Why would G&K choose Fiona Payne

Why choose Fiona Payne? she been married to David bathing the children Payne, yes Kate is supposed to be close but surely they must have realised that this was a dangerous thing to do, is it their arrogance, would the Euro Weekly Paper have printed about the Gaspers statement if Fiona hadnt been at Katie side?...........yet another own goal by the Mccanns.

Hello BB, I also wondered why they asked Fiona Payne to support Kate. I saw on TTW4's blog that she has supported Kate on other occasions as well. I know she is a friend but she has her own family & commitments. So I started thinking about this & what occured to me was the fact that according to the Mc Canns & in his own statement's as well, Fiona's husband David Payne was supposed to be the 'last' person outside of the family ( which made him an independent witness) to see Madeleine before she 'disappeared ' I wondered if maybe this was the reason that made Fiona feel 'obliged' to go to help support Kate on this occasion? Perhaps the other times supporting Kate were because of a 'similar feeling' of obligation to her friend. IMO. If it had been myself in Fiona's place, with all the negative publicity & my own gut instincts, I would not have wanted to go anywhere near there at all. IMHO. So it does make you wonder why, that given the circumstances she did willingly go there, doesn't it? All best wishes Rose xx

MaR I just dont understand why both the McCanns and Paynes would take a chance what with the "David Payne allegations" but its a chance they have taken through loyalty or not, it has back fired imo, but they are too arrogant to realise when they are pushing their luck, I just hope they keep pushing what with Amaral trying to shut Amaral up as well.

Interesting this, as we were always lead to believe that Jane Tanner was the closest, to the extent she even attended the birth of Madeleine.

duncanmac wrote:Interesting this, as we were always lead to believe that Jane Tanner was the closest, to the extent she even attended the birth of Madeleine.

Hi la'

Fiona has probably known Kate the longest (through meeting in the hospital) whereas ROB is a longstanding firend of David's. From what I can remember of Tanner's statement, it was almost as though she was trying to say that she didn't know the McC's that well. Interesting question, though, and why none of the "Family" were called upon?

they chose her to remind her that - she and her hubby are in it as much as they are

as well as to remind their other 'friends' exactly what they have done/agreed to/covered up

as in 'if we go down so do you' - just incase anyone is thinking of bailing and telling what they know to save themselves

just a little slap down warning from the McCanns to her and the rest of the tapas 7

Also think it's interesting that she got over to Lisbon at a moment's notice. On Tuesday morning Gerr and Kate said they'd take the stand after Dr Amaral. Yet less than 24 hours later after throwing a hissy fit the doctor had to return to work and left. Flights were disrupted because of the weather and yet Fiona could turn up and be in court by Thursday morning. Doesn't she have committments? And what was so urgent at the doctor's job - doubt he's done a full week since April 2007. And he's got a very busy week next week but not at Glenfield.

Fiona couldn't do the reconstruction though despite far more notice.

Hope the house of cards is slowly crashing down and someone has the bottle to tell the truth.

The Paynes have been helping to control this from the start imo.
Tanner has always looked shakey not getting her story right, she is a weak link.
The Paynes however always come across as agressive and in control of their part in this, they are certainly not 'victims' of circumstance. It does not surprise me that Fiona should be at Kates side, it wouldnt surprise me if she is there as a reminder to Kate rather than the other way around.

Maybe she is nosey and also fancied a break away for a day or so?
Sometimes the simplest answers can be the truest.

Photon wrote:

duncanmac wrote:Interesting this, as we were always lead to believe that Jane Tanner was the closest, to the extent she even attended the birth of Madeleine.

Hi la'

Fiona has probably known Kate the longest (through meeting in the hospital) whereas ROB is a longstanding firend of David's. From what I can remember of Tanner's statement, it was almost as though she was trying to say that she didn't know the McC's that well. Interesting question, though, and why none of the "Family" were called upon?

That's a very good point! Why are there no immediate family members there supporting them?

[quote="justin"]The Paynes have been helping to control this from the start imo.[quote]

Don't rule out Mrs Webster either, I have never been convinced of her in any of this, why sit at the table when it was announced the child had gone missing?

justin wrote:The Paynes have been helping to control this from the start imo.
Tanner has always looked shakey not getting her story right, she is a weak link.
The Paynes however always come across as agressive and in control of their part in this, they are certainly not 'victims' of circumstance. It does not surprise me that Fiona should be at Kates side, it wouldnt surprise me if she is there as a reminder to Kate rather than the other way around.

yes, Fi Fi is Gerry's rottweiler. i.m.o.

I wondered at the time who the Tapas 7 Lawyers were who got them a £50,000 award each from the DE.
Could Carter Ruck have acted for them Courtesy of the Madeleine Fund?

Fiona Payne was the one who stayed with Kate in 5a and said she was banging her fists against the Wall
and every so often going to the twins and putting her finger under their noses to make sure they were still
breathing.....now why would she do that? Those amazing twins slept through everything even being moved
to another apartment.!!!

