by May I
What constitutes an all-inclusive holiday? Full- board includes all meals; usually breakfast, lunch and an evening meal. Half-board; the T9 option, normally includes breakfast and an evening meal. The McCanns, we are told, decided to have breakfast at their own apartment, whilst the other members of the group went to the Millenium restaurant. (referred to in the following as the Mill), wasting, apparently, free meals due to mobility issues.
Apart from their first evening meal in the Mill, we are also told that the group thereafter, made a block booking to eat in the Tapas Bar. To do this, they had to plead for a table, so the first question is, why do they need to plead for a booking if they already have an all-inclusive, half-board option package?
Please bear with me whilst I wade through the various statements and press reports, trying to make any sense of the arrangements described.
Agapito, a waiter at the Tapas says they all used to go to the Mill for dinner every day, as would be expectef on their was all-inclusive deal. The T7 claim they lunched in the Payne's apartment, as it was the most spacious. The McCann's, we are told, lunched, alone, in their own apartment a few yards away.
Luis Barros, a waiter at the Tapas, who also worked at the Mill, said there were 20 diners on half board at the Tapas, but he had to seek authorisation from his manager Steve (Cova) to make a block reservation for the T9. Steve Cova was the Angolan catering manager who had left at 8pm on the night Madeleine disappeared.
Waiter Joaquim Jose Baptista said that to book a Tapas table, guests had to queue at reception from 11 am onwards on the day ( The Sun 2310.07.).
This is where Fawlty Towers comes to mind. Scene One -Imagine foreign visitors on half-board to that eccentric hotel in England. They come down for their INCLUSIVE evening meal, only to be told by Basil, the manager, that they can't eat, as they haven't booked.
“You have to queue at 11 am to book a table. We like to impose some discipline on our guests, none of that free-for-all stuff you continentals go for! A queue, where you stand in a line and wait, you cloth-eared, ......”
At this point, his wife drags him off before the scene gets too ugly and a long-suffering waitress placates the enraged guests. Manuel, the only English speaking waiter in Fawlty Towers would end up getting the blame for serving JUST 23 plates in under 30 minutes..
No, not even John Cleese and pals would be THAT ridiculous to give us a laugh. They excel in INTELLIGENT and FEASIBLE humour.
Returning to Baptista. He says he usually served the group with 8-10 bottles of wine. His partner (Maria Fernandez) worked at the Mill. She described the McCanns coming to the Mill for the SECOND time and recounts how Maddie searched for high chairs for the twins.
She refers to her as “a little angel”, rather than the rather naughty child of others' descriptions. An expression also used by David Payne.
So, we now have more confusion about whether or how many times the McCanns went to the Mill, as there is now an additional sighting. Maria Fernandez is not the only one, however. Cecilia do Carmo, a Mill worker who greeted guests, places the McCann family at the Mill on Thursday. May 3rd; the day Maddie disappeared .
She saw Maddie with her parents on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday am (discrediting totally the theory that the little girl possibly died before May 3rd ...)- presumably at breakfast-and describes Maddie as clinging to her father.
Alice Silvestre says the McCanns ate there often and confirms the Mill was used for breakfast and dinners.
Paula Veira recognised them from a photograph and says she saw them twice.
Baptista seems to disappear from the story at a later stage, to be replaced by Geronimo Salcedas, another Tapas waiter (see... post for background) Why would that be? Baptista was apparently interviewed 3 times by the police and was said to have disappeared abroad after this.
Could it be because his story no longer fitted the account of events? He describes Kate as raising the alarm from the BALCONY of the apartment, rather than returning to the Tapas bar screaming.
Who to believe? Was the Mill the all-inclusive venue, rather than the Tapas? Well, Jennifer Murat, mother of Robert didn't believe the McCann's private investigators. In an article in The Express (17.12.08.) she claims the PI's paid off witnesses.
She should be in a better position to judge than anyone, as they had paid a visit to the home of the Murat relatives in November 2007.
As for my opinion, I couldn't possibly comment.
There was a staff of 18 people at Tapas for 4 tables of guests and 25 members of staff to look after the other guests but HOW MANY? 100? 200? more than that?
ReplyDeleteThe Tapas had a ratio of nearly 1 member of staff per customer! No wonder they can serve so many plates of food to the Tapas 9 in less than one hour. And no wonder 2 members of the Tapas staff can spend 30 minutes together in the kitchen the night Maddie went 'missing'.
I forgot to say it was the Mill that had 25 staff.
ReplyDelete''His partner (Maria Fernandez) worked at the Mill. She described the McCanns coming to the Mill for the SECOND time and recounts how Maddie searched for high chairs for the twins.
