Curtains for the McCanns by Dr. Martin Roberts

According to Jane's witness statement, Evie was fine at her 9:10 pm check, and it wasn't until Russell's 9:25 pm check when he was the one who found Evie crying and vomiting.

It is very hard to believe that if Evie was fine at 9:10 pm that Russell would get up to check on her just 10 minutes after Jane's return to the table. More likely Jane and Russell left for the bar at 8:45/8:50 and did not check on Evie until 9:25/9:30. Just think how awful it would sound if they left their knowingly sick daughter not to be checked on for nearly 45 minutes only to be found crying and vomiting for who knows how long!

To make the situation not sound so bad, insert a check by Jane at 9:10, so that she can claim that Evie was fine at 9:10 pm, and that when Russell discovered her crying and vomiting at 9:25 pm it could only have been for a maximum of 15 minutes, not 45 minutes. Such good caring and loving parents! Gerry liked (and possibly suggested) this insertion as it would give him an alibi, however, he did not go through with his end of the bargain and state that he had seen Jane.

jinvta wrote:According to Jane's witness statement, Evie was fine at her 9:10 pm check, and it wasn't until Russell's 9:25 pm check when he was the one who found Evie crying and vomiting.

It is very hard to believe that if Evie was fine at 9:10 pm that Russell would get up to check on her just 10 minutes after Jane's return to the table. More likely Jane and Russell left for the bar at 8:45/8:50 and did not check on Evie until 9:25/9:30. Just think how awful it would sound if they left their knowingly sick daughter not to be checked on for nearly 45 minutes only to be found crying and vomiting for who knows how long!

To make the situation not sound so bad, insert a check by Jane at 9:10, so that she can claim that Evie was fine at 9:10 pm, and that when Russell discovered her crying and vomiting at 9:25 pm it could only have been for a maximum of 15 minutes, not 45 minutes. Such good caring and loving parents! Gerry liked (and possibly suggested) this insertion as it would give him an alibi, however, he did not go through with his end of the bargain and state that he had seen Jane.

Morning jinvta, CBS News engaged an American Detective to go to PDL and investigate because he was of Portugese origin and could converse with the Staff. They told him Jane was never at the Restaurant that night , if true, what can we make of that.?

jinvta wrote:According to Jane's witness statement, Evie was fine at her 9:10 pm check, and it wasn't until Russell's 9:25 pm check when he was the one who found Evie crying and vomiting.

It is very hard to believe that if Evie was fine at 9:10 pm that Russell would get up to check on her just 10 minutes after Jane's return to the table. More likely Jane and Russell left for the bar at 8:45/8:50 and did not check on Evie until 9:25/9:30. Just think how awful it would sound if they left their knowingly sick daughter not to be checked on for nearly 45 minutes only to be found crying and vomiting for who knows how long!

To make the situation not sound so bad, insert a check by Jane at 9:10, so that she can claim that Evie was fine at 9:10 pm, and that when Russell discovered her crying and vomiting at 9:25 pm it could only have been for a maximum of 15 minutes, not 45 minutes. Such good caring and loving parents! Gerry liked (and possibly suggested) this insertion as it would give him an alibi, however, he did not go through with his end of the bargain and state that he had seen Jane.

It doesn't sound right at all. If anyone, child, adult, teenager, is feeling sick and then vomits, its doesn't sound right for that person to be okay 10 minutes prior; vomiting is usually preceded by nausea (which is horrible) and it can be distressing, especially for a child. So, 10 minutes earlier I would think that the child was feeling awful.

The only time I know that people get this feeling right away and throw up immediately is from shock!

jinvta wrote:

Panda wrote:I think Russell's statement is questionable. It is a known fact that Jane Tanner went to check on their children about the same time as Gerry checked on his,  she discovered their daughter had been sick and rushed back to tell Russell. He was in the middle of eating his steak dinner and the Cook kept it warm for him while he went to attend to his daughter. When he returned the rest of the group had left the restaurant and he finished off his steak , with only Fiona's Mother for Company I presume.

I think that many would beg to differ with you on it being a known fact that Tanner checked at all. Both Amaral and Inspector Moura believed that Tanner never left the table that night, and based on the evidence, I would agree with them. There is absolutely no way that Tanner could have walked by Jez and Gerry talking on the narrow path without either of them seeing her. She was likely lying to cover up Russell's extended absence (rumored to be 9:00 - 9:45), as allegedly he came back to the table just before Kate got up to do her infamous check. Kate claims that it was Russell (not Matt) who got up just before Gerry at 9 pm.

jinvta, it was Russells 'known fact " the Detective hired by CBS said according to the Waiters, Tanner never went to the Restaurant that night. I have a vague memory of someone saying Tanner was dressed in a sweater and slippers that night??

jinvta wrote:According to Jane's witness statement, Evie was fine at her 9:10 pm check, and it wasn't until Russell's 9:25 pm check when he was the one who found Evie crying and vomiting.

