Re: Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau

Guest Wed 1 Apr - 21:29

Krisy22 wrote:
fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

I have always thought it very brave of Dr Katherine Gaspar... to make that very serious statement. Also, thought it very strange that none of the party involved have ever spoken about it.

I can tell you, if there was ever a whiff of anyone suggesting such a thing about my family or good friend I would not let it rest. I don't think most people would.

all doctors have a responsibility to be aware of child protection issues and should report concerns even if they simply have a 'hunch or feel uneasy'.

she didn't. for two years.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

**Lioned** Wed 1 Apr - 21:52

Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Well the Gasper woman knows what she heard and would certainly be considered a credible witness in normal circumstances.

disagree. did doodley squit for two years and then was not definitive. credible? nah.

So do you think Dr Gaspar had some other motive ? Maybe she just a nutter or attention seeker.

**Lioned** Wed 1 Apr - 22:00

Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October !

David Payne

On the 16th of May 2007, two doctor friends of the McCanns, and the Paynes, make a statement to Leicestershire Police (LP) in which they express their concern over sexually suggestive gestures made by David Payne on a previous holiday in Majorca. These alleged gestures are considered, by one of the witnesses, to be consistent with acts of paedophilia.

The statements are not sent from LP to the Policia Judiciária (PJ) until 24 October 2007 (arriving on 26 October 2007), 24 days after Gonçalo Amaral had been removed from the investigation.

In an interview with Correio da Manhã, published on 24 July 2008, Gonçalo Amaral states that the depositions arrived in May, but this refers to the date they arrived at LP.

Intriguingly, the letter from LP mentions the completion of a written questionnaire - by David and Fiona Payne - but it is unclear whether that questionnaire was supplied by the PJ or whether it was instigated by LP themselves. There appears to be no copy of the questionnaire anywhere in the PJ files.

Correio da Manhã reports, on 19 July 2008, that 'the depositions ... only entered the process in January 2008 ... At that point in time, Kate and Gerry were already arguidos, the rogatory letters had already been issued and the English, including Dave, showed their reluctance in returning to Portugal.' However, this statement, about the depositions only entering the process in January 2008, does not appear to be supported by the PJ files themselves.

It is unknown whether these statements by the Gaspars were subject to any further follow-up by either LP or the PJ.

Also on this page are the statements of Yvone Martin who expressed concerns about David Payne and the behaviour of the McCanns. It is understood these statements were followed up by Gonçalo Amaral, who notes in his book, 'The Truth of the Lie', that Leicestershire Police reported: "There is nothing incriminating in his past and, as we were able to verify, he has no criminal record."

**Krisy22** Wed 1 Apr - 22:42

Marky wrote:
Krisy22 wrote:
fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

I have always thought it very brave of Dr Katherine Gaspar... to make that very serious statement. Also, thought it very strange that none of the party involved have ever spoken about it.

I can tell you, if there was ever a whiff of anyone suggesting such a thing about my family or good friend I would not let it rest. I don't think most people would.

all doctors have a responsibility to be aware of child protection issues and should report concerns even if they simply have a 'hunch or feel uneasy'.

she didn't. for two years.

**Krisy22** Wed 1 Apr - 22:46

Krisy22 wrote:
Marky wrote:
Krisy22 wrote:
fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

I have always thought it very brave of Dr Katherine Gaspar... to make that very serious statement. Also, thought it very strange that none of the party involved have ever spoken about it.

I can tell you, if there was ever a whiff of anyone suggesting such a thing about my family or good friend I would not let it rest. I don't think most people would.

all doctors have a responsibility to be aware of child protection issues and should report concerns even if they simply have a 'hunch or feel uneasy'.

she didn't. for two years.

Lost my last post Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 294124

Judge Dread Wed 1 Apr - 23:34

No one, apart from Mr & Mrs Gaspar, actually knows the reason why she waited two years before reporting her fears to the police.

And until we know for certain, perhaps we shouldn’t be too quick to judge her…

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 6:36

Lioned wrote:
Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Well the Gasper woman knows what she heard and would certainly be considered a credible witness in normal circumstances.

disagree. did doodley squit for two years and then was not definitive. credible? nah.

So do you think Dr Gaspar had some other motive ? Maybe she just a nutter or attention seeker.

neither. probably just trying to help. probably thought what she saw was more significant now than it was then which might explain why she hadn't previously reported it.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 7:08

Lioned wrote:Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October

the incident occurred in 2005.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

**Lioned** Thu 2 Apr - 8:11

Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October

the incident occurred in 2005.

OK so it didnt click till a child went missing ?

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 9:24

Whatever the truth about what Mrs G did or didn't hear, the incident did lead to the information becoming known that David Payne was the self-appointed bather of all the children in the group on that holiday.

I am trying not to attach anything untoward to that but I can only say that is an unusual arrangement. If I went on holiday with other couples, some of whom I did not know well, and I was informed that this is what would happen, I would not have stayed in the group.

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 9:36

Lioned wrote:
Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October

the incident occurred in 2005.

OK so it didnt click till a child went missing ?

well, according to her statement she thought about it often.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 9:52

fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

which suggests that the line of communication was working. as for the timescale between statement and submission, is it not reasonable to consider that can be explained by the time needed to conduct an investigation and arrive at a conclusion?

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

**Krisy22** Thu 2 Apr - 9:59

Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:
Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October

the incident occurred in 2005.

OK so it didnt click till a child went missing ?

well, according to her statement she thought about it often.

I wonder is she had thought about it often.. as it had played on her mind. The fact that it must have sat okay with the other Doctors may have stopped her speaking out at the time other than to her husband regarding the bathing..
Madeleine then going missing may have gave her no alternative ... especially has it had been on her mind. Just a thought.