ReplyDeleteShe refers to her as “a little angel”, rather than the rather naughty child of others' descriptions. An expression also used by David Payne. ''
None of this appears in her statement - where have you got it from?
Only read the first part and stopped there because it was already completely wrong.
ReplyDeleteJoao Pedro Ramos Agapito was a waiter at the Tapas and not at the Millenium. He worked from 09:30 until 17H00. Therefore he did not see them at breakfast nor at dinner.
The original portuguese statement says "ir la jantar" meaning "they went to eat". Not specifying if dinner or lunch it is clear from the context of his working hours that he is referring to dinner.
Very bad research I am afraid.
-------------------------------
""- Works in "Luz/Ocean Club" for two years as a "barman" in the restaurant "Tapas" from the hours of 09:30 until 17H00;
- When questioned about the missing child, Joao responded that he saw the child and her respective family around the club but did not see them in the restaurant (Tapas) as breakfast was served in the Millenium. He knows from his colleagues that they used to go there (Tapas) regularly to eat almost every day; ""
''Who to believe? Was the Mill the all-inclusive venue, rather than the Tapas? Well, Jennifer Murat, mother of Robert didn't believe the McCann's private investigators. In an article in The Express (17.12.08.) she claims the PI's paid off witnesses.
ReplyDeleteShe should be in a better position to judge than anyone, as they had paid a visit to the home of the Murat relatives in November 2007. ''
What does the fact that the Tapas was included as an option for those on a half-board package got to do with Robert Murat's mother?
Completely agree Johanna, I posted about that too, but it doesn't seem to have been published yet
ReplyDeleteExtremely poorly researched and mostly a piece of sheer invention
To Johanna (8:06:00 PM):
ReplyDelete"The original portuguese statement says "ir la jantar" meaning "they went to eat". Not specifying if dinner or lunch it is clear from the context of his working hours that he is referring to dinner."
Well, "ir lá jantar" means exactly "go there for dinner", the portuguese word "jantar" means dinner, the evening meal, and not any other meal of the day.
Breakfast is "pequeno-almoço", Lunch is "almoço", Afternoon Tea is "lanche", and Dinner is "jantar", and that's it!
"Ir lá jantar" does NOT translate into, nor does it mean, "they went to eat", NO, NO, NO! That would be in portuguese "eles foram lá comer".
Hope this will make things clear!
Mrs.BlackCat
From May I:
ReplyDeleteAnon
Apr 12, 2011 7:49:00 PM
I did say at the beginning this was from statements AND press reports. By cross referencing I established the name of Maria Fernandes and there is a photo of her and Baptista together in press.
Maria F was reported in The Sun and I give the reference 23,10.07. re little angels comment, but by the time her statement was taken she doesn't mention it. Hence my comment about Jenny Murat and the PIs getting at witnesses
Maria Fernandes is quoted in more than one newspaper as referring to the angelic M at the Mill and more than one report refers to the McCanns coming to the Mill on at least 2 occasions. The fact that this does not appear in her statement is exactly what I'm getting at. One could argue the press got it wrong, but where did they get the info from and why was it more than one newspaper got it wrong? My view is things had to change to fit the evolving story.
From May I:
ReplyDeleteJohanna,
Agapito’s statement:
"À pergunta feita, respondeu que, efectivamente viu a criança e a respectiva família a circular pelo clube no entanto nunca os chegou a ver juntos no restaurante até porque os PEQUENO-ALMOÇOS são servidos noutro local, o restaurante "Millenium", e, ao ALMOÇO, nunca os chegou a servir. Contudo, sabe através dos seus colegas que costumavam lá ir JANTAR quase todos os dias" (CAPS are mine)
This translates into:
"To the question asked, (he)answered that, (he) effectively saw the child and respective family circling (as in "seen around") through the club however never got to see them together at the restaurant even because the BREAKFASTS are served in another site, the "Millenium" restaurant, and, at LUNCH, never got to wait on them. However, (he) knows through his colleages that (they) used to have DINNER there almost every day."
Agapito's statement refers to his collegues at the MILL who said the family went there - the Mill, not the TAPAS, nearly every day. The translations of the PJ files have translate it as “LUNCH”, but it is “DINNER”, as any research into BASIC Portuguese will clearly tell you: pequeno-almoço = breakfast, almoço = lunch and jantar = dinner. Very, very clear. And VERY BASIC.
Then he KNOWS, through his colleagues, that they (the McCanns) USED to go to the MILL for dinner. If you read the original statement, maybe you can see if my interpretation makes sense or not.
One should do some serious research before suggesting others to do so in such unpolite and unprovoked terms. The reason why one does so, is quite clarifying, I must say.
