Matt Oldfields check ?

That is exactly what i think Anna.

Some where still missing ?

Which one of O'Brian or Tanner stayed back to look after the sick child but they probably wouldn't be expected back.
She must of been waiting for more that one to return to the table. "the remaining members of the group " in the plural.

Lioned wrote:

I was wondering why DW stayed behind for 5 mins ? What does the remaining members of the group mean here  ? Surely not waiting for the whole lot to come back so does it mean there are still one or two away from the table at 10pm when kate rushes in ?

Because she thought it was "another one of their games".  Don't ask me where I read that because I can't remember now, but that was one of the things she was meant to have said.

ETA mentioned here too - http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/01/mark-william-thomas-on-mccanns.html

Lioned wrote:Which one of O'Brian or Tanner stayed back to look after the sick child but they probably wouldn't be expected back.
She must of been waiting for more that one to return to the table. "the remaining members of the group " in the plural.

Allegedly Tanner went to check on her children right after Gerry at about 9:10/9:15 and found nothing wrong with her sick child and so returned to the Tapas bar. Yet her partner, O'Brien went to check on the same kids 15-20 minutes later and found the child to be sick. He stayed in the apartment and sent Oldfield back to the table to tell Tanner. Tanner then ate her meal and left for her apartment at about 9:50 pm so that O'Brien could return to the table to eat his meal. This would have occurred about 9:55 pm, around the same time that Kate was leaving the bar.

So, why didn't Kate check in Tanner/O'Brien's room to see if Madeleine was there? Why couldn't Tanner hear Kate yelling for Madeleine when she was in her room?

LJC wrote:

jinvta wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:I think Matt Oldfield listened at the window at an earlier check, but if you read the comment I posted earlier, you will see from Oldfield's statement of May 4th 2007, that he said he had gone into the McCanns' apartment at around 9.35pm. He got the number of windows wrong. In his rogatory statement, he got the colour of the curtains wrong.

 
 
This is my understanding too, that Oldfield listened at the window at the 9:05 check and then went in the apartment but did not enter the children's bedroom at the 9:25 pm check. Oldfield checking on his kids at 20 minute intervals, but then not bothering to check on them at 10 pm when Kate went for her check does not make any sense. Nor does Kate not offering to return the favor to check on Oldfield's child when she conducts her check at 10 pm.
 
As stated above, it is completely unnatural (and unbelievable) for Oldfield to enter the McCann apartment during the 9:25 pm check. It was out of his way (as opposed to a listening check) and only 10-15 minutes after Gerry had allegedly just checked. It would have made much more sense for him to do a listening check outside the window at this time, but in doing so he would have had to have noticed the window open in order to coincide with the Tanner bundleman/eggman sighting.
 
Oldield's alleged check could hold the key to this mystery. Nothing about his checks make any sense, and SY needs to determine why he was lying about his checks. It is also interesting to note that the purpose of his alleged 9:05 pm check was changed from checking on the kids in his witness statement to hurrying up the Paynes in his rogatory. Why did his story change to hurrying up the Paynes? Perhaps because a check just 20 minutes after arriving at the table doesn't make any sense.
 
8:45 arrival, 9:05 check, 9:25 pm check and then no check at 10 pm!

Yes, and this is what SY are getting at too when they say the timeline has changed.  SY have forced the McCanns to admit that the timeline agreed amongst the friends does not add up and, in the Crimewatch recon they have 'Matt' simply saying the words "All quiet" when he gets back to the dining table, with 'Kate' acknowledging in a contented way and continuing to enjoy her night out.  The McCanns do not add anything themselves at this point but what does "All quiet" mean?  

It means, imo, that either Matt did not like to admit to the McCanns that he did not go in properly but gave more importance to his own children or that the McCanns wanted his check to count for their own reasons, but now SY have rumbled it and they have no choice but to go along with it.

I agree and I think it is odd the amount of solicitousness of Maddie by a man not her father - as opposed to checking one's own child - why are you going out of your way to check on McCann kids when they aren't checking on yours, why would you feel like your pride was hurt if Gerry went to check his own kid, surely that is his responsibility and not for you to be lurking in and out of their apt when a listen at the window is more convenient and normal. Matt seemed to have been lying in order to make it seem like they were all so careful and responsible although as Amaral said given the outcome that is patently absurd - you weren't checking often enough to prevent a break in and abduction, so the attempt to make yourselves look responsible isn't working - not telling the truth that the door had been unlocked, inventing and then reneging on the visual checks, opening a window that you then realize - doh - I have to now account for why that wasn't open when jane "saw" the abductor and we all change our story to make that sighting possible to have been the actual abductor - either something is UP here or they are the most craven bunch of arse-covering neglectful liars imaginable.

This has also got alot to do with the 'open window and why, with tanner, o'brien and old field walking past the window didnt they notice it open and the answer is.....she wasnt taken out of the window till after all the checks had been done.

