Yuku free message boards

'RE dg's post "well, i have just been told today that a couple from northern ireland have received instructions from their solicitor via the portugese judicary system that as they will become witnesses for the prosecution they will be required to return to portugal in september for the forthcoming "trial" of the prosecution of the mccanns"

VERA - you were there - ahve you been invited? If you can't anser this directly just tell us
"it's sunny today" for yes
or
"it's raining today" for no!

1. The Portuguese Police when questioning witnesses had recent pictures of Maddie taken on that holiday, the pictures that were shown were all of her with dark hair except one. Make of that what you will.

2. Police are following up on sightings of Maddie that four independent witnesses have reported a day after she went missing. The witnesses believe they saw Maddie hunched up, with her face between her knees in the back seat of a car parked outside an internet cafe in a town 2 to 3 miles down from PDL. All the witnesses noticed this girl because there was no child restraints in the car which is contrary to Portuguese law.

3. Police have been investigating a beach path coming out of PDL that witnesses reported having seen suspicious items concealed but discarded in the vegetation, these items included a child change of clothes, some childrens toys and footwear.

4. The UK police have been interviewing witnesses in this country that were holidaying at the time of the crime in PDL. These interviews are ongoing and so far primarily concerned with a list of questions that have been faxed across from the PJ regarding sightings of Gerry and Maddie together on May 3rd. Kate never featured in any of the questioning regarding times and places.

5. This source has been interviewed four times, twice by the PJ and twice in the UK by investigators regarding what she saw on May 3rd, 4th and 5th. Her statements are being treated very seriously by both the PJ and the UK police with regards to the possible sighting of Maddie in the back of the car on May 3rd.

Just goes to show you that things are moving along in the background and have been doing so. What is interesting here from the perspective of a witness is quite how this all fits in with the other information put on here from other sources. However, that's my reason for posting it on here, maybe members can start thinking how it is relevent.

There has been a lot of posts lately stating that their source told them 5 snippets of information. I was reading back on a few things tonight and came across these 3 letters from 'Vera'. I can't remember were she posted them, I don't think it was here but if this has already been posted then mods/admin please delete. Otherwise this here is my 3 pieces of info and the source is VERA.

Post one
There is not a listening service at MW's in Portugal and never has been.

The reason I know this is that I was at MW's in Praia de Luz at the same time as the McCann's.

I was there with my daughter and granddaughter at the time Madeleine went missing.

I saw a lot of things while I was there but I can't say what, as both of us have given statements to the PJ.

We alternately went out and searched for Madeleine while her parents stayed indoors.

People on holiday and the people of Praia de Luz searched and some of the people took a week or more off to search for her.

The parents were far too busy going for a jog or playing tennis to do such a lowly thing as search for their own daughter.

When you do eventually learn of what did happen and what was seen, your jaw will drop down to the ground in complete shock.

As for Murat saying that he didn't know any of the Tapas nine. What do you think when Gerry was asked in front of a camera, "Do you know Robert Murat". His answer was "No comment". I found that's a very strange think to say. Why not just say 'yes' or 'no'.

The only people who said that Murat was there that night are the McCann's friends. All the other witnesses said that there was a man who 'looked' like him. Look for a picture of David Payne, you will see that they are very alike and one could be mistaken for the other especially as it was quite dark by then. I have seen the two of them and the likeness is startling! I thought that they were the same person until I saw them standing nearly next to each other.

Not one of the McCann's friends said they had seen Murat that night. Not until later in the week was it mentioned when a female reporter said that he was being very helpful just like Ian Huntley was when the two girls went missing in England.

She pointed out the similarities of how Huntley had been helpful when the reporters spoke to him and so mentioned it to one of the McCann's friends and that's when they started pointing the finger at him.

She was one of the reporters who were there when the murder of the two girls was being investigated and that's the only reason that she mentioned it.

I am not saying Murat did or did not have anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance as I really don't know if he did or not. Nor do I know if Madeleine was abducted or if something else happened to her by accident or at her parents hand.

I can only tell you the same things that are known to the public already and that is that the parents left their three kids every night alone and vulnerable. A disaster waiting to happen!

I do wonder if people would be as supportive to the McCann's if the children had died from a leaky gas boiler or burnt to death in a fire. Maybe even drowned in the pool or had an accident while they were left alone, or would they be pointing the finger at them and saying that the parents are guilty of wilful child neglect and would they still be supportive of the parents if they had done the same thing in England.

Still, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs.