By the way, Johanna, who do you believe in? For example, do you believe that Cecilia do Carmo is a liar when she places Maddie at the Mill on Thursday?
From May I:
ReplyDeleteAnon
Apr 12, 2011 9:05:00 PM
The speed with which you people responded after the post’s publication, surely indicates that you were anticipating the content of the post as NO ONE could read the blog, go back and read statements, liaise them with the blog so quickly.
The synchronized manner in which your responses appeared does also reveal some symptoms of OCD about this blog. Do you have your computers on this blog 24/7?
Still on the "ir lá jantar" confusion...I went to check the statement in an excellent site (www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk) and in the original portuguese file it says:
ReplyDelete"Contudo, sabe através dos colegas que costumavam ir lá jantar quase todos os dias"
There's no doubt about it, it means: "however, he understands from what he was told by his co-workers that they(McCanns) used to go there for dinner on almost all days". (Note that he said "almost every day", and not all the days, meaning that they might have gone elsewhere on some of the evenings...to Chaplin's...?)
It can never be interpreted as going there to eat a meal, whatever that meal might be, lunche, tea, etc., it's dinnner and dinner only!
Sorry for carrying on on the subject, but the translations sometimes are so misleading...
After reading MayI's reply @11.00pm I went and re-read the Agapito portuguese statement very carefully.
ReplyDeleteMay I wrote:
"Agapito's statement refers to his collegues at the MILL who said the family went there - the Mill, not the TAPAS, nearly every day."
I have some doubts if he refers to the Millenium, it is dubious, it can be interpreted either as him meaning the Tapas or the Millenium. Portuguese is a tricky language, lol, but I believe he means the Tapas, because he was talking about "his" restaurant:
"à pergunta feita, respondeu que, efectivamente viu a criança e a respectiva família...nunca os chegou a ver juntos NO RESTAURANTE, até porque os pequenos-almoços são servidos noutro local, o restaurante "Millenium", e ao almoço nunca os chegou a servir. Contudo, sabe atavés dos colegas que costumavam LÁ ir jantar quase todos os dias."
From the above I understand he means that he never saw them in the Tapas bar( NO RESTAURANTE), his place of work, becuse breakfast was
at the Mill, and that he also never got to serve them at lunch time (because they never ate lunch out, but in their apartm), but his colleagues from the Tapas, who worked nightshifts, told him they went there (LÁ, meaning his owrk place, the Tapas)for dinner.
It's a matter of interpretation, I suppose, it can go both ways, if only Mr. Agapito could be asked about it...
It is evident that some people from the OC lyed along with the Mccann's. They heard and memorized the title of the song but had no time to practice the melody and sing it correctly. The result is what we can see- more confusion to dificult the investigation. with all that characters failing the details. Ay judge will catch them on the first questions.
ReplyDeleteJohanna, your point is useless. Most of us already read the statements available and made a generic opinion. Doesn't matter what Agapito or Maria said, in particular. When we put their statements in piles to organize them, they all fall on the same category- MADE UP TO HELP THE MCCANN'S PASSING THE IMAGE OF A PERFECT FAMILY WITH MADELEINE AS A LOVELY ANGEL, ALIVE AND AROUND AT MAY 3, 2007.
If we analise the strategies adopted by the witnesses on their statements, we arrive at the conclusion that there is no big difference between them and what is/was/still delivered by team Mccann to their supportive press- They were all unable to provide any idea/ concret event, to be a fact. There is always a friend, a family, somebody else, who saw something and reported it to them. Statements and sup.events, were all based on stories that passed mouth to mouth. All fake.
To all readers. Due to the mistrahslation of the word "jantar" for lunch the following paragraphs:
ReplyDelete"Agapito, a waiter at the Mill says they all used to go to the Mill for lunch every day, as it was all-inclusive. Now, from what I understand from the reviews of the Mill, it was possible to swap dinner for lunch, but didn't the T7 claim they lunched in the Payne's apartment, as it was the most spacious? The McCann's, we are told, lunched in their own apartment.
Starting to get confused? It's like Quiz Night all over again!"
were corrected into:
"Agapito, a waiter at the Tapas says they all used to go to the Mill for dinner every day, as would be expectef on their was all-inclusive deal. The T7 claim they lunched in the Payne's apartment, as it was the most spacious. The McCann's, we are told, lunched, alone, in their own apartment a few yards away."
It's not the core subject of the post, that being two: firstly why would the T9 plead for a booking when they had an inclusive deal, and second, what kind of establishment requires for their clients that have an inclusive deal to book, making the late runners HAVE to eat somewhere else other than the expected? It's a long walk from Tapas to the Mill, and there would certainly be resentment amongst clients, and that would show up in the reviews. Notice how people complain about how MW customers are better treated than those from Thomas Cook.
