in the conversations of all the others and immediately afterwards everyone began talking again.

Sorry Panda it was definitely about Maddie, as the others noted hence the 'nervous silence'.

Guest Thu 9 Sep - 14:01

Judge Dread wrote:Was Payne the subject of a thorough police investigation?

As far as I am aware, he wasn’t. (Perhaps someone would be kind enough to enlighten me on that).

What concerns me most is that Dr Payne has, to this date, made no moves to defend himself against what is essentially a terrible accusation. Nor has he threatened legal action to clear his name. He has chosen instead to remain behind the T7’s wall of silence pact.

In my humble opinion, this is not the actions of a wholly innocent man but more the actions of a man who has something to hide.

and therein lies the problem with this gaspar thing. noone knows what happened next. so, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary we may want to consider the matter may have been investigated and concluded to the satisfaction of all concerned. that there is no case to answer. that may not sit well with some of you but there it is. since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

Judge Dread Thu 9 Sep - 14:14

Panda wrote:
Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

**Keela** Thu 9 Sep - 14:17

Judge Dread wrote:
Panda wrote:
Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

for the Judge

**Wallflower** Thu 9 Sep - 14:25

sans_souci wrote:
Wallflower wrote:Sans souci, do you think what Sofia said about the McCanns' peadophile friends is libellous?

As it stands, no. - ie on the basis of a report in a tabloid paper. If she repeated it in a more direct medium, then possibly.

It is merely a rather stupid and vindictive allegation to make on the basis of a vague and rather hysterical statement by Dr Gaspar, and not backed up by her husbands statement. Says more about Sophia Amaral, in my view.

By the way, this argument doesn't really stand up. I don't think you could get a more "direct" medium do you? Designed to be read by the masses - and we all know that forums like Joanna Morail copy and translate absolutely ANYTHING relating to this case and then it just gets proliferated on the net.

**margaret** Thu 9 Sep - 14:36

Marky wrote: since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

It has been printed in Portuguese papers and alluded to in our press, the Mcs & extended tapas group have sued about false headlines remember the Express group settling out of court. What's the difference?

**zodiac** Thu 9 Sep - 14:39

Panda wrote:
Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

The PJ had (and still do have) primacy in the investigation. The LP are merely assistants to the PJ. The PJ should have been faxed the statements immediately they were taken. It should have been up to the PJ to decide if any credence should be given to the Gaspar statements. Dr Amaral was the co-ordinator at the time the statements were taken. DP was still in Portugal when the statements were taken, he (along with GM) could have been questioned about the content of the statements there and then.

**Angelique** Thu 9 Sep - 14:39

Judge Dread wrote:
Panda wrote:
Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

I am with you on this point - but I mistrust LP they will obstruct and defend the TM right down to the end of the line. They cannot and will not produce one iota of evidence or move to investigate anyone or anything which could harm TM - it's in the Rules.

Angelique

**Panda** Thu 9 Sep - 14:44

margaret wrote:
Marky wrote: since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

It has been printed in Portuguese papers and alluded to in our press, the Mcs & extended tapas group have sued about false headlines remember the Express group settling out of court. What's the difference?

I can"t remember seeing any comment in the U.K. Press specifically alleging that Payne is a pedophile, as for
the Portugese Press all they could have mentioned was Gaspar"s Statement, the rest of the publicity has come from the internet and Forums like ours.

We are all entitled to our opinion and I have no wish to keep on trying to explain my reasons for thinking the way I do, so I will suggest we agree to differ. McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

**Angelique** Thu 9 Sep - 14:49

Panda wrote:
margaret wrote:
Marky wrote: since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

It has been printed in Portuguese papers and alluded to in our press, the Mcs & extended tapas group have sued about false headlines remember the Express group settling out of court. What's the difference?

I can"t remember seeing any comment in the U.K. Press specifically alleging that Payne is a pedophile, as for
the Portugese Press all they could have mentioned was Gaspar"s Statement, the rest of the publicity has come from the internet and Forums like ours.

We are all entitled to our opinion and I have no wish to keep on trying to explain my reasons for thinking the way I do, so I will suggest we agree to differ.

I accept your reasons for thinking that way - but put it this way: Payne knows LP will do nothing about any suggestions or statements from the Gaspers because they belong to the same fraternity - could this be why he says nothing and makes no move to defend himself - because he has no need - even if it is heresay - it can go no further and "die a death". He is safe whichever way it goes.

Angelique

**zodiac** Thu 9 Sep - 14:51

Panda wrote:
margaret wrote:
Marky wrote: since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

It has been printed in Portuguese papers and alluded to in our press, the Mcs & extended tapas group have sued about false headlines remember the Express group settling out of court. What's the difference?

