Who's being accused this time?/Chelsea Hoffman

T4two wrote:The fact remains that the press and PR machine have avoided the dogs' findings like the plague I suspect because they have no credible explanation to offer. It is therefore of paramount importance that this information is put into the public domain as frequently as possible. When criminologists and ex coppers are given a platform to comment in public on the Madeleine case and do not use it to stress the significance of the dogs' findings, it isn't just an unfortunate omission it is actively supporting the parents' statement that there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine is no longer alive. The dogs findings are unequivocal and the most important fact of the whole case.

I will follow your advice - it doesn't do any harm to recycle 'old' topics and enhance them. The truth may spread like oil on water.
The other things that stop people dead in their tracks is the Ltd. Co. 'Fund'. Fund sounds so respectable, almost like a Trust-Fund.....
Ltd. Co. not so much.

HiDeHo wrote:Goncalo Amaral would be limited to any of his comments being concluded from the Official Police Files investigation that are released to the public. That would include witness statements that may or may not be confirmed.

His OPINION/CONCLUSION may be based on the information from the vast amount of files NOT released.

Yes. And so far, it fits the cadaver dogs.

HiDeHo wrote:Goncalo Amaral would be limited to any of his comments being concluded from the Official Police Files investigation that are released to the public. That would include witness statements that may or may not be confirmed.

His OPINION/CONCLUSION may be based on the information from the vast amount of files NOT released.

Not in conversations with people close to him.

kitti wrote:I believe Madeleine died before may 3rd and all what they had to do was played out in front off the world before then.


Thursday was different as one off the tapas lot has said....it was a 'steer clear off Mccanns ' day and I believe they did, the rest were too bothered getting in their own alibis set in stone to bother with the Mccanns .


People have, past 6 years, been asked to think about may 3rd especially people on that holiday ...what they did that day etc....the deed was done and dusted before that day, thursday was 'opening night' and they had better get it right as they had only one chance at doing this.


There bad actors.

Yes, this.

Can't see how it could be anything else given what we have been 'allowed' to know. Nice post.

weissnicht wrote:

kitti wrote:I can forgive people that ignore the dogs findings I.e. Their Facebook page is full off them.


I can even ignore certain criminologists for doing so BUT I cannot ignore or forgive Retired police officers I.e. Horrocks, the Mccanns two retired police officers and SY and the MET for totally ignoring the dogs findings when they have used them in the past even successfully prosecuting and jailing people without having found the body.


This to me is the worse disservice they could give to a human being AND it being a small child makes it worse even though everything points to a death they stand there with the same smirk gerry mccann has and have the front to say she is alive ....


I have lost all respect for SY and the MET....

And me.

And me too

Claudia79 wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:Goncalo Amaral would be limited to any of his comments being concluded from the Official Police Files investigation that are released to the public. That would include witness statements that may or may not be confirmed.

His OPINION/CONCLUSION may be based on the information from the vast amount of files NOT released.

Not in conversations with people close to him.

Considering the political pressure the PJ were under and the press storm created by the McCanns, I think they went with what would stand up in court.
Pointless to do anything else at the time.

We're six years on now, it may well be that quite a different conclusion based on evidence known to us and that not known to us has been reached.
For my part I do not believe in an accident but I believe the dogs.

dutchclogs wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

kitti wrote:I can forgive people that ignore the dogs findings I.e. Their Facebook page is full off them.


I can even ignore certain criminologists for doing so BUT I cannot ignore or forgive Retired police officers I.e. Horrocks, the Mccanns two retired police officers and SY and the MET for totally ignoring the dogs findings when they have used them in the past even successfully prosecuting and jailing people without having found the body.


This to me is the worse disservice they could give to a human being AND it being a small child makes it worse even though everything points to a death they stand there with the same smirk gerry mccann has and have the front to say she is alive ....

I have lost all respect for SY and the MET....

And me.

And me too

Me three, I have zero trust in the MET!

Even when the occasional high ranking officer gets his marching orders, it is my feeling that the crimes were far more serious than reported, and others within the Establishment have been protected.

tigger wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

HiDeHo wrote:Goncalo Amaral would be limited to any of his comments being concluded from the Official Police Files investigation that are released to the public. That would include witness statements that may or may not be confirmed.

His OPINION/CONCLUSION may be based on the information from the vast amount of files NOT released.

Not in conversations with people close to him.

Considering the political pressure the PJ were under and the press storm created by the McCanns, I think they went with what would stand up in court.
Pointless to do anything else at the time.

We're six years on now, it may well be that quite a different conclusion based on evidence known to us and that not known to us has been reached.
For my part I do not believe in an accident but I believe the dogs.

The investigation team excluded the possibility of death before the 3rd during the investigation. And the last I heard, they still go with the Tavares de Almeida report.

ive always thought it was earlier than the 3rd - lack of dna --clean up --not been around as much --im on one of my weeks where i think nothing will ever become of this case -- they stamp and cry and sue -- till someone with power questions what happened on 3rd of may 2007 asks qustions we will still be here in another 6 years -imo theres too many involved with protecting the mcanns still

cass wrote:ive always thought it was earlier than the 3rd - lack of dna --clean up --not been around as much --im on one of my weeks where i think nothing will ever become of this case -- they stamp and cry and sue -- till someone with power questions what happened on 3rd of may 2007 asks qustions we will still be here in another 6 years -imo theres too many involved with protecting the mcanns still

One of the held back creche sheets is the 29th for the twins' creche. There are also some other documents held back from around that time I believe.
the 30th Maddie was signed in and out in 15 minutes, ROB made mistakes in his entry and Kate who tells us that she always was Healy - signed as Healy before the 3rd, signs as Healy only on the 2nd. I think the other Healy signature is on the twins' sheet.