Another important matter of the post which we would like to see contradicted is the fact that Maddie is seen, ALIVE, on the morning of the 3rd by an independent witness: an OC worker.
Anon
ReplyDeleteApr 12, 2011 11:32:00 PM
If it was in Tapas, he didn't need to know that through his friends, would he? He would know himself. I'm afraid that paragraph is clear, he assumes the McCs had breakfast in the Mill, doesn't know where they had lunch, and KNOWS they had dinner at the Mill. What he's trying to say is that he never saw them in Tapas.
Hi Johanna. Good to see you back!
ReplyDeleteTaking into account that you, among other things, base your own theory on the "fact" that G and K had a jealousy spout over Najoua, based purely on K's statement alone, you're the one to tell others to go and do some research!
Still waiting for your answer on whether you agree with Insane's opinions or not. Or are you going to finally reveal the real Black Hat you really are (only reason I see plausible for you to attack with such passion Tex) by adopting their attitude of only asking but never to answer?
May I places a very interesting fact in her post which invalidates your whole theory, and you go and pick on whether it was lunch or dinner or if the man worked at Tapas or the Mill, when you, of all people, should address the question if the lady is lying when she says she sees M alive on May 3.
Let me tell you that it's becoming quite clear why this blog bothers you so much.
If there was a need to queue up for booking, why then is not the place packed? None of the reservation sheets seem to present a full-house capacity. People seem to mistake that 4 tables wit 4 pax max means that there were only 16 seats, but that is only INDOORS. On the esplanade, we have no numbers, but only some estimation of 20 (honestly I don't know where this comes from, but seems reasonable) which would make a total of 36 people. In no day is this amount of people quantified for any of the days. So why the queue?
ReplyDeleteTextusa, 6:59:00
ReplyDeleteI'm anon. 11:32pm,
I agree, he never saw them in the Tapas, but because of his work hours. I assumed that he did not know who had or had not dinned at the Tapas because he was not there at dinner time. His work shift ended at 5:00pm, long before dinner hours started (7:00pm?), so his knowledge of who the dinner guests were could only come from what his Tapas colleagues told him.
I suppose that when the tragedy happened and everyone was talking about it and the police began to interview people, he and his co-workers talked about the Tapas group and the children he mentioned he had seen them around but that he had not had close contact with them because they never came for lunch there(during his shift), and his colleagues maybe told him "oh, but they are regulars here, they have come here for dinner on almost every night".
That is my interpretation of the whole thing.
I wish that the police depositions would be done in a different manner, in a more accurate way, not by "when asked the witness said this or that" in the third person, but by transcripting the actual dialogue, question and answer, word for word of what was asked and what was answered. I believe it would make things a lot more clear and avoid uncertaities and misinterpretations.
Maybe I'm wrong in my interpretation of the statement and maybe you're wright, I don't know for sure, I cannot affirm I'm 100% right or not, because by the way it is related in the deposition it can go both ways.
It's a though one...
Same feeling about you Johanna, as anon April 13, 10:12.
ReplyDeleteYou seems to be a double faced. Some posts from you on Joana Morais blog look like an anti-Mccann. Here, you act as a pro. What is the difference? Some issues Textusa is touching and are bothering some people or there is two Johannas posting in different blogs and trying to spread confusion? The way they write look the same. The only difference is the message.
From your research I also like to know what is your opinion about Madeleine alive on May 3 and the last picture of Madeleine around the pool. Why that picture just show up after Gerry first trip to Rothley( after May 20)? If was on Kate camara with wrong time, differing one hour from the real time, why no other pictures of Madeleine were delivered to the press regarding that particular holidays? Or Kate just take one picture of Madeleine which by an exceptional exception was took on the last afternoon? Then, why calling it the last and not the single? From where came the other pictures of Madeleine, in the swings with her brothers and father and in the Tennis court? from Kate camera or from other camera? Strangely Madeleine looks much beautiful and younger on the first picture delivered to the press(showing the coloboma) then on the one in the Tennis Court or the swimming pool.
About the last picture of Madeleine, a very interesting "ANALYSIS BY ALBYM", available at PAMALAN.
Anything that Agapito could stated to the police about May 3 is a lie or the result of a story circulating mouth to mouth, since thursday and Wednesday were his DAYS OFF. Then his working time for that day is useless for the case and he just got it when he arrive on May 4, or somebody called him to give him the story they want to be circulating. Who are allocated to work on Thursdays from 16(4pm) to 24( 12 pm), were Ze, Cebola and Joe. Any statement available about those guys? I don't see them on the disclosed files, but they could be there under their full names.