The one thing that has always puzzled me is, why do the McCann's say that being an arguido stops them from looking for their daughter. Nobody has ever stopped them looking for her or made any attempt to do so. They have not been charged with anything as yet and are free to go anywhere they wish unless it takes over five days and then all they just have to do is inform the police as to whereabouts they are.

They do have Metodo 3 searching for her, although how a company with no history of finding missing children/people and who's only qualification as private detectives is to deal with fraud cases as the norm was ever hired to find Madeleine is beyond me!

Posted by: Vera, Essex 13 Mar 2008 01:27:06

Post Two
The McCann's were at Chaplin's. I do know that for sure because I, my daughter and granddaughter were there at the time. I didn't see the McCann's being asked to return to see to their child because we left fairly early as my granddaughter was tired.

I did overhear some of the MW staff talking about this fact the next morning who were chatting amongst themselves as I was in the reception area waiting for my daughter and granddaughter to meet me there, that was the same day that Madeleine went missing.

Their opinion of the parents attitude of leaving their children alone each night wasn't exactly flattering and according to them, that's why MW's offered them a babysitter for free for the night of the 3rd of May. I don't deliberately listen to other people's conversations but if you are standing round waiting for someone you can't block out what you hear people talking about.

I also overheard a woman telling the police on one of the following days about a child was crying for a long time as I was standing fairly close by, but I didn't know that she was talking about Madeleine at the time.

I also saw Robert Murat helping with the translations. I didn't know his name at the time and only discovered it when I read it in the newspaper. I can't say I took any more notice of him than any other person that was around.

As I said before, Murat and David Payne are amazingly alike and anyone could easily be confused as to which person any witnesses did see walking around the area on the night of the 3rd of May. I wouldn't have noticed either of them except that they were standing near to each other and would probably have just thought that they were brothers or something but that is all that registered with me at the time.

The McCann's were the ones that people noticed as it was their child that was missing.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine but I'm sure it will eventually come out in the 'wash' when the PJ get answers to their questions. They could all be guilty or innocent as far as I know.

Their avoidance of answering some questions directed at them at interviews makes me wonder what they and their friends might be hiding though. But that would only be my personal opinion of them.

I have seen and heard every single live interview (I don't take any notice of what the papers print) that they have given and have noticed that their version of what happened that night has changed with each interview especially Gerry's version of events of when he checked up on the children.

In the first interview he said that he saw Madeleine asleep.

In the second interview he said that she was not in bed and had probably gone into their room as the twins might have disturbed her (these are the same twins that never wake up at night, just as Madeleine, according to her parents, never wakes up at night).

In the third interview, Gerry said that he didn't see Madeleine and he thought that she might have got up to go to the toilet. He didn't check though.

In the fourth interview Gerry said that he didn't see her because she had probably got up for a drink of water. Again he didn't check this out.

In another interview with the magazine Vanity Fair, he said that he saw Madeleine in her bed and stood there looking at her and thinking how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful daughter.

This was not a live interview, but I found the complete transcript of the interview on the VF website and every sigh or hesitation in replying was written down.

I saw the McCann's before and after Madeleine's disappearance as did other people who were on holiday. I didn't really take any notice of their behaviour beforehand as they were just people on holiday. I'll keep my opinion of them to myself as to their behaviour afterwards. The only thing I can say is that they seemed upset on the night when they gave their first interview (I only saw that on the news) but as for how they acted after that, I will leave you to come to your own conclusions. If you have seen them on the t.v. you can take a guess as to what I think.

All the people on holiday gave statements to the police and anything that was said to the PJ has to stay known only to them until they wish it to be made known to the public or not, so I can't tell anyone about that either.

Posted by: Vera ,Essex 13 Mar 2008 14:18:08


Post Three
"I am not in any way in breach of the law as I have not stated anything that I said to the PJ.
If I had done, I would be in breach of the law. I have only spoken of things that I have overheard or have personally seen.

If you think that what I have written is rubbish, that's fine with me. It is completely irrelevant to me what your opinion is. It doesn't change facts or other peoples opinions just because you disagree with it, now does it? Just because you personally didn't see a thing happening. Does that mean it doesn't happen?

Where have I made up any story to make them look guilty on my post? I gave an honest and polite view of my own observations and that was all. I left people to come to their own conclusions as to what they think of the McCann's according to their own opinions and observations and not mine. I was under the impression that people were allowed an opinion of their own on here. Or am I wrong?

I do not know whether the McCann's had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance or not. How could I? I was not there watching them when it happened. Were you?