Has it not been proven that JT did NOT leave the tapas at 9.15pm.

jinvta wrote:I have to agree with others that Oldfield may have been willing to fabricate "checks" in order to avoid being charged with negligence, rather than to cover up for the McCanns. Allegedly he arrived at the bar at 8:45 pm and had no intentions of conducting any type of check at 10 pm. It was quite convenient for him to be able to say that he made two checks in order to make him appear to be a responsible parent.

One thing that is interesting to note is the Kate McCann claims it was Russell who conducted a check at 9:05 pm, just before Gerry. Apparently she had not memorized the agreed upon timeline when she gave her interview. This check could very well have been Russell as his daughter was sick. Further, the 9:25/9:35 pm check could have been Russell and Gerry rather than Russell and Matt, as the waiters only remember two men going for the check. Matt initially probably agreed to say it was him, not thinking that he would have to claim to have gone in the apartment. However, since the windo would have to be open at this time to coincide with the Tanner sighting, the check had to be internal, thus avoiding the window.

IMO Matt lied about both checks. The police are not properly investigating if they are not trying to find out the reason for his lies.

I don't think the children were being checked at all, whether that's because someone was with them every night or they were just not checking - hence all the confusion about 'checks'.

I think Matthew changed the story of his 'check' when he was dropped in the doodoo about being the last person to 'see' Madeleine.  He soon changed his story to say he didn't see her when he realised the implications.

In any case, knowing Matthew had been in the apartment before Kate why did she make the fuss over the door not being how she left it, surely Matthew (and Gerry) had to open the door to see the children?

The door and the checks are lies!

Go watch the mccanns recon where Gerry and matt are in the apt and matt says he wished he had taken the few extra steps and gerry then said.....'at no point other than that night, did i. ...pause....go...pause.....stick my head in...'


Gerry McCann slipped up and is telling US they never did any visual checks that week apart from the thursday and that
Prob means he didnt do Any listening checks either, if you get up to do a check you may as well do a visual check as the distance is shorter than doing a listening check.


I can't imagine anyone doing a visual check by going into their apt and not doing one, it doesnt make any sense at all.

Madeleine was here, part 4/5...4.32

that was the only night they claim they checked on each others children. Fancy that.

Logic proves nothing, but

Logically, if I were Kate McCann, and I was going to ask, or if Oldfield offered, to check on my children, it would be just a listening check. You know, will you have a listen outside mine on your way to yours. Why ask him to go in and perhaps scare the bejasus out of the children if they woke.

They said they had no fear of abduction, so logically the only reason they would visually check was to make sure they were physically there, I.e. not abducted. the twins were in cots, they were not walking anywhere. Madeleine helped to sleep, so she would not wake and wander. Listening should have been sufficient.

Payne said they were adopting the MW listening system used in other resorts but theirs was better because it was more regular. Not better because it was visual, just more regular.

The sick adult, in my opinion, was the one who did the listening checks on those nights. Payne was on a different floor but did not need to be included as he had his monitor anyway. So one stayed behind and had a wander outside the doors now and again.

Logically, with all the ups and downs their statements take account of, there was no point in trying to have a meal. Nightmare scenario, up and down all night. Why bother would be my attitude, more trouble an it is worth.

Perhaps they decided to all eat together that night as it was towards the end of the holiday, and adopt the listening check from the table. Perhaps Oldfield did listen but was asked to embellish the truth, thinking he was being helpful he agreed and said he physically checked.

margaret wrote:

jinvta wrote:I have to agree with others that Oldfield may have been willing to fabricate "checks" in order to avoid being charged with negligence, rather than to cover up for the McCanns. Allegedly he arrived at the bar at 8:45 pm and had no intentions of conducting any type of check at 10 pm. It was quite convenient for him to be able to say that he made two checks in order to make him appear to be a responsible parent.

One thing that is interesting to note is the Kate McCann claims it was Russell who conducted a check at 9:05 pm, just before Gerry. Apparently she had not memorized the agreed upon timeline when she gave her interview. This check could very well have been Russell as his daughter was sick. Further, the 9:25/9:35 pm check could have been Russell and Gerry rather than Russell and Matt, as the waiters only remember two men going for the check. Matt initially probably agreed to say it was him, not thinking that he would have to claim to have gone in the apartment. However, since the windo would have to be open at this time to coincide with the Tanner sighting, the check had to be internal, thus avoiding the window.

IMO Matt lied about both checks. The police are not properly investigating if they are not trying to find out the reason for his lies.

I don't think the children were being checked at all, whether that's because someone was with them every night or they were just not checking - hence all the confusion about 'checks'.

I think Matthew changed the story of his 'check' when he was dropped in the doodoo about being the last person to 'see' Madeleine.  He soon changed his story to say he didn't see her when he realised the implications.

In any case, knowing Matthew had been in the apartment before Kate why did she make the fuss over the door not being how she left it, surely Matthew (and Gerry) had to open the door to see the children?

The door and the checks are lies!

Yup -0 he changed it to fit in. And then they all refused to cooperate with reconstruct. Not something that would go well in the papers but this is just what the investigation was discovering and why they did not believe the story the parents obviously were concocting.