Agapito said the tapas was closed the last 2 weeks for people outside MW and just open for OC guests. Then, where the story of the queue for bookings fit on that? And why was said that Najoua was contracted to do Aerobic lessons around the pool and Quiz nights at the Tapas? She was contracted in the low season to do a job that targeted VERY UNCERTAIN AND VERY FEW CLIENTS?
For me, the only OC worker I take serious and her statement believerable, was Silvia, the lady called after the alarm being raised. Her first statement to GNR looks genuine and gave a true account about the real situation. She had doubts about the story the mccann's delivered to GNR because the crime scene and the behavior of the Mccann's did not match their abduction story. The rest of the witnesses available look all manipulated by Mark W who instead of searching the girl was going around the flats with one of the Tapas 7 to advise guests to stay inside because nothing could be done to recover the girl. Looking at how big and spreaded is the complex and how empty must be the flats loccated on some areas, wonder why he and the Tapas did not want people outside helping the police and searching everywhere, few hours after the girl being missing. Kate and god knows, she said it.
Anon
ReplyDeleteApr 13, 2011 10:39:00 AM
Thank you for your comment, and brilliant reasoning in the defense of your opinion. Your interpretation of his wording is completely acceptable, although I don’t subscribe it. The reason is that, for me, his line of thought is that he’s justifying why he hasn’t seen them at Tapas, for meals, and he tries to justify that with the Millenium. But as you rightly say, I could be right and you wrong or the other way around. I hope we both agree that it’s a dubious statement, and, alone, on cannot deduce much from it.
If a lesson can be taken from all this, is that we have to be very careful when handling the translations. Not to be one ungrateful for the tremendous task it was to translate all these documents, it’s humanly understandable that there the same care put on each translated documents. I must here say, for it is true, in all the sites that have translated the PJ Files, ALL, without exception have accepted corrections, and ALL mention possible different interpretations of what was said, so to them my sincere thanks and utmost gratefulness.
But one has to be very careful with the translations. Sometimes they do induce one in error, as we've seen. For example, in the same Agapito’s statement, he says: “Disse que o restaurante é reservado e que por isso não é normal aparecerem outras pessoas, isto durante o período do dia, porque a noite o restaurante é aberto ao público” which is wrongly translated into “Stated that the restaurant is by reservation only and for this reason, it is not normal to see other people during the day but at night, the restaurant is open to the public”, giving the idea that during the day one would need to book to be able to get in to the restaurant.
In this particular instance, saying that “o restaurante é reservado” is with the meaning that the use is reserved for clients of the hotel only. So the correct translation would be “Stated that the restaurant is reserved and for that reason, it isn’t normal to for other people to appear, this during the day, because at night, the restaurant is open to the public”.
So Agapito doesn’t say that the restaurant is in any manner to be used by reservation only, but is a reserved area, during the day, for the OC clients. He needn’t say that because the entrance and the way the whole Tapas complex is set-up it’s easy to understand that it is that way. What is surprising is that one can consider it open to public at night. No, there’s nothing saying it that it’s prohibited, but certainly there’s nothing calling customers in. Anyone walking down that street doesn’t have the idea that there’s a PUBLIC restaurant there. But then again, it’s a personal opinion with which you’re entitled to disagree.
(cont...)
(...cont)
ReplyDeleteHowever, there’s something rather interesting that Agapito does also say that goes against your reasoning:
“No entanto sabe que nestas duas últimas semanas não serviram jantares ou atenderam no bar clientes que não estivessem hospedados.” (However (he) knows that in these last two weeks they did not serve dinners or attend at the bar clients that were not hotel guests).
Now, doesn’t that strike you as odd for someone to know such vast information (remember, only if you queued up would you get a place, so imagine the number of clients in a fortnight) with such certainty, but needed to get the information that the McCanns ate there (at Tapas) dinner from his colleagues. One doesn’t fit with the other, does it?
About the way the police depositions could be done in a different manner, in a more accurate way, not by "when asked the witness said this or that" in the third person, but by transcribing the actual dialogue, question and answer, word for word of what was asked and what was answered, is something that is unchangeable, for it’s the customary manner that the Portuguese Judicial system does it. The idea is that writing in the third person, a reader can infer, without hesitation, what was the exact question that prompted that particular answer. If it works or not, is each one’s personal opinion and I would rather not give mine at this point in time.
Lastly, as we’re on the carefulness in the use of wording, I must call to your attention a phrase you used with which we here in this blog are completely in disagreement and are making a pretty good effort to prove otherwise. You say “; I suppose that when the tragedy happened and everyone was talking about it and the police began to interview people, he and his co-workers talked about the Tapas group”. You see, when the tragedy that we think happened, NOBODY talked about it, what “everyone was talking about” was the supposed abduction, a pretence tragedy that never happened.
