When, at the beginning of December last year, I asked to look at the Paraíso CCTV photos again, some called me crazy and many didn’t understand the exercise at the time.
I then, pressured I confess, explained that I wanted you notice two main things: the rather significant space required to be occupied by a large group of people having a meal and the fact that two of the T9 men were spotlessly dry.
Today, I hope that you now see that those pictures are indeed VALUABLE visual aids to understand that two LEGITIMATE and OFFICIAL facts, as stated in the PJ Files and to this day uncontested by the LEGITIMATE authorities, NEVER happened: the Tapas dinners (note the plural form of the word) at Tapas, and the life-risking May 3rd afternoon watersports adventure undertaken by all but one of the T9 men.
By the way, in my opinion, the only one who says that he didn’t play in the water that afternoon, was probably the only one who in reality did, as I bet there are a lot of water obstacles in the Boavista Golf Course, but that is another different story altogether.
Today, I say that there’s a THIRD valuable piece of information that can be withdrawn from the said pictures. As I intend to launch a challenge to you my readers quite soon, I’ll just state here right away what I think it is.
But let me just, before I say what I have to say, tell you what some people see what I don’t see: that the Paraiso CCTV pictures are alibi pictures.
Some have stated that the T9 were intentionally “posing” on the afternoon of May 3rd, to provide some kind alibi to hide the fact that Maddie's death happened before that day.
That, to me, makes no sense whatsoever.
One creates a false alibi in order to be seen somewhere AROUND ABOUT THE TIME the possible criminal activity is taking place or has just taken place. That’s the whole idea of an alibi: to be seen at a certain point in time somewhere else but the place where one is NOT to be seen.
So, IF (please note the BIG “if”) these pictures were to PROVE that the T9 were seeking an alibi, then they would PROVE that the crime happened around about the time these pictures were taken, and that would place the time of death late afternoon of May the 3rd.
And if posing for those pictures were to create an alibi for THAT afternoon, May 3rd, why then come up with the whole nonsensical story about the watersports “fun”, which is basically contradicted by those exact same pictures?
If it were me, I would make sure I would appear in them leaving no question that I had just recently come out of the water, preferably in a wetsuit, and would be keeping all possible receipts/bookings that would prove that I had really hired a boat.
But, as we've seen, they just appear in those pictures as if... they are having a late afternoon relaxed snack which I believe is all they were doing.
But a fundamental question one has to ask is whatever for were they creating, if they were, a false alibi?
What was supposed to be going on that required for the group to be seen there at that time?
For example, the watersports storyline was made up to create the illusion that Russell O’Brien and Matthew Oldfield were not where they were that afternoon, or to be more precise, they were not where and when Carol Tranmer-Fenn saw a blonde man exiting the Oldfield’s apartment by the back gate.
Much, much much earlier than the time seen on Paraiso CCTV pictures.
Now, that's one good reason to create an alibi.
Russ was NOT supposed to be seen exiting THAT apartment THAT afternoon.
Why? There could have been a million innocent reasons for him to be seen where he was seen and doing what he was doing.
But he has what is known as "guilty conscience" which we all have when we know we’ve done something we shouldn’t have been doing.
Life REALLY is sarcastic.
One one hand David Payne tells the truth because he doesn’t know if he’s been seen, or not, going into, and coming out of, Kate’s apartment, on the other Russell creates a lie because he knows he’s been seen.
David tells the truth “just in case”, Russell lies because he’s left with no choice but to deny as a preemptive tactic.
The Paraíso CCTV pictures represent just exactly what they portray: the last normal moments of the lives of these people.
Soon after these pictures were taken, their lives, and the lives of others, have become a daily living hell, to this day, as we all know.
But today what I want is for you to look at Fiona Payne’s dress code, on that particular afternoon.
Doesn’t she just stand out from all others who just happen to be, as expected, casually dressed for one afternoon’s stroll by the beachfront?
She even stands out from Dianne Webster’s more conservative choice of clothing. Fiona Payne is dressed far more “poshly” than the remainder of the T party, wouldn't you say?
She seems to be dressed more likely to be going out on a shopping spree rather than to want fill up those skirt and blouse with bothersome beach sand when she, supposedly, would have frolicked with the kids on the beach.
And just going back a little, to reinforce what was already said, would one “posh” oneself up for an alibi?
Maybe she had an “appointment” to go to later? No, please don’t say that she went jogging at around 7 pm that day.
We all know that whatever plans these people had for that evening/night were washed away.
So that particular urge to “run” at that particular moment was certainly triggered by something which was not the maintenance, or improvement, of body tonacity.
Or, maybe, most likely, she had come from an “appointment”? Much like the same way the watersports crowd had just come from theirs when they were pictured. I’ll, as I always like to do, let you THINK about it.
Update on Feb26th:
One commentator at the MMF, has placed a photo sayimg "Fiona was wearing the same outfit on May 5th" This is the photo:
The difference in definition between this photo and the one's at Paraíso's makes me agree that the outfit is the same.
It only lacks the jacket, but the weather must have been warmer when this one was taken, in comparison with the temperature it must have been when all those people were having so much fun in the water.
But do look at Kate and Gerry, or the kids, for that matter. Are they poshly dressed? No. But are they dressed for the beach? For some fun in the sand? To get their feet wet, and clothes full of that grainy stuff? No.
They all look to be dressed for business "in-land". When I say, and maintain, that Fiona Payne is "too-poshly" dressed at the Paraiso CCTV pictures, I'm obviously making a statement in comparison with the natural beach-wear casual clothes the others WERE wearing, and that ANYONE would be wearing if one wanted to go INTO the beach.
Because if I was comparing that particular Fiona's outfit with what Kate wore in the 1000 day celebration, than I would have say that she was had very little dressing taste and that she was far, far from being posh.
The context is precise.
Both Dianne and Fiona, on the CCTV pictures, are NOT dressed for what they say later they were doing around the time those pictures were taken.