It is very hard to believe that if Evie was fine at 9:10 pm that Russell would get up to check on her just 10 minutes after Jane's return to the table. More likely Jane and Russell left for the bar at 8:45/8:50 and did not check on Evie until 9:25/9:30. Just think how awful it would sound if they left their knowingly sick daughter not to be checked on for nearly 45 minutes only to be found crying and vomiting for who knows how long!

To make the situation not sound so bad, insert a check by Jane at 9:10, so that she can claim that Evie was fine at 9:10 pm, and that when Russell discovered her crying and vomiting at 9:25 pm it could only have been for a maximum of 15 minutes, not 45 minutes. Such good caring and loving parents! Gerry liked (and possibly suggested) this insertion as it would give him an alibi, however, he did not go through with his end of the bargain and state that he had seen Jane.

I agree. A child fine and asleep at 910 is not likely to be vomiting at 925, they usually get up and come stand by your bed and say my tummy hurt or I don't feel good - nausea, then the vomiting. All these folks had had the bug going round from night one, and it stood to reason the kids being dumped in crèche with a lot of new germs from kids they weren't normally around, would get any bug going.

They were all supposed to be at the Tapas at 830, G&K got there first, OBriens might have been there at 845? They were not prompt.

The problem with their made up check schedule is that people would have been up and down like Jacks in boxes - arrive at 830, 845, 850 leave at 9, 905, 910, return from the check, back up at 925, 930, etc. That much musical chairs is not believable.

Panda wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Panda wrote:I think Russell's statement is questionable. It is a known fact that Jane Tanner went to check on their children about the same time as Gerry checked on his,  she discovered their daughter had been sick and rushed back to tell Russell. He was in the middle of eating his steak dinner and the Cook kept it warm for him while he went to attend to his daughter. When he returned the rest of the group had left the restaurant and he finished off his steak , with only Fiona's Mother for Company I presume.

I think that many would beg to differ with you on it being a known fact that Tanner checked at all. Both Amaral and Inspector Moura believed that Tanner never left the table that night, and based on the evidence, I would agree with them. There is absolutely no way that Tanner could have walked by Jez and Gerry talking on the narrow path without either of them seeing her. She was likely lying to cover up Russell's extended absence (rumored to be 9:00 - 9:45), as allegedly he came back to the table just before Kate got up to do her infamous check. Kate claims that it was Russell (not Matt) who got up just before Gerry at 9 pm.

jinvta, it was Russells 'known fact "  the Detective hired by CBS said according to the Waiters, Tanner never went to the Restaurant that night.  I have a vague memory of someone saying Tanner was dressed in a sweater and slippers that night??

Panda,

I thought it was Moura who said that Jane Tanner never left the table that night. Either way, if she never left the table or never went to the restaurant, then she could not have conducted a check at 9:15 pm. Jane Tanner was spotted by Jez Wilkins outside of the apartments wearing an oversized purple jumper and was allegedly wearing flip flops, as I remember some discussion about how it was impossible that neither Gerry nor Jez could have heard her shuffling by in her sandals.

https://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t12258-joseph-moura-on-tanner?highlight=moura#242398

Well, but she seemed to know that Gerry and Jez had stood there chatting and even agreed with Jez where they were standing. The mockumentary where they do the recon of the bit where jane sees Tannerman is interesting, she is practically in tears as Gerry insists that he went across the street and was "looking up" facing into a WALL whereas Jez and Jane say he was just outside his own gate.


If they were where Jez and Jane say they were it'd be impossible for BOTH men to not have seen her unless the one facing the apts had his hands over his eyes. And even if Gerry was across the street "looking up at Jez" and facing the wall, then Jez would be facing the apt and the path Jane was on.

The way Gerry claimed they were standing in order to completely miss the abductor and Jane was really kind of funny. One of those subjunctive, "I'd have had to have been facing roughly this way" kind of statements rather than "I stood here."

And to complete the tale Jane "almost thought of speaking to him" but then didn't. She remembered the joke she intended to make about watching the footie, but actually said nothing because she didn't really care for Gerry and seems to have been intimidated or put off by him.

Didn't only one side of the street have a sidewalk? It would therefore be a good guess to assume that they would have met on the sidewalk rather than in the middle of the street.