Anon @ 3:38:00 PM
ReplyDeleteI agree with you totally. You gave a very reasoned, rational argument.
Silvia is the most credible witness discussed so far.
I would like to see you write more comments.
With COPY nd PASTE, from MCCANNFILES:
ReplyDelete"McCanns: Madeleine McCann - Trade Mark No. 2456061? Day Trading (German)"
By A DAY TRADER
Published: 2011/04/12
"Perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of the case of missing Madeleine McCann is that, within days of her disappearance, her parents submitted a trade mark application on her behalf. Trade marks are typically used to protect commercial property rights, so that, in this bizarre case, it seems that not only was Madeleine perceived as a missing daughter, but also as a future commercial concern, the rights of which were required, to protect the commercial interests of Team McCann. In a way, it's easy to see why Madeleine's image attracted substantial sums for the interested parties. Personally the thought of a 'trade mark' for a missing child sounds pretty sick to say the least, and brings a certain disgust at the whole question of her loss. But what is your opinion? Is it customary to mark a missing child this way? Was the McCanns' child an exception, whose name needed to be trade marked in the circumstances? Source: ipo.gov.uk"
On 18 May 2007, Gerry knows without doubts MADELEINE WILL BE NOT FOUND UNTIL 2017. Nothing have changed on what is public known about Madeleine saga, from 3 May to 18. Then, her father knows what will be hapenning to her since the beginning of her disappearence.
On 18 May when we, the majority of the public, were under shock and overprotecting our kids because of what was massively reported in PDL, the father of the suposedly abducted girl was relaxed, having mind and time to make her a trademark, securing his future economical incomes FROM THE EXPLOITATION OF THE IMAGE OF THE GIRL. 12 May 2011 will be one more step on WHAT WAS VERY WELL PLANNED- the book after the Fund, after the public donations, after the payed interviews, after the Mcvideo in PDL. What will be next?- The movie, the doll, the parfum, girl clothes, etc, etc.
Where are the UK authorities who allow all that fraud to be carried on? I believe... for much, much less then that, 90% of the British citizens will be in prison accused of many crimes.
Everyday a new face from the Mccann's emerges and those news are FACTS not FICTION.
Anon at 5.53 I agree with your comments, how have the mccanns been able to market madeleine to such an extreme that now we have a book about to be launched by the mccanns.
ReplyDeleteThe turning of madeleine into a patent is grotesque.
From a commerical point of view it could be suggested that this whole madeleine thing was pre-planned by a couple with dire financial problems, and a big mortgage they were struggling with. They used fund money to pay off some mortgage payments. Distorted the truth, paid witnesses to lie, invented a ludicrous abduction story full of holes.
They spend most of the fund money on what !!! then ask for more, then spend that and again ask for more, and nobody investigates anything.
The Mccanns would not be able to achieve what they have without the help of some very powerful or frightened people.
I am so glad we have the internet and can research for ourselves otherwise we would only read the rubbish printed in our papers by Mccann Limited.
Well done Textusa.
“Waiter Joaquim Jose Baptista said that to book a Tapas table, guests had to queue at reception from 11 am onwards on the day”
ReplyDeleteSo why is the ‘reservation’ sheet written in British handwriting if the booking was supposed to be done by a Portuguese receptionist who does not mention taking any bookings from anyone.
Not one receptionist says they took bookings for the Tapas dinners, not even for T9.
To complicate matters further two more ‘witenesses’ contradict each other.
Sandro Miguel Moreira Sampaio da Silva
Date/Time: 2007/05/07 18H45
Receptionist
Further adds that this family, like all the Mark Warner clients, are placed into a half-pension regime? breakfast and dinner. For diner, the clients can opt for two restaurants, the Tapas of the Millennium, with the first being ?service a la carte? and the second ?buffet? with the clients choosing not just for food, but for questions of proximity in relation to their living quarters. However, the current witness states that the guests have informed him that the Tapas restaurant is of better quality but is much more difficult to arrange a reservation as it has fewer places;
. In this case, the rationale choice for a family to dine is the TAPAS, since it is 40 METRES in distance from the apartment, as opposed to the MILLENIUM which is around 200 metres from the same;
Vitor Manuel dos Santos
Date/Time: 2007/05/07 11H00
Occupation: Head of Accommodation
He adds that this family booked from 28th April to 5th May on a half board basis, in other words, breakfast and dinner. For dinner the guests could choose between two options, the Tapas and the Millenium and ALTHOUGH THE MEALS ARE IDENTICAL, the clients choose the restaurant according to its proximity to their accommodation.