I wonder why during this trial none of their immediate family took time to be there to offer support to kate and gerry?
even the yorkshire ripper had family for support and i know of very few who wouldn't support their child no matter how serious the crime ( remember foxy knoxy?)
Maybe in their hearts they know or suspect the truth and cannot bring themselves to stand in a court of law to support their children in a lie.
It must be incredibly hard to appear to support you child whilst knowing - and trust me they know that they had a hand possibly in her death but definitely in the subsequent disposal of her body.
These people are catholics and they know that their granddaughter was denied the dignity of the last rites and a dignified burial and as such is now in limbo.
It maybe that rather than say enough and hand their children over to the cops and then have to endure the subsequent lurid details of their childrens hedonistic lifestyles and possibly details of darker deeds they have said do not involve us in anything you say or do. we will be there for the grandchildren but we will wash our hands of you.
The moms know when their kids are lying, they always do. could it be that kate and gerry have given them a cleaned up story of what happened and said what is done is done, it was an accident and if this comes out we lose our kids and you lose your grandchildren. what a threat to make.
My feeling is that the healeys and the mccanns have a good idea what happened, they may have been fobbed of with some excuse as to why they had to hide the body and i am sure no parent wants to think the unthinkable that their child might be involved in child abuse of the worse kind and so would clutch to the straw that it was an accident.
if mrs healey was to take kate to one side for a firm mother daughter talk i think kate would talk.
Mrs healey would have to reassure kate that whatever happened she would always be there for her and would love her always no matter what, she would stand by her side to comfort and support her through the coming days and would be there at the bitter end with undemanding and unconditional love. she would make sure the twins were loved and cared for and would be there on her release to help her make a fresh start.
I think it will be down to the moms to make the children confess.
In gerrys case i think it will be the threat of a moms power and we know how mean moms can be, with kate it has to be compassion.

did kate and gerry invite a tapas friend over because they didn't want to have to face a flat refusalfro their family? if they don't ask they can't be told no and having a tapas friend there would be a reminder to the rest of the group of that pact.

suggestions and ideas and discussions are welcome

Hobnob

I don"t subscribe to the pedophile theory and think it was an accidental death. Gerry had just been awarded
a Grant from the British Heart Foundation and had Political ambitions so would have not wanted the bad publicity. Someone on a Blog I was reading the other day asked the question "Why did the McCanns rent a Car
when they were going to Rome the following day?" Could it have been to dispose of the body by someone
else? I don"t know when they hired the Scenic, was it the day before they went to Rome?

It might have been an accidental death, we do not know and nor will we until the body is recovered and a post mortem done.
It is one of many theories and one that stands out purely because if it had been an accidental death they could have reported it as such and post mortems don't give an exact time death but an approximate one using the body temp in recent death depending on where the body is and the temperature it will give an approximate time give or take an hour or so. they could have claimed she died overnight and probably no one would be any the wiser. what we have top ask ourselves is why did Madeleines body have to disappear? why was it so vitally important that an autopsy must not be performed? What would the autopsy have revealed that couldn't be explained away?
sedation? heck kids drink medicines all the time so they could have claimed she drank medicine and they didn't know and she died during the night, a tragedy but they wouldn't go to jail as accidents can happen.
A fall? again accidents can happen, she had a fall and banged her head bit of a nosebleed but no obvious head injury and they being doctors would know what to look for and again a tragic accident.
Were there signs of assault that couldn't be explained away as an accident? had she been punched fell and smashed her head? that would take some explaining and were there signs of previous physical abuse? scars bruises that couldn't be explained and the normal rough and tumble of toddlers?
then there is the worst case scenario... there is no way in hell that could be explained away and it would show up in a post mortem.
There was obviously something so damaging to kate and gerry that they couldn't have an autopsy done, something so damaging that they were prepared to be called child neglectors and risk a court case. better to be known as a neglector than what?
The whole group are involved in the cover up in someway since i know of no parent in the same situation who wouldn't be suspicious of the people who had checked on the kids prior to her disappearing.
One was apparantly with a sick child, others allegedly went into the apartment. A normal parent would be demanding they be questioned to see if they could have done it and there would always be that suspicion even if the cops said there was no real proof that they were involved.
Why are they so sure their pals weren't involved? they are certain about their friends because kate and gerry know exactly what happened.
The friends all know if not exactly what happened they will still have a good idea and for what ever reason joined forces to assist with the cover up.
Diane Webster may be the only one who doesn't really know what happened but she will have her suspicions. she is noticeable by her absence in the photos taken outside the old bailey when the tapas 7 got damages, she doesn't seem to have been part of the inner circle more the gooseberry

jay2001 wrote:Also think it's interesting that she got over to Lisbon at a moment's notice. On Tuesday morning Gerr and Kate said they'd take the stand after Dr Amaral. Yet less than 24 hours later after throwing a hissy fit the doctor had to return to work and left. Flights were disrupted because of the weather and yet Fiona could turn up and be in court by Thursday morning. Doesn't she have committments? And what was so urgent at the doctor's job - doubt he's done a full week since April 2007. And he's got a very busy week next week but not at Glenfield.

the whole thing was stage managed right from the getgo. they knew or had a damn good idea what was going to come out during that hearing. everything was arranged for the benefit of the uk media to gain sympathy. it was all theatre.

