Yvonne Martin meets Payne.

Do you think NSY and the PJ together, have a
fair idea what transpired in PDL, and of the
make-up of this motley group of holidaymakers?

After reading Yvonne Martin's statement, a person
with exceptional experience and knowledge in
child protection, her evidence MUST be critical
and trustworthy. So when she states that she
felt that Payne was familiar to her within her
work in child protection, then it should be taken
as very credible. Furthermore, her description of
Payne adds more credibility to her knowledge of
him as a past contact,(note the scar detail)
Extract,........
She describes him as tall man, height about 1,80 m, about 35 years old, of normal physical complexion, with short, dark hair, with a round face and with a scar on the left side of his face running from the eyebrow to the check. He uses graduated glasses of small dimension with rectangular lenses. He spoke with a southern English accent and was wearing cream coloured trousers and a dark polo shirt
.
When asked whether that it would be possible to identify him from a photograph, the witness replied yes.

NSY must have further information on files, if
they exist, regarding Gerry, Payne and others.
Moreover, the Gasper statements back-up Yvonne
Martin's suspicions of Payne as someone of interest
that needs elimination from their enquiries.

In my opinion, considering the evidence available
in the first 48 hours following the event, Martin's
contact with Payne, Smith's sighting of Gerry, Tanner's
incredible attempt at an alibi, etc, must provide
them with a very clear insight into what was going on
and who was who. but getting it to conviction must
be what is being made.

All in my opinion.

Totally agree with you, Marxman. I would have though that SY would have had the nouse to join the dots and start asking pertinent questions. They can't possibly be stupid not to see what is clearly in front of them. THIS BUNCH COULDN'T TELL THE TRUTH IF THEIR LIVES DEPENDED ON IT AND IT PROBABLY DOES. They have all lied through their teeth and changed the stories so many times. If all the dots are still not joined up after the review then we will know for certain that the truth was never meant to be found.

Do you think NSY and the PJ together, have a fair idea what transpired in PDL, and of the make-up of this motley group of holidaymakers?

Yes absolutely YES they do

Completely agree about Yvonne Martin...Gaspar statement was kept from the investigation for a reason, and why would the Gaspars make this statement in the first place without real reason or real cause for concern which derives from somewhere. Because they know what this lot get up to. Why has gerry got a CATS registration number?...why was Jim Gamble trying to get all the photos of all the holidaymakers

The answers are all there....except why tanner put herself out to such an extent like she did. She was also the only one of the T7 who went back for the channel 4 reconstruction programme with gerry, slipping up with the football line en route...tanner really put herself out while the others hid and would not co-operate with the investigation. Why was it her that had to do all the dirty work?

jd16 wrote:

Do you think NSY and the PJ together, have a fair idea what transpired in PDL, and of the make-up of this motley group of holidaymakers?

Yes absolutely YES they do

Completely agree about Yvonne Martin...Gaspar statement was kept from the investigation for a reason, and why would the Gaspars make this statement in the first place without real reason or real cause for concern which derives from somewhere. Because they know what this lot get up to. Why has gerry got a CATS registration number?...why was Jim Gamble trying to get all the photos of all the holidaymakers

The answers are all there....except why tanner put herself out to such an extent like she did. She was also the only one of the T7 who went back for the channel 4 reconstruction programme with gerry, slipping up with the football line en route...tanner really put herself out while the others hid and would not co-operate with the investigation. Why was it her that had to do all the dirty work?

Maybe she had a lot to loose, maybe she is weak and easily persuaded, maybe she is protecting someone else. Who knows but she rally put her neck on the block imo.

After a bit of lateral thinking, I'm now of
the opinion that this meeting between
Yvonne Martin and D Payne holds the key
to unravelling this mystery.
It just appears such a credible pointer.
YM eye-balls Payne and he knows she
knows him.
He dismisses her from further contact.
The 5a visit?
Murat is fingered, and he looks like DP.
Gasper statement is put on ice.
Payne melts into the background despite
many attempts by the media to goad
him into going public.
Payne 'we have a pact' makes statements
full of confusion and downright nonsense.
Old scarface has a lot to hide I suspect.

