Thursday, 16 June 2011

The PdL Triangle

Anonymous Jun 15, 2011 12:56:00 PM wrote:

“I couldn't agree more. Media, police files, statements hold the most important key of information on the first days. 

When Madeleine was gone I read that all the kids were alone in the same apartment. In fact, Madeleine was alone and dead in 5-A ready to be transferred to a safer place.

So, if Kate and Payne were there when she was bumped in the head, this trouble was cooked late in the afternoon, the dinner was planned to put the group away from the crime scene and to be seen during the evening.

At the same time n abduction window of opportunity was opened. Was Jez involved in this swinging process and forced to go along with them or was he in a wrong place in the wrong time?

Was Murat called to help them with a KEY (seems the man was plenty of keys from empty apartments...) because he is a relative of Mark Warner owner?

What would be MW resort problem refusing to help Mccanns? How could McCanns prove MW is a resort for special couples and selective swinging?

Wasn't even worse to be involved in a fake abduction, hiding a corpse and produce fake statements involving employees that do follow your orders today but may change direction tomorrow?

That takes me to this conclusion: hiding Madeleine fatal condition worths what they were saving, and that cannot be the swinging resort offering... might be related to what would be found in the autopsy.  

She didn't fall, was not an accident... but why would the resort got involved?


a) they've panic and did not realize how things went wrong;

b) someone from OC should be supervising kids and wasn't without knowing she was already dead and a civil complain was on the way to OC. Covering up was the solution;

c) someone very important could not be involved in such a thing and that person was....;  

d) at that time OC did his best and had no idea to what was dragged for;

e) you name it or correct me if you please”

Dear Anon, First, let me praise you for the fact that you exposed your ideas but left, intentionally, room for them to be debated freely, which is highly commendable.

You raise a very interesting subject, and that is what parties exactly were involved, and how so.

Their will, their commitment and which of them took the lead in what we call here “The Maddie Affair”.

First we have to define the parties involved.

In our opinion, there were, and still are, three: T9, OC (which includes ownership and a significant part of the staff), and guests.

For simplicity sake, we shall call them the T-Team, the O-Team and the G-Team.

There are some “loose” players, like the PdL resident Expats. These can be either O-Team (had the same, or more, to lose as the OC) or G-Team (had the same to lose as some of the guests, or then assumed, for many different reasons, the mission to protect at all costs any reference made about any kind of involvement by some of them), or "play" for both teams.

For example, I find difficult to fit Murat in any of these teams as he fits in both.

But the Expats, are not the only “loose” players around. As all things in life, there’s no strict and clear line separating, or intersecting, these groups.  

David Payne, for example, seems to be right in the middle of the intersection of the three teams.

Secondly, we have to define the time.

As it went by, so the power relation between the teams changed.

During a long time it did, more or less, remain stable, but took on a lively turn since Jim Gamble was, shall we say, asked to perform much more important and noble duties, like being told to fade away into the background.  

Then, we said it was the beginning of the end, today we see the evident signs of the unavoidable erosion that has followed.

But let’s freeze time at the exact time we believe Maddie McCann died: around 18:30 on May 3rd, 2007.

We do this so that we can analyse what each of the teams had to lose, AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT, or thought they had to lose when they did realize how compromising Maddie’s death actually was.

Before you think we’re going into highly secret, or covert scientifically secret, reasons, let me clarify those that are new to the blog, that Maddie’s death was compromising just because it was an inexplicably violent death of a child (we still believe it to have happened unwittingly) in the middle of a swinging holiday.

How many times has each one us thought we would do something DIFFERENTLY if we had had the chance of knowing, BEFOREHAND, the consequences?

It’s so easy to judge, or decide the best path or course of action, knowing the OUTCOME.

But these people don't know that. They're before a fact, and making assessments and evaluating the implications of that particular fact upon themselves, based on the information possible and available, which is very little.

AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME, they know not the world will pick up on this issue.

They know not that they will face a stubborn policeman.

They know not that the investigation, the PJ Files, will become public, for public scrutiny.

All they know is that they have a dead child on their hands, whose cadaver bears the marks of a violent demise, and they know that they don’t want anyone else to know that they were present or in the vicinities when Maddie lost her life.