**Chris** Thu 2 Apr - 10:23

Marky wrote:
fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

which suggests that the line of communication was working. as for the timescale between statement and submission, is it not reasonable to consider that can be explained by the time needed to conduct an investigation and arrive at a conclusion?

Possibly but is it not more reasonable that if such investigation had been conducted to a conclusion that LP would have made reference to such rather than the rather prefunctory "here they are" or words to that effect. The accompanying letter to the PJ referred to re-examining the statements previously made as regards events in 2007 but nothing in relation to the concerns raised in the statements.

**fuzeta** Thu 2 Apr - 10:42

I do wonder about the fact they did not send the statements until Mr Amaral was removed.

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 10:57

Chris wrote:
Marky wrote:
fuzeta wrote:From what I can remember the PJ knew about the Gasper statements and had been requesting them for a long time.
Eventually Leicester police had no option but to send them. My memory may be wrong but I do have a good one usually.

which suggests that the line of communication was working. as for the timescale between statement and submission, is it not reasonable to consider that can be explained by the time needed to conduct an investigation and arrive at a conclusion?

Possibly but is it not more reasonable that if such investigation had been conducted to a conclusion that LP would have made reference to such rather than the rather prefunctory "here they are" or words to that effect. The accompanying letter to the PJ referred to re-examining the statements previously made as regards events in 2007 but nothing in relation to the concerns raised in the statements.

alternatively, maybe they hadn't concluded their investigation but responding to a request from portugal, sent them anyway.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

**Angelina** Thu 2 Apr - 10:58

Not Born Yesterday wrote:Whatever the truth about what Mrs G did or didn't hear, the incident did lead to the information becoming known that David Payne was the self-appointed bather of all the children in the group on that holiday.

I am trying not to attach anything untoward to that but I can only say that is an unusual arrangement. If I went on holiday with other couples, some of whom I did not know well, and I was informed that this is what would happen, I would not have stayed in the group.

Quite right Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 307691

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 11:49

Krisy22 wrote:
Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:
Marky wrote:
Lioned wrote:Not sure your reference to two years Marky ? This is the timing of the gasper statement to LP on 16th May 2007 then on to the PJ in October

the incident occurred in 2005.

OK so it didnt click till a child went missing ?

well, according to her statement she thought about it often.

I wonder is she had thought about it often.. as it had played on her mind. The fact that it must have sat okay with the other Doctors may have stopped her speaking out at the time other than to her husband regarding the bathing..
Madeleine then going missing may have gave her no alternative ... especially has it had been on her mind. Just a thought.

maybe she just 'stumbled' midway onto a conversation she was not party to, saw something she didn't understand and misinterpreted it, didn't seek to clarify it with the two concerned, "hey fellas, what you talking about and what's that little thing you just do mean?", but considered that it could be child abuse related, pondered on it every now and then and two years later decided to go talk to the police but only when a child disappeared.

still don't explain why, as a medical professional, she didn't report it sooner, as medical professionals are expected to do if they know, suspect or otherwise that children may be at risk.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 12:20

What's your view Marky on the point I made earlier about the very unusual bath time arrangements?

I don't know if you are a parent but I know that I would have found it very odd indeed if a friend's husband had insisted that he would bathe my child without me being present.

On your bike would have been my reaction.

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 13:01

Not Born Yesterday wrote:What's your view Marky on the point I made earlier about the very unusual bath time arrangements?

I don't know if you are a parent but I know that I would have found it very odd indeed if a friend's husband had insisted that he would bathe my child without me being present.

On your bike would have been my reaction.

yes i am. i'm half and half on this one. for sure, if the individual(s) were recent acquaintances then the invitation would be politely declined but for those known for a very long time and who had children the same age, then probably no problem. still, to come up with a bathtime rota is not something i ever heard of and so does strike me as unusual but then many people have very different ideas these days. not really a bloke sort of job really. well, maybe stand at the back and watch the fun.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

cherry1 Thu 2 Apr - 19:08

Marky wrote:or to put it another way way, if this was a cover up the copper with the conscience wouldn't have been anywhere in the building, let alone anywhere near the file. can't have it both ways.

That doesn't make sense!

It was probably someone on the squad who did not agree with it being covered up and decided to send it through.

cherry1 Thu 2 Apr - 19:16

When the mind is shocked at what it has heard, the mind doubts what it has heard and so questions if they really heard it, that is no doubt why she didn't report it at the time but the Gaspar statements do not stand alone, there is a lot of other information along these lines also. The important fact is when Madeleine went missing she reported it and it seems it was held back by Leicester Police.

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 19:29

cherry1 wrote:
Marky wrote:or to put it another way way, if this was a cover up the copper with the conscience wouldn't have been anywhere in the building, let alone anywhere near the file. can't have it both ways.

That doesn't make sense!

It was probably someone on the squad who did not agree with it being covered up and decided to send it through.

come on cherry, if this was a conspiracy coverup nothing would have been left to chance. you're clutching here.

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

Guest Thu 2 Apr - 19:53

cherry1 wrote:When the mind is shocked at what it has heard, the mind doubts what it has heard and so questions if they really heard it, that is no doubt why she didn't report it at the time but the Gaspar statements do not stand alone, there is a lot of other information along these lines also. The important fact is when Madeleine went missing she reported it and it seems it was held back by Leicester Police.

and your point is? what lot of other lot of other information along those lines are you talking about?

Licence To Troll - Blacksmith Bureau - Page 5 608891

**Lioned** Thu 2 Apr - 19:58

Just a little reminder re cover ups !

Sponsored content