There was also the list of paedos sent to Portugal which I believe was held by someone high up in Portugal and not given to the PJ? presumably SY will be aware of exactly who is on that list. Then we have the CATS registration number as has been mentioned, along with Page 129 of Kate's book, the various photographs of Madeleine etc. imo

From the PJ files and one of Yvonne Martin's statements:-

She declares that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers and whether David Payne was on that list.

I seriously doubt a person in her position and line of work would make statements such as this unless she was reasonably certain of her thoughts. She would be only too aware of the consequences of even thinking something like that, let alone making an official statement to the police.

mossman wrote:From the PJ files and one of Yvonne Martin's statements:-

She declares that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers and whether David Payne was on that list.

I seriously doubt a person in her position and line of work would make statements such as this unless she was reasonably certain of her thoughts. She would be only too aware of the consequences of even thinking something like that, let alone making an official statement to the police.

-

Absolutely, and furthermore YM provides in her
statement;

When she was back home, following the case on English television, she saw the same individual and this time, her initial doubt faded and she concluded that she had seen the face in the course of her professional activity in child protection, not being able to discern if he was a suspect/arguido or witness

I got a strong sense that the McCanns were unnerved in the presence of Jim Gamble on the This Morning show. I did wonder if they knew he was privy to information that was at the core of their protection?

pennylane wrote:I got a strong sense that the McCanns were unnerved in the presence of Jim Gamble on the This Morning show. I did wonder if they knew he was privy to information that was at the core of their protection?

Indeed Pennylane, and not forgetting the type of reading material Gerry had,
and why was Gamble's operatives on the ground in PDL?

marxman wrote:

pennylane wrote:I got a strong sense that the McCanns were unnerved in the presence of Jim Gamble on the This Morning show. I did wonder if they knew he was privy to information that was at the core of their protection?

Indeed Pennylane, and not forgetting the type of reading material Gerry had,
and why was Gamble's operatives on the ground in PDL?

It's all very disturbing. I also feel there's a vital piece of the jigsaw missing. My gut feeling is that there may be another couple who has slipped under the radar.

I noticed Yvonne Martin`s job was based mainly in the North East around Tyneside although she apparently worked in Plymouth as well. As DP lived in the Leicester area, I wondered how YM would have come into contact with him as they weren`t anywhere near each other, unless YM as a social worker in child protection was privy to the whole country`s database of risky people. But that must be in the thousands and unless she has a photographic memory I can`t see how she would remember one in thousands.

As for JG, I`ve always wondered if the list of suspects that were not arrested during Operation Ore is at the root of this. Have they all got dirt on each other? Wasn`t an ex-PM manipulating proceedings in OO, and didn`t an ex-PM and his wife have a cosy chat with the Mcs, a fact which KM boasted about as if they were great pals, but I wonder if there was more to that phone call than KM makes out. If so, they must be very nervous of the Mcs acting like loose cannons.

The most interesting thing about YM is not just the statement itself but the 'timing'. She was one of the first people to see the mccanns the very next morning of the 4th (when DP quickly ushered her away), when it is fair to say that at that particular point in time 99% of people were only thinking and believing Maddie had been abducted. And in this highly emotional situation YM's gut feelings were she was sure she had seen DP before through her work as a child protector. So much so she made a statement to this effect. She would have very good reason to have these initial gut feelings in this situation, especially from someone who has been doing the job for so many years and is very well experienced and clearly respected by her employers for her work

Then we have the Gaspars, not involved whatsoever and no reason to say or do anything....but they felt strongly enough to come forward off their own back to make the statement they did in the very same vain as YM's gut feelings. What normal decent parents sit at a dinner table with friends circling their nipple and sucking their finger in relation to one of their daughters? Only one type of so called 'parent' and it is sick. This happened on 2 separate occasions. And LPP hid the statement until the case was shelved