I merely mentioned that I overheard 'a' woman telling the police about a child crying. I never said that she was the same person on the TV. I have never even seen a picture of the woman you say denied hearing a child crying, and I didn't say that she had been on TV.

I don't know whether they are one and the same person or not. How could I? There might have been even more people who heard a child crying and reported it. If you're relative works at the O.C. maybe she could tell you how many people have mentioned or complained about a child being left alone crying to the staff there.

As for the reason that the O.C. offered the McCann's a free babysitter. I have already explained what I overheard some of the staff discussing and the 'why' is in my post. If there was another reason, I certainly don't know anything about it.

I was merely relaying to posters what I had seen while we were on holiday and that is not anything to do with any statement given to the P.J.

What I have written is common knowledge to many people who live in PDL and those who were on holiday there at the time and it's certainly not a state secret. Quite probably a great deal of the public may have heard about it through the media for all I know so I am giving no secrets away.

If you are so sure that you are right and I am wrong, that is entirely up to you to decide. I am not trying to impress you or anyone on here with what I say or think.

If you have a relative in Luz, then perhaps she can give you more information of what happened that night as I was only on holiday to enjoy myself with my family and not there to play detective.

As for 'keeping it under my hat'. It is my choice what I write on here, not yours! But thanks for the advice as I'm sure you were only trying to be helpful."

Posted by: Vera ,Essex 14 Mar 2008 07:40:43

Believe it or not... don't ask me for sources!

1- PJ has proofs that McCanns used sedatives.
2- 4 Members of Tapas were not in PDL just for vacations.
3- One of the Tapas members is under police surveillance and protection.
4- There was a 10th Tapas
5- PJ has reports about outside attempts on manipulation in Birmingham FSS lab DNA results.

I'm starting this thread yet again - well, first time I've started it since joining 3A's, but there you go.

The last two threads obviously became beasts of monstrous, and due to certain posters, monotonous proportions.

I don't actually agree that I should have a thread where my posts alone are viewable - that is not really the point of a forum and I think the input from everyone is important and useful. However, I would ask certain posters, and you know who you are, to cut down on the shotgun postings and the repetition. It clearly annoys most people and serves very little purpose.

I will also say again that I encourage debate and will answer all the questions I can. This should in no way be seen as a thread where only Anti's are welcome. That is NOT how it should be. But I would ask that ALL posters respect each other here and if you read something you disagree with, then please respond sensibly and courteously.

To kick things off I will repost as much of the stuff I have contributed to these threads as I can find, but it is a big task and any help would be appreciated. Thanks


Quote:
Hello everybody.

I've been dabbling with my sources again and thought you might all like to hear the distilled information they have imparted to me - (that which I can reveal, obviously).

Firstly I think it important to say that this investigation is nowhere near closure. As many will know, charges will only arrive when the investigation is officially at an end and not before.

Right now the investigation is focusing on May 2nd 10.00pm through to around 10.00pm May 3rd - a 24hr period in which it is now considered several crimes were committed.

The shift in emphasis to May 2nd is primarily due to the significant lack of independent evidence to support Maddy being seen alive during May 3rd by anyone outside of the TAPAS 9 - and even then only Oldfield actually 'saw' her. Maddy was not present at the creche or children's club. She did not eat with the others and there is NO CCTV footage of her anywhere in the complex or PDL at large beyond the afternoon of May 2nd.

It is also deemed of interest that Gerry missed his afternoon tennis session on May 3rd due to an 'Achilles' injury. It was his unannounced absence which actually drew Oldfield to the apartment and not Gerry asking him to check on Kate. Gerry was not present at the tennis courts and Oldfield went looking for him. Gerry was elsewhere entirely. It is now believed that Oldfield did NOT see Maddy during this brief visit.

The theory is now that Maddy died around midnight May 2nd and that her body was concealed in a bag - Gerry's lost/missing/never had one hold all, sports bag no less. It is believed that this bag was stored in another apartment during some part of May 3rd before initial disposal around the mid to late afternoon of May 3rd. The scent of death was well established and the clean up completed during this time frame. The apartment's cleaner was turned away on May 3rd by Kate McCann I am told.

The forensic material examined and the results are strong in places and weak in others. None are conclusive but highly indicative and along with other evidence form a persuasive case. It is no longer considered that Maddy's body was relocated using the Renault Scenic, but that items pertaining to her and taken from her body were removed, hidden in the tyre well and dumped elsewhere.

As previously reported the PJ have the bag Gerry is so keen now to deny all knowledge of. It is a damning piece of the jigsaw, but not the only one and not the best.