In this case in concrete, the rational choice for dinner would be the Tapas restaurant as it is 100 metres distance from the apartment, whilst the Millenium is situated 600 metres away.
Who is lying? Both?
Sandro Miguel Moreira Sampaio da Silva says
ReplyDelete"In this case, the rationale choice for a family to dine is the TAPAS, since it is 40 METRES in distance from the apartment, as opposed to the MILLENIUM which is around 200 metres from the same;"
Vitor Manuel dos Santos says
" In this case in concrete, the rational choice for dinner would be the Tapas restaurant as it is 100 metres distance from the apartment, whilst the Millenium is situated 600 metres away."
Is this a Fawlty Towers script?
The hymn sheet was not read properly.
It is clear for me that many of the OC workers lie on their statements, special the ones who were in more contact with clients- Restaurant waiters. Most probably, by phone call or directly, all recieved the message to be passed to the police(generic) without exercising well the words to be delivered. Then, depending on being more or less confidenr with police interrogatory, more or less instructed, each one tried to deliver the message their employer wants to. Because the lesson was not well prepared due to the lack of time, many contradictions were delivered. Wonder how many of them maintain their words if were called by a court now to explain what they know about that fatidic night.
ReplyDeleteFor me, more important then the statements made by the OC workers, Tapas 9 or the witnesses connected with them, were the statements of the GNR officers ( first to arrive to the crime scene).
ReplyDeleteFrom them, one is very interesting-José María Batista Roque, Processos Volume XII
Pages 3281 - 3284
Date: 17 – 10 - 2007
( I just copy and paste what calls my attention on his statement- Source: "Mccannfiles"-PJ files, GNR officers statements)
1- He and one colleague were the first police to arrive to the crime scene, at 23h (11Pm).
2- "...at a determined moment he thinks it was the father who told the translator that it was an abduction, at least this is how it was translated."
3- "... He opened all the cupboards in the bedrooms, living room and kitchen and checked under the beds and inside the washing machine. He did not see the fridge." (Where went the fridge?)
4- "During the search he did not find anything strange apart from the bedclothes on Madeleine's bed, which were too tidy, it appeared that she had been picked up from or had left the bed with great care. There was a mark on the sheet that appeared to be made by a child's body." ( No forensic evidences from Maddie were found on the bed, I think, then who could be the child? Jane Tanner daughter?)
5-"...at a determined moment, the girl's parents kneeled down on the floor of their bedroom and placed their heads on the bed, crying...He found the parents to be nervous and anxious, he did not see any tears from either of them although they produced noises identical to crying. He did not feel that this was an abduction, although this was the line indicated by the father."
6-"...the window in the girl's bedroom was closed with the blind raised up the space of the width of a hand. He does not remember the existence of curtains."
7-"... there were two children in cots placed in Madeleine's room in a transversal position to the beds. The children never woke up, were in a ventral position, they did not even move during or after the search."
8-"...when he was searching outside, near the pool, that someone from the Ocean Club whom he cannot identify, passed him a mobile phone, as a British Consulate employee who spoke in Portuguese, wanted to talk to the authorities. Upon speaking to him, he told him that the investigation and subsequent actions were under the responsibility of the PJ." (beginning of the manipulation?)
Anon., Apr 14, 2011 11:47:00 PM
ReplyDeleteThat was the THIRD time this GNR officer was questioned by the PJ, and what's more interesting is that in this 3rd testimony he had much more to say than on the previous two! This time he elaborated a lot more, giving a detailed report of what he observed and of what he did. What strikes me more is the apparent lack of training of the GNR officers to deal with a potential crime scene, he his not able to identify most of the people he found inside the apartment on his arrival there! The place is crowded with people and neither he or his colleague remembered to ask for their ID and take down their names for future reference! All those people were potential witnesses/suspects, etc.
Also, no one was asked to leave the place and no attempt was made to preserve the place from further contamination.
I think it's terrible that the police forces that are usually the first to be called to crime scenes, the PSP and the GNR, are not at all trained to do the right things, the basics, while waiting for the PJ to come in and take over!
About the fridge you mention, well, I think that once again we are dealing with the difficulties of the coloquial use of the portuguese language and the obsolete way the police depositions still are made. As in the testimony of the Tapas barman Agapito, about whether he ment the Millenium or the Tapas bar when he said that "they went THERE for dinner almost every night"("iam LÁ jantar"...), that THERE(LÁ), could mean either of the places, also in officer Roque testimony, when he says he "did not see the fridge" I believe it means that he did not look inside the fridge. His words: "Não viu o frigorífico" ( he did not see the fridge). He should have said: "Não viu NO frigorífico"(he did not see INSIDE the fridge).