Jane's check is a very badly told tale and one that is extremely hard to believe. I believe that it would be impossible for both Jez and Gerry to have missed Jane walking past them in a large purple jumper and flip flops. And if she indeed had walked right past them, then so could the "abductor" have walked right past them. Just because you are in a conversation does not mean that you are completely oblivious to everything around you. Having seen Gerry talking to Jez, Jane also claimed to have known that he had already conducted his check. Now how could she know this? For all she knew Gerry ran into Jez and had not made it to the apartment yet. But since the whole check was made up anyway, she may as well add some fluff.

Where did SY get information that states bundle man was creche man?


SY couldnt interview anyone from portugal as it's not in their jurisdiction.


There is no night creche records in the released files.


Can't imagine the PJ withholding vital info since may 2007, if they had HAD this info mr Amaral would off proved that tanner was mistaken....


So again where did SY get this info from?

Anna esse has a blog Frommybig desk which covers the crèche for that evening. don't know exactrly where you would find it but it there and very interesting. imo

The PJ could get it and I presume MW is a British company isn't it? And they can voluntarily give whatever records are asked. They have no reason to hide things.

PJ may not have thought people walking back from the crèche would be going the way this guy was - towards it - so would not bother to do deep interviews with those folks although I'd be surprised, as people walking through the area at the time they might have seen something or someone else.

I don't see the PJ requirement to run and douse every red herring idea the McCanns come up with when that team won't even cooperate.

WHEN is 'scaredy cat' Wilkins going to tell SY/MET  that it was he that 'crossed the road' to chat with McCann right outside the gate to 5A?

Instead of letting McCann and Edgar LIE about where he was, and saying that it was McCann that 'crossed the road' after leaving 5A?

JW is 6' 4"

I didn't even know you could stack sh*t that high!

What a miserable f**king coward he is!

Shows how much he cares about getting to the truth about a 3 years old child's 'disappearance'

Unless, of course, he was 'in' on the whole.........

And WHY aren't SY/MET questioning his 'lying' statements!

They are recorded in ENGLISH! So no 'translation' problems/costs there!

Jez has always insisted that it was he who crossed the road and met Gerry just outside the back gate to 5A. In fact, he even states that when he first noticed Gerry, Gerry was walking and Jez assumed that Gerry had just checked on his kids. However, if Gerry were to have been walking, he would have had to have left from the front door (not the patio door), for the two to have met directly in front of the gate. If Gerry had left from the patio door, Jez would have either seen him either coming down the stairs or he would have ran into him further down the road closer to the bar.
 

tanszi wrote:Anna esse has a blog Frommybig desk which covers the crèche for that evening.  don't know exactrly where you would find it but it there and very interesting. imo

Oh please share! I would love to see those night creche records!

jeanmonroe wrote:WHEN is 'scaredy cat' Wilkins going to tell SY/MET  that it was he that 'crossed the road' to chat with McCann right outside the gate to 5A?

Instead of letting McCann and Edgar LIE about where he was, and saying that it was McCann that 'crossed the road' after leaving 5A?

JW is 6' 4"

I didn't even know you could stack sh*t that high!

What a miserable f**king coward he is!

Shows how much he cares about getting to the truth about a 3 years old child's 'disappearance'

Unless, of course, he was 'in' on the whole.........

And WHY aren't SY/MET questioning his 'lying' statements!

They are recorded in ENGLISH! So no 'translation' problems/costs there!

Because that line of questioning would be considered 'unhelpful'
Apparently they have their sights on a gang of 3 unidentified burglars.

Even tanners picture off Wilkins and Gerry standing outside the gate has been disregarded .

Wonder if crecheman resembles Robert Murat....walks like him.

Going back to Oldfield , Redwood has confirmed that there was no check between 9 and 10pm which suggests Oldfield did not do a 9.30pm check. Besides, he had already checked for Kate at 8.30pm , so would Oldfield check again for her at 9.30pm and Gerry at 10pm???? No, IMO he only checked at 8.30pm.

Panda wrote:Going back to Oldfield , Redwood has confirmed that there was no check between 9 and 10pm which suggests Oldfield did not do a 9.30pm check. Besides, he had already checked for Kate at 8.30pm , so would Oldfield check again for her at 9.30pm  and Gerry at 10pm???? No, IMO he only checked at 8.30pm.

The McCanns were the first to arrive at the restaurant at approximately 8:35, followed shortly by the Oldfileds at 8:45. Oldfield would not have conducted a check on the McCanns children at 8:30 pm when they were supposed to have been just leaving the apartment.

Allegedly Oldfield first checked on the kids and hurried up the Paynes at approximately 9 pm, even though he had originally stated that the entire group was present when he left for this listening check. Kate stated that is was actually Russell who got up at this time, not Matt.