CCTV footage from MW's reception proves that the TAPAS 9 were, for the most part, lying about the frequency of their checks. This is considered an attempt by ALL TAPAS 9 to stall any charges of negligence. The investigation team are also aware of the attempt within the May 3rd confusion to blur the actual time and circumstances of Maddy's disappearance.

They all did eat at Chaplin's on May 2nd and they were contacted at Chaplin's by an employee of MW's with regard to the children - specifically the McCann children. This was followed up immediately upon their return to the MW complex.

Further questioning is to take place shortly and will encompass ALL TAPAS 9 elements, plus others. It is now expected that two others will be made or allowed to request Arguido/Arguida status. These two others are seen as complicit in the aftermath of events surrounding Maddy.

Again, as far as my information allows, I can say that there is NO suggestion of pedophile involvement in any way. The DNA of a North European does not mean that this came from semen or that there is any suggestion of sexual abuse. I think we should all sigh with relief over that. There have been errors in translation and information which may have lead some down this murky pathway.

This case is not finished yet and has a way to run. The culprits will not be found in Spain, Portugal or Morocco.

The above has been gleaned and distilled over Christmas from my three friends and sources. I can elucidate on some points but not others.



Quote:
I think we are all just going to have to be patient and hold on to the positives of last week.

The FACT that statements have changed, despite what Clarrie might think, is very important. His words, 'substantially the same' speaks volumes. He knows that things have shifted and the outcry over Kate's words last week might have completely erased their Brussles debut, but it also wiped out coverage of the interviews and talk of what might have occurred.



Quote:
For instance the CCTV thing rumbles on. I am told that the PJ are in possession of a number of recordings, some of which are from the night of May 3rd. These do not ALL come from what you would traditionally think of as CCTV. They are 'installed' systems of varying quality. They also had something last week which proved to the Tapas 7 that they were not being very accurate about their movements, or lack of, on the night of May 3rd. I assume that this must be some sort of recorded video evidence.

Oldfield. The Oldfield's have provided some good information, so I am told. I was also told a while ago, and have mentioned it before, that he was the last person outside of Gerry, Kate and the twins, to see Madeleine alive. This was on the evening of May 2nd. I await any definitive proof which shows she was alive on May 3rd. The investigation is spanning a 24hr period from 10pm May 2nd to 10pm May 3rd. I also am lead to believe that Oldfield and Kate are, or have been very close indeed



Quote:
I have no inside information about how devout the McCanns are. From my own personal observations I would say they used the Catholic fervour in Portugal to remove themselves from any link to the disappearance of their daughter. It was calculated and cold, as was the trip to the Vatican.

Family comments here in the UK seem to cast doubt on just how committed this couple are to the Catholic cause!!

The reaction and mood of the local Catholic priest says much. I think he carries something of a burden. I'm not sure he has heard their confession. He may have of course, but I doubt it. However, I think he knows he has been used and abused - as have all Catholics who offered the McCanns succor based on their faith alone.




Quote:
The information I have is that her end was violent, but whether by pure accident or design I have never been told.

I cannot imagine an accident is the key, there would be little need to cover up an accident. It would be embarrassing and potentially fraught with issues of neglect, but I do not feel these would have been pressing enough to warrant such a massive deflection campaign. They seem even now ready and able to embrace the neglect issue if the need arises.

So my opinion that it is something more sinister.

I cannot accept that it was premeditated at this moment. Perhaps I will eventually be proven wrong.



Quote:
That pesky abductor, waiting for the cadaver scent to settle. Placing blood beneath a tile and a foot print by the bathroom door. Tidying and cleaning the apartment. Placing hair and DNA samples in more than one car. Changing Maddy's PJ's for her. TXTing Gerry. Leaving stuff in a barn that one of the Tapas 9 was close to.



Quote:
It wasn't a blanket. I understand it was on a large sheet of cold metal - forensic evidence was left behind.



Quote:
I should just say that, although it is not believe Maddy's body was moved in the scenic, her corpse was moved after initial storage.

The PJ know where and on what her body was kept.

This was a holding measure until a good enough disposal plan was finalised.

I am keeping my fingers crossed that the sites identified will yield something.



Quote:
Fake or botched abduction does NOT tie in with the fluids and cadaver odour - sorry folks.

They specifically dismissed the 'booked at MW's insistence' baby sitter for the evening of May 3rd BECAUSE Maddy was already dead. This babysitter was NOT present May 2nd late evening or May 1st. Hence the crying May 2nd and the report to MW's.



There is obviously a lot more and stuff in the other archived thread too - but that is enough to be going on with.