And if it had to be known, as they soon realized that it had to be, that they were in fact THERE, that would be within the permissible boundaries (this for some, for others, not even that was to be permitted), but what was ABSOLUTELY NOT ALLOWED TO BE KNOWN was the WHY they were there.

The UK has very little PUBLIC tolerance for any sexual "deviation"...

It's a fact that the UK tabloids act as starved dogs around a bone whenever they can get their teeth into a nice and juicy sex-scandal. Even the most hungry hyenas seem tame compared to them.

So, for all three teams, things, at that moment, were not looking good. Not good at all. In fact, they looked bad, horrible, with unacceptable consequences.

So they decide to take action.  

Who decided what and when?

Let’s first understand the constitution of each team.

The T-Team is made up of 9 elements. It would later grow, as various Healy and McCann signed up.

The O-Team, would, at this time, be at the Ownership/Managerial level. Some of the other staff were involved that evening, but probably were not aware of most of the details. Simply followed orders. On the next day, and the days after, the staff was slowly brought up to speed. Some of them were fully briefed on what was going on, probably because they were paid specifically to cater for that event.

These were conscious accomplices when they lied to the Police.

There were others that were convinced to go and tell “white lies” just to help out a distraught family, that had got herself into trouble, so there was no need to aggravate their grief.

They were probably told that it would be inconsequential lies, as the whole thing was under control, would quickly be resolved and that normality would quickly return.

These honest, low-wage workers, are the ones that have the biggest right to curse, which I'm sure they do, the day somebody decided to invite the McCanns over to a "PdL party"...

The G-Team, would have been two, or three of the most “important” guests.

It's uncertain how they appear into events, and only, I'm sure, David Payne can clarify that, and, as we've seen, asking him serve nothing to know.

He either contacted the O-Team first, and this team contacted the G-Team, or he contacted the G-Team first. Is it relevant the order in which the other two teams were contacted? No, it isn't, but I think it was the G-Team first, as the "Party-Coordinator" came from its ranks.

Like it happened with the O-Team, other guests were informed of what had happened on the next morning.

Some flew immediately out of scene, others cooperated out of pure self-interest, and some, probably less important and influential were pulled in.

The names that appear on the "Tapas sheets" are not there innocently. Those sheets were done, and redone. But they were done under pressure, and some who agreed to let their names be there, quickly changed their mind. H

How do I know that? By their deafening silence.

At first I thought, like you, that the McCanns had had always the lead, and were the ones to set the pace up, but I began, progressively to think somewhat differently.

You see, although the Jim Gamble "piece" did fit in the puzzle with perfection, one of the other around it, did not. It had to be forced into place, or, in the very least, didn't fit gently in.

That "piece" was David Payne.

I just couldn't see any set of circumstances which would have place Gamble under Payne's foot.

The other way around did seem a possibility, but the facts pointed for Gamble to be helping Payne, and certainly not the other way around.  

Gamble is a "filth collector" not a "filth-monger" himself. He who beholds the filth controls the "filthee", not the other way around. And taking into account the number and importance of people involved, both manipulating and being manipulated, as well as the resources spent and required, it meant that all went much, much further than a possible friendly return of favours, however strong their eventual bonding.

The David Payne "piece" just didn't fit in the way I think pieces should fit in. Always gently and naturally, never forced or distorted.

After some thought, and researching, I now think that in those early moments of that May 3rd evening, the decisions were in fact "tri-partied". All three teams suggesting and discussing possible solutions to the unsolvable problem.

But this "cooperation" was not for long. In fact, it probably only happened for a very short period of time.

It quickly became an exclusive “bi-party” ran operation. Ran solely by the O-Team and the G-Team.

Only these two teams had the capability and resources to influence and manipulate so many people, both powerful and common.

The first knew the terrain; and brought in ex-Pat help, the second had the power and influence and may justify why all of a sudden the UK Government took such a keen and devout interest in a group of upper middle-class, if that, doctors.

The T-Team, as insignificant as they really are, were ordered to take the role of actors, in a script written by the other two.

Yes, there was an “actor” very keen to please, a Dr. Gerald McCann, who, if others like the Smiths had cooperated, would have played the role of his life. A BAFTA in the very least.

His "we're not here to have fun", seems to indicate that they were to be introduced to a "higher" circle of people.