I suppose he did not think it would be a place where the child would hide( because at that time he was only thinking in terms of the child being playing, hidding in some place, being naughty, and not of a crime), because there would be hardly space due to the shelves, so he did not look (não viu)in the fridge. He did look inside the clothes-washer though, a place with a reasonble open wide space(no shelves)where a child could get into.
Anon
ReplyDeleteApr 15, 2011 11:26:00 AM
You're absolutely right. When he says "Não viu o frigorífico" the verb is clearly used in the sense of verification/checking. The correct translation would be "He didn't check the fridge". And there wouldn't be any confusion about a missing fridge that I never understood from where it had started. Now I know.
Thank you also Anon Apr 14, 2011 11:47:00 PM, thanks to your input, that's another thing clarified.
I'm Anon. 11:47,
ReplyDeleteAbout the fridge, your interpretation 11:26 could be perfect correctly. Mine, and I could be totally wrong, is he don't see the fridge, not he don't look inside the fridge. His statement is quite detailed and he clear said that he checked inside the washing machine, inside the cupboards, etc. I'm just thinking on a mechanical way and put myself on the GNR officer position- when we are doing such searchs( imagine you looking for something inside your Kitchen, your behavior is automatic, you search everywhere, even on the most stupid corners) we look everywhere without thinking, then I don't see any reason for him to bypass the fridge, even if he was looking for a child who could just being playing hide and s. I need to do more research about that but is coming to my mind that Payne also refered a fridge and quickly shift his statement to another issue and the Mccann's, like hapenned to the story of the window had to find a story with a fridge that needs to be repaired. Probably the fridge was not there and they were confronted with that fact and forced to gave an excuse. Amaral also talks at some point about the use of a fridge to explain why madeleine could be moved to different locations.
About the suposed poor skills of GNR to preserve the crime scene, I think very little we know about what they have done between they arrived and the arriving of PJ. I believe, they asked everybody else to leave the flat apart the parents and the twins. The contamination was done before they arrived. For me is not strange they did not remember the people who were there with parents. The night and the place was a chaos and he even reported that when he went to the pool already saw local people searching the girl. Who called that people if he was the first police to arrive there? The portuguese TV and radio News or they were called trough mobiles from people inside the OC? Then, GNR had other priorities and they cannot remember all the faces, special because they are dealing with one more dificulty-the translations.
Good that we can start looking at some details. I believe the details hold a lot of clues.
I think the broken fridge story (or myth) had nothing to do with the fridge in 5A or the Gnr officer testimony, it comes from elsewhere...from Gerry McCann's own blog, so it seems. Many people affirm that they read about it in the said blog. In one entry on his blog, Gerry alledgedly mentioned he had to replace the fridge of the rented villa were they stayed after they left apartm. 5A, of how he bought a new ona and took the faulty one to the dump. This particular entry soon vanished never to be seen again... If true, this whole account is very fishy, because it was a rented villa and if any of the appliances was not functioning the logical thing to do was to inform the landlord and ask for a repair or replacement. Can you believe that Gerry would put down his own money to buy anew fridge for a place which he would be leaving in a matter of weeks? I do not!
ReplyDeleteAlso, it was also said that the owner, when he knew this from the media, was very surprised, he had ahd the appliances checked some time before and all as o.k., and if not, he would have replaced the fridge himself.
Now, I must admitt that I never read Gerry's original blog about the broken fridge, I only read what was written in forums (3 As, for one), but people were adamant it was real. What I find strange and somehow makes me doubt the story, is that many people have saved copies of all of Gerry's blogs and other information, for the future, in case it would be "wooshed-clunked", which are still available today (all mit takes is a google search), and yet, this particular blog is nowhere to be found! Isn't it terribly unlucky no one, not a single soul, has saved it???
Or, if anyone has he/she is not sharing...
Many information is under secrecy. The GNR officers, I believe gave more statements to PJ then what was disclosed and the most important information still closed to be analised by judges when the case will be reopenned. PJ knows if there was a fridge inside the 5A or not. Could be a myth or not. I think Pj based their conclusion about madeleine death on various evidences, not only what came from the dogs search.
ReplyDeleteThe main objective of disclosing the files was raising discussions trough the public and that was full achieved. I don't believe that a GNR who was working for the police for many years committed such error of leaving the fridge without being checked, special because he belongs to Portimao office and very few years before they investigate the case of Joana Cipriano and on Joana case, her blood was found on the freezer. Of course, the two cases could be different but what an error, if so, leaving the fridge out of the checking.