Then we have gerrys CAT number...Nobody gets a CATs number without a reason for it. They don't give CAT numbers on a whim or to a name on a log. They give Cat numbers for a reason and a reason which would 'have' to be fully verified and checked

jd16 wrote:The most interesting thing about YM is not just the statement itself but the 'timing'. She was one of the first people to see the mccanns the very next morning of the 4th (when DP quickly ushered her away), when it is fair to say that at that particular point in time 99% of people were only thinking and believing Maddie had been abducted. And in this highly emotional situation YM's gut feelings were she was sure she had seen DP before through her work as a child protector. So much so she made a statement to this effect. She would have very good reason to have these initial gut feelings in this situation, especially from someone who has been doing the job for so many years and is very well experienced and clearly respected by her employers for her work

Then we have the Gaspars, not involved whatsoever and no reason to say or do anything....but they felt strongly enough to come forward off their own back to make the statement they did in the very same vain as YM's gut feelings. What normal decent parents sit at a dinner table with friends circling their nipple and sucking their finger in relation to one of their daughters? Only one type of so called 'parent' and it is sick. This happened on 2 separate occasions. And LPP hid the statement until the case was shelved

Then we have gerrys CAT number...Nobody gets a CATs number without a reason for it. They don't give CAT numbers on a whim or to a name on a log. They give Cat numbers for a reason and a reason which would 'have' to be fully verified and checked

marxman wrote:

pennylane wrote:I got a strong sense that the McCanns were unnerved in the presence of Jim Gamble on the This Morning show. I did wonder if they knew he was privy to information that was at the core of their protection?

Indeed Pennylane, and not forgetting the type of reading material Gerry had,
and why was Gamble's operatives on the ground in PDL?

Jim Gamble was head of CEOP at the time and questions remain as to how the McCanns had CEOP manuals in their possession. As there has been no mention that Madeleine vanished as a result of an online predator, why was the CEOP involved at all?

Why did Jim Gamble invite Gerry to be guest speaker at a conference? Why has he heavily promoted the Mccanns website link on the CEOP site? Why did he not advise the McCanns against including photos of Madeleine wearing make-up in the viral video he was involved with making and promoting?

Here is a link to The Jim Gamble Section on Jill Havern's Forum which makes for very interesting reading

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/f21-jim-gamble-ceop-operation-ore

i have been reading about mr gamble as i was not too familiar with his background, other than what i know in relation to Madeleine.

however i thought the logo on the top left hand corner of the link below was interesting and looked familiar ?

www.virtualglobaltaskforce.com

On the night of 4th May 2007 there was a programme aired on TV from someone exposing Gamble and the CEOP as they had wrongly made him a criminal through an innocent credit card online purchase. It took him years of hell to clear his innocence. Funny that on May 4th 2007 all the big attention was taken away from this programme over to PDL and the case of an abducted 3 year old!

The 'eye' used in CEOP logo, the 'eye used by Mccanns (colomoba) and the 'eye' used in
freemasonry, scroll down to the structure of Freemasonry chart.
http://thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr/nwo.htm

jd16 wrote:On the night of 4th May 2007 there was a programme aired on TV from someone exposing Gamble and the CEOP as they had wrongly made him a criminal through an innocent credit card online purchase. It took him years of hell to clear his innocence. Funny that on May 4th 2007 all the big attention was taken away from this programme over to PDL and the case of an abducted 3 year old!

it certainly took the heat of Gamble. Strange also how all the publicity about Op.Ore died down, and rumoured a certain person may have been on list - does one good turn deserve another!

marxman wrote:

mossman wrote:From the PJ files and one of Yvonne Martin's statements:-

She declares that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers and whether David Payne was on that list.

I seriously doubt a person in her position and line of work would make statements such as this unless she was reasonably certain of her thoughts. She would be only too aware of the consequences of even thinking something like that, let alone making an official statement to the police.