Beattie wrote:Hobnob

I don"t subscribe to the pedophile theory and think it was an accidental death. Gerry had just been awarded
a Grant from the British Heart Foundation and had Political ambitions so would have not wanted the bad publicity. Someone on a Blog I was reading the other day asked the question "Why did the McCanns rent a Car
when they were going to Rome the following day?" Could it have been to dispose of the body by someone
else? I don"t know when they hired the Scenic, was it the day before they went to Rome?

Hi Beattie As I recall the Scenic was booked a few days previously, but by chance was only available the day before the Rome trip.

F Payne was by kates side to make it look like that the mccanns trust them implicetly thus making the gaspers statement look 'untrue' and ridiculous.

hobnob wrote:It might have been an accidental death, we do not know and nor will we until the body is recovered and a post mortem done.
It is one of many theories and one that stands out purely because if it had been an accidental death they could have reported it as such and post mortems don't give an exact time death but an approximate one using the body temp in recent death depending on where the body is and the temperature it will give an approximate time give or take an hour or so. they could have claimed she died overnight and probably no one would be any the wiser. what we have top ask ourselves is why did Madeleines body have to disappear? why was it so vitally important that an autopsy must not be performed? What would the autopsy have revealed that couldn't be explained away?
sedation? heck kids drink medicines all the time so they could have claimed she drank medicine and they didn't know and she died during the night, a tragedy but they wouldn't go to jail as accidents can happen.
A fall? again accidents can happen, she had a fall and banged her head bit of a nosebleed but no obvious head injury and they being doctors would know what to look for and again a tragic accident.
Were there signs of assault that couldn't be explained away as an accident? had she been punched fell and smashed her head? that would take some explaining and were there signs of previous physical abuse? scars bruises that couldn't be explained and the normal rough and tumble of toddlers?
then there is the worst case scenario... there is no way in hell that could be explained away and it would show up in a post mortem.
There was obviously something so damaging to kate and gerry that they couldn't have an autopsy done, something so damaging that they were prepared to be called child neglectors and risk a court case. better to be known as a neglector than what?
The whole group are involved in the cover up in someway since i know of no parent in the same situation who wouldn't be suspicious of the people who had checked on the kids prior to her disappearing.
One was apparantly with a sick child, others allegedly went into the apartment. A normal parent would be demanding they be questioned to see if they could have done it and there would always be that suspicion even if the cops said there was no real proof that they were involved.
Why are they so sure their pals weren't involved? they are certain about their friends because kate and gerry know exactly what happened.
The friends all know if not exactly what happened they will still have a good idea and for what ever reason joined forces to assist with the cover up.
Diane Webster may be the only one who doesn't really know what happened but she will have her suspicions. she is noticeable by her absence in the photos taken outside the old bailey when the tapas 7 got damages, she doesn't seem to have been part of the inner circle more the gooseberry

excellent post hobnob, my thoughts too, it must have been something so damaging to all their reputations that the body had to be 'disappeared'.

Actually Diane Webster was with them on the courthouse steps. Russell O'B was the missing tapasnik. Funny that.

ann_chovey wrote:Actually Diane Webster was with them on the courthouse steps. Russell O'B was the missing tapasnik. Funny that.

as i recall only o'brien and tanner were the subject of that second payout and as you say he didn't make that little photocall. as for the rest. they didn't need to be there. another stage managed event.

ann_chovey wrote:

Beattie wrote:Hobnob

I don"t subscribe to the pedophile theory and think it was an accidental death. Gerry had just been awarded
a Grant from the British Heart Foundation and had Political ambitions so would have not wanted the bad publicity. Someone on a Blog I was reading the other day asked the question "Why did the McCanns rent a Car
when they were going to Rome the following day?" Could it have been to dispose of the body by someone
else? I don"t know when they hired the Scenic, was it the day before they went to Rome?

Hi Beattie As I recall the Scenic was booked a few days previously, but by chance was only available the day before the Rome trip.

ann-chovey You"re like Leslie Welch "The Memory Man"....remember him? So, why would the McCanns pay for a day"s Hire when they didn"t need it? They wouldn"t pay for a baby sitting service. Food
for thought.

I've said it before and l'll say it again... the only reason they must have a 'pact' and none of them are telling the truth is because of something unsavoury beyond neglect.

That's why Maddies body must not be found, that's why they're all in it together - thank God the Gaspers witnessed what they did and told the police.

kitti wrote:F Payne was by kates side to make it look like that the mccanns trust them implicetly thus making the gaspers statement look 'untrue' and ridiculous.

Bingo Kitti! Spot on. I hadn't thought of that before, but it is obvious, isn't it?

Another poster called FP, gerry's rottweiler and i think that is true. She always has this snooty look and she is the leader IMHO.

Yes, FP was the one nominated to make the speech outside the Courthouse. Also, the fact that they tried to
claim Murat as a suspect. I suspect all of them were cautioned by the Lawyers who went to PDL not to say
anything to the Media, hence the "we had a pact" comment. Not one of the Tapas 7 have been interviewed, ever