I can"t remember seeing any comment in the U.K. Press specifically alleging that Payne is a pedophile, as for
the Portugese Press all they could have mentioned was Gaspar"s Statement, the rest of the publicity has come from the internet and Forums like ours.

We are all entitled to our opinion and I have no wish to keep on trying to explain my reasons for thinking the way I do, so I will suggest we agree to differ.

It was in Euro weekly then IIRC it was rucked. Link below:.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/01/euro-weekly-news-gaspars-on-david-payne.html

Congratulations to the first British newspaper [even though it's a Spanish edition] for the editorial decision of mentioning the Gaspar's statements

DavidA Thu 9 Sep - 14:59

Judge Dread wrote:
Panda wrote:
Maybe he just doesn"t want to dignify the accusation with a comment

Since the LP did not send this info to the Portugese for several months they too probably didn"t give the
accusation much credence.

I admit it was a rude gesture but may have referred to Women , not children.

Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

I agree, Judge.

I also think that if the accusations against DP are an accurate assessment, then it quite possibly implicates the others as well. And I imagine the others in the tapas group are aware of that. We should not forget that the Dr Gasper statement refers to, what should be fairly noticeable actions, so clearly the others should have noticed them also. This would suggest either acceptance or involvement. It certainly does not paint a pretty picture.

Again, we can add this to the other evidence. This includes possible unrest before / during the holiday, a group of adults that seemed to think nothing of leaving very young children alone (even after being spoken to by MW staff), a group of adults that appear to have no photos of their family holiday that they are willing to share, an apparent agreed silence from the tapas group, and an apparent on-going focus from G+K on targeting other people who speak out.

jimuck Thu 9 Sep - 15:26

Panda wrote:Sorry, but I think you are making too much of the Gaspar statement, if it was up to most of you Payne would have been hung drawn and quartered, Even Dr. Gaspar"s Husband did not share her concern and they had lunch back in Leicester with the McCanns which suggests that they still continued their friendship and that
Gaspar"s fears were unfounded.

Similarly, Yvonne Martin"s request for a search of records to see if Payne was on any list proved fruitless.

If the Tapas Group were swingers and indulged in pedophilia, would they have gone to a small family
orientated Resort........no, they would have rented a Private Villa.
Similarly I see nothing untoward in Fiona Payne reading the Statement outside the Courthouse, she is
probably the more outgoing of the Group.

I do however share the ? about O"Brien. He was reportedly off work for several weeks after the Holiday, was
noticeable by his absence at the Courthouse, would not have had to leave a Steak in such a hurry when JT
as the Mother was already in the Apartment. Couldn"t she, as a Mum cope with her daughter"s sickness? Why
would O"Brien wash the sheets, all he had to do was ring Reception at OC, they would have sent someone with
clean sheets who would take the soiled ones away. If anyone was involved with helping the McCanns on that
night it would have been O"Brien IMO

Bloody hell , Panda how do you know this, please tell me more.

"Similarly, Yvonne Martin"s request for a search of records to see if Payne was on any list proved fruitless."

Guest Thu 9 Sep - 19:50

margaret wrote:
Marky wrote: since payne does not appear to have been directly accused of anything in public, what is there to defend and who is there to sue?

It has been printed in Portuguese papers and alluded to in our press, the Mcs & extended tapas group have sued about false headlines remember the Express group settling out of court. What's the difference?

noone has ever printed a story that claims payne is a paedo. McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

Guest Thu 9 Sep - 19:54

Judge Dread wrote:Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

first point: he has no name to clear.

second point: you don't know what was done.

third point: that's her opinion.

McCanns/Amaral - Page 7 25346

**Claudia79** Thu 9 Sep - 19:58

Marky wrote:
Judge Dread wrote:Okay, first point: Maybe he doesn’t. And that is his choice. The problem is mud sticks. And by doing absolutely nothing to clear his name, the speculation that he sexually abused children will continue ad infinitum. All I’m saying is that, in my opinion, an innocent man would not, in fact could not, remain silent.

Second point: If the LP did not give Dr Gaspar’s statement much credence then they are a disgrace to their profession and not fit for purpose. Child abuse accusations should always, without exception, be given credence and thoroughly investigated.

Third point: According to Dr Gaspars statement, the sexual gesture made by Dr Payne, in front of Dr McCann, referred to Madeleine Beth McCann, not to women.

first point: he has no name to clear.

second point: you don't know what was done.

third point: that's her opinion.

It doesn't matter. The statement should have been sent to the Portuguese Police ASAP.

Sponsored content