The creche records are suspect as from the 29th. Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann are signed in by Gerry 9.15 (def. his handwriting) Cat Baker cannot recall seeing Madeleine that morning.

Another point is the safety/id bracelet allegedly worn by all the children. Since we have not seen any photographs of the other children, we don't know if those bracelets were worn all the time. But e.g. the tennis photo doesn't show a bracelet and neither does the pool photo.
This bracelet is never mentioned by Kate. Yet the nanny says that she wrote it out before she met Maddie.
I don't think Maddie was ever in the creche.

tigger wrote:

cass wrote:ive always thought it was earlier than the 3rd - lack of dna --clean up --not been around as much --im on one of my weeks where i think nothing will ever become of this case -- they stamp and cry and sue -- till someone with power questions what happened on 3rd of may 2007 asks qustions we will still be here in another 6 years -imo theres too many involved with protecting the mcanns still

One of the held back creche sheets is the 29th for the twins' creche. There are also some other documents held back from around that time I believe.
the 30th Maddie was signed in and out in 15 minutes, ROB made mistakes in his entry and Kate who tells us that she always was Healy - signed as Healy before the 3rd, signs as Healy only on the 2nd. I think the other Healy signature is on the twins' sheet.

The creche records are suspect as from the 29th. Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann are signed in by Gerry 9.15 (def. his handwriting) Cat Baker cannot recall seeing Madeleine that morning.

Another point is the safety/id bracelet allegedly worn by all the children. Since we have not seen any photographs of the other children, we don't know if those bracelets were worn all the time. But e.g. the tennis photo doesn't show a bracelet and neither does the pool photo.
This bracelet is never mentioned by Kate. Yet the nanny says that she wrote it out before she met Maddie.
I don't think Maddie was ever in the creche.

I'd not heard about the id bracelet before. Very odd for Mrs M to avoid all mention of it when she goes into great detail about carefully removing the hair bead/elastic band thing.

dazedandconfused wrote:

tigger wrote:

cass wrote:ive always thought it was earlier than the 3rd - lack of dna --clean up --not been around as much --im on one of my weeks where i think nothing will ever become of this case -- they stamp and cry and sue -- till someone with power questions what happened on 3rd of may 2007 asks qustions we will still be here in another 6 years -imo theres too many involved with protecting the mcanns still

One of the held back creche sheets is the 29th for the twins' creche. There are also some other documents held back from around that time I believe.
the 30th Maddie was signed in and out in 15 minutes, ROB made mistakes in his entry and Kate who tells us that she always was Healy - signed as Healy before the 3rd, signs as Healy only on the 2nd. I think the other Healy signature is on the twins' sheet.

The creche records are suspect as from the 29th. Elizabeth Naylor and Madeleine McCann are signed in by Gerry 9.15 (def. his handwriting) Cat Baker cannot recall seeing Madeleine that morning.

Another point is the safety/id bracelet allegedly worn by all the children. Since we have not seen any photographs of the other children, we don't know if those bracelets were worn all the time. But e.g. the tennis photo doesn't show a bracelet and neither does the pool photo.
This bracelet is never mentioned by Kate. Yet the nanny says that she wrote it out before she met Maddie.
I don't think Maddie was ever in the creche.

I'd not heard about the id bracelet before. Very odd for Mrs M to avoid all mention of it when she goes into great detail about carefully removing the hair bead/elastic band thing.

I first met Gerry and Kate McCann on the Sunday morning, 29.04.2007, at the Minis Club. They brought the children and as it was their first day of holidays the normal procedure was that they were allocated a childcare worker. I had previously written the children’s bracelets which included their name, any allergies and relevant information.
unquote

Mind you, Cat Baker remembered very little in her early statements. After the visit to Rothley on invitation by the McCanns in November 07 Her memory had improved amazingly by the time she had the rogatory interview.

Thanks tigger. I'd not seen that before.

The 'Diagram of Events' which was the PJ version of a timeline re Cat and McCanns for that morning is missing

HiDeHo wrote:The 'Diagram of Events' which was the PJ version of a timeline re Cat and McCanns for that morning is missing

V. interesting!
Some more, from Daily Mail in November 07: Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-487506/Revealed-The-nanny-help-clear-McCanns-name.html#ixzz1edkZTbll


This is what CB wrote:
The young nanny, described as 'fun and vivacious', has been deeply affected by Madeleine's disappearance, telling friends of nights without sleep and a complete loss of appetite.
Writing to one concerned friend nine days after Madeleine disappeared, she admitted: 'I was her nanny, so it's been tough for me, you wouldn't recognise me.
'It's hit me so hard I've hardly slept or eaten. My mum came to see me, but transferring me to "San Ag" has put me back at stage one as I am so stressed again.
'Love you loads, thanks for writing. I'm sorry I haven't been in touch, I have not been out of the house much.'
unquote.


The photograph of the McCanns smiling broadly on leaving the church? Which was exactly the same day the young woman above wrote of her agony!