-

Absolutely, and furthermore YM provides in her
statement;

When she was back home, following the case on English television, she saw the same individual and this time, her initial doubt faded and she concluded that she had seen the face in the course of her professional activity in child protection, not being able to discern if he was a suspect/arguido or witness

Presumably she has a genuine interest in child welfare as she chose it as her profession. I just cannot understand why she didn't follow up on her concerns about DP. I know that if I were in her position, I would have gone through my files with a fine toothcomb and if I found anything on him, I would have moved Heaven and Earth to have it investigated. Maybe she did, and found nothing. If so, why did she not say so? Also, if I were DP, I would have sued her for making that statement. For some very strange reason, Yvonne Martin has remained silent.

For some very strange reason, Yvonne Martin has remained silent.

She has probably 'been silenced'

jd16 wrote:

For some very strange reason, Yvonne Martin has remained silent.

She has probably 'been silenced'

She most definitely has jd, as she has not spoken since :(. I still find it hard to believe that someone who specifically chooses Child Protection as a career can be silenced if s/he comes across exactly what s/he's been trained to look for.

maebee wrote: She most definitely has jd, as she has not spoken since :(. I still find it hard to believe that someone who specifically chooses Child Protection as a career can be silenced if s/he comes across exactly what s/he's been trained to look for.

No doubt kennedy has had a meeting with her. With the history of these people there is little doubt YM has been silenced. With powerful bodies behind them they can silence anyone

cherry1 wrote:

jd16 wrote:On the night of 4th May 2007 there was a programme aired on TV from someone exposing Gamble and the CEOP as they had wrongly made him a criminal through an innocent credit card online purchase. It took him years of hell to clear his innocence. Funny that on May 4th 2007 all the big attention was taken away from this programme over to PDL and the case of an abducted 3 year old!

it certainly took the heat of Gamble. Strange also how all the publicity about Op.Ore died down, and rumoured a certain person may have been on list - does one good turn deserve another!

The outgoing chief of Britain's child protection agency and the host of US TV show America's Most Wanted posed as paedophiles to investigate the sex trafficking of Cambodian youngsters.

Jim Gamble, ex-chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (Ceop), and John Walsh said they were shocked when they went into a Cambodian bar where there were 50 to 60 girls.

Mr Walsh said: "Within two minutes a madam came up to us and said, 'What are you looking for?' and Mr Gamble said: 'We're looking for young girls.' She brought over three or four girls that were (about) 12 or 13 years old - very, very young."

Mr Gamble told her they wanted younger girls, Mr Walsh said. He said the woman replied: "What do you want? We have six and seven-year-old boys and girls. I can arrange that off premises."

Mr Walsh said the experience was "disgusting and heartbreaking". He said Western paedophiles from the US, Britain and Germany travelled east to Cambodia as international sex tourists. He said his show chose Cambodia because it is cheap to buy a sex slave there.

"I saw many Western men that had come there not to go to the Buddhist temples, not to come there to look at the beaches, not to do anything at all but to molest and have sex with children. It's wrong, it's illegal and it has to change," Mr Walsh said. He said the episode would be a "tough show to watch, but it is important to expose the reality that children are sexually assaulted by predators. Senior police officer Mr Gamble, the former head of Northern Ireland's anti-terror unit, resigned from Ceop in October over the Government's decision to make it part of the National Crime Agency.



Copyright © 2010 The Press Association. All rights reserved.

Why was it was necessary for Jim Gamble, head of one the top child protection agencies in the United Kingdom, to go into a seedy Thailand joint and ask if a 'madam' had 'girls younger than 12' available? Isn't this taking 'fact-finding missions a bit too far?

It wasn't necessary for Gamble to go.

Only 3 reasons he would go there IMO.

a) wanted more fame as TV filming it
b) wanted a holiday in Thailand
c) - Not going to share my thoughts on this one UGHH