When did Redwood confirm that there were no checks between 9 and 10 pm? If true, that would negate Gerry's 9:05 pm check and Jane's 9:15 pm check (and bundleman sighting) as well.

jinvta wrote:

Panda wrote:Going back to Oldfield , Redwood has confirmed that there was no check between 9 and 10pm which suggests Oldfield did not do a 9.30pm check. Besides, he had already checked for Kate at 8.30pm , so would Oldfield check again for her at 9.30pm  and Gerry at 10pm???? No, IMO he only checked at 8.30pm.

The McCanns were the first to arrive at the restaurant at approximately 8:35, followed shortly by the Oldfileds at 8:45. Oldfield would not have conducted a check on the McCanns children at 8:30 pm when they were supposed to have been just leaving the apartment.

Allegedly Oldfield first checked on the kids and hurried up the Paynes at approximately 9 pm, even though he had originally stated that the entire group was present when he left for this listening check. Kate stated that is was actually Russell who got up at this time, not Matt.

When did Redwood confirm that there were no checks between 9 and 10 pm? If true, that would negate Gerry's 9:05 pm check and Jane's 9:15 pm check (and bundleman sighting) as well.

jinvta, the table was booked for 8pm, same time every night and the McCanns were first to arrive at about 7.45pm, the Paynes last just after 8pm. It was the 8.30pm check by Kate that Oldfield offered to do and Gerry did the 9pm check. Redwood dismissed Jane Tanners sighting about the same time as the Crimestoppers programme and commented that there was no check between 9 and 10pm which left a lot of time for an abduction I presume. I remember thinking how could Kate not want to check on the children herself at 8.30pm knowing Madeleine had cried the previous night. As Gerry so selfishly remarked," it was our holiday too.", they might as well have left the children at home with the Grandparents.!!

Panda,

The booking was for 8:30 pm, same as for all other nights. I am not sure where you got the idea that it was at 8 pm, as I have never seen that time before.

https://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t8617-the-tapas-timeline

According to the timeline on the sticker book, everyone was in the restaurant by 8:45, with Matt conducting the first check at 9 pm.

jinvta, I am pretty sure the timeline I read was nothing like this:=

2120: JT then returns to the restaurant, by which time GM had also returned. The entire party then begins eating their starters which have arrived.
2125: After starters, MO and RJO go back to the apartments via the car park entrance to check all flats. They go first to 5D where RJO's daughter E**e is heard crying. RJO enters flat, whilst MO checks inside 5B, and then returns to 5D.
2130: RJO remains in 5D as daughter has vomited. MO goes to check on 5A via the patio gate entrance. The outside gate is probably shut, but the child gate on the stairs up to the patio is possibly open. The patio door is closed but unlocked.
MO enters flat, hears a sound in the children's bedroom that is probably one of the twins rolling over in their cot. He does not enter the bedroom but can see through a now quite open door (greater than 45 degrees) into the room.
He sees the two twins in their cot, but does not check Madeleine formally as no sounds and twins asleep. He recalls the room did seem lighter than expected, perhaps suggesting the shutter had been raised or the curtains opened?
2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that E**e unwell.
2140: JT returns to 5D to take over care of E**e from RJO.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives.


2200: (approx): KM leaves table to check children in 5A. The patio gate is closed and the child gate is also probably closed. She enters through the closed patio entrance, with the curtains closed. She crosses the living area, and there is no noise from the children's bedroom. She is about to leave, when she notices the bedroom door was
open (approximately 60 degrees).
She starts to close it and it slams. Considering the patio doors had caused a draft, she checks these doors but they are closed. KM returns to the bedroom and opens the door to check the children were not disturbed by the noise.

At this point, she notices that Madeleine is missing. She checks the other single bed in the room and also Kate and Gerry's beds. Then she double checks that Madeleine was not in her bedroom again. At this point, she notices the curtains blowing fonvard with a gust of wind. She runs over, pulls open the curtain and notices the shutter was
completely raised, and the window pushed open to the left as far as possible.
She then completes a check of the bathroom, kitchen and wardrobes.
On failing to find Madeleine, she runs to the entrance of the restaurant, shouting from the path leading to the restaurant area raising the alarm that Madeleine was missing.

If the timetable was 8.30pm .....the starters were served at 9.20pm??? Also, the Cook's Statement does confirm that she kept Russell's steak warm when he arrived at 10pm and everyone except Fiona's Mother had gone. This timetable was obviously prepared by the group...after the event. They receive their starters at 9.20 and at 9.25 Oldfield and Russell check on their children? these timelines have more holes than a Colander.