This was to be their trial run, their initiation ceremony.

All T-Team players had very little influence, with the exception of David Payne, who appears to be the connecting point between the T-Team and the other two.

Please do not confuse Payne's influence, with power to influence. His was liaison role only, aggravated with the fact that he was the responsible one for all the mess.

The script was well written, the play even had a title: "NEGLIGENCE AND ABDUCTOR".

The story of a forbidden love between two fictitious characters, Mrs Negligence and Mr. Abductor, brought together, by fate, in the fictitious far, far away land of COLOBOMA.

Unfortunately for all, the Kate's untimely alarm rendered all cue cards useless... as we all know, that timing is EVERYTHING in theatre, and Kate ruined it all.

Gerry still hadn't returned, the window still hadn't been broken into, they didn't have that precious hour to get the details right between them at the Tapas joined up tables, which would clarify as to who sat where, and that they didn't sit around a BIG ROUND TABLE.

Adding to this, and the “critic”-on-duty, one Gonçalo Amaral, proved to be not in the mood to play along with what had suddenly turned from a Tony Award winning spectacle into a sad, pathetic play.

But what NOBODY realized there and then was that, once they launched the play, the casting was done, without a possibility of changing any of the actors.

Not for the supporting roles, much less for the leading ones.

And between you and me, the choice of actors was disastrous and would prove to be disastrous both for the O and G-Team.

Yes, they could remove, which they did, from the building some, or most of the participant stagehands, but the main cast, was, as was proved, irreplaceable.

Everyone was taken by surprise with the selfish, egocentric and narcissistic personality traits of the McCann couple.

These two soon realized how great the power the information they possessed had, and, stupidly, as only stupid people can be, misused it by exaggeration and completely spoiled its usefulness.

Maybe that’s why that when they came to the tabloids threatening that they were “running out of money in the fund (... or else)”, they were subtly convinced to write the book (an ode to stupidity), which, they were certainly told, would end their problems once and for all, especially their financial ones.

Selfish, egocentric and narcissistic people are known to be highly manipulative, but are so much in love with themselves that you just have to give a little tug on their vanity that they will follow you down any path you wish to take them on.

And what Kate wrote, was not a book, but a sworn and signed self-incriminatory testimony of 350 plus pages.

One month has passed since it was published, and I believe that they would gladly give back all the money the book has made to date, just to be able to return to May 11th, 2011.

To ask to return to May 3rd, 2007 is not for them to plead, because, as said, I believe that little after Maddie died, they had little or nothing to say in the matter of the events of that evening.

Am I implying that the O-Team and the G-Team had anything to do with Maddie's death?

Of course not, because they didn't. That death occurred WITHIN the T-Team "compound".

Am I exempting the McCanns from any of their guilt?

Absolutely in no way.

 Once you understand this triangle, things will become much, much more clear.

Then, if you "submit" David Payne's "piece" to Gamble's one, and not the other way around, you'll find that it just slides in perfectly.

Post Scriptum:
About the reported, by Duarte Levy, suing of TVI, Goucha, Sargento and Carvalho, by the McCanns, this blog finds very strange that only Paulo Sargento has been constituted as "arguido".

The fact that a TV Station and ONE of its presenters seem to be involved, means that a certain, and specific, aired program merited this said judicial action.

A program where all three (Goucha, Sargento and Carvalho) were certainly present.

This in turn means it was single event in time, which would mean that ALL its PARTICIPANTS would have be named "arguido" at the same time, and not selectively, like seems to be the case with Sargento.

It simply doesn't make sense for him to have been notified of his "arguido" status on June 15th, and for Carvalho to be heard only in July.

When will then be the TVI Management heard or notified? Or Goucha?

Until we have confirmation from other sources other than Duarte Levy, this blog remains very skeptical about these "news".

And you know what we think about Levy's exclusive reporting...


  1. Esta frase na verdade sempre me fez muita confusão ( "we're not here to have fun") .

    Virem cá por uns dias, uns malditos dias, e não terem como objectivo divertirem-se!!!

    Realmente as hipóteses aqui sempre apresentadas vem sempre com muita lógica e, daí que para mim sejam credíveis.

    Estes 3 círculos representam bem a interacção dos que acabaram por conduzir à morte da criança e das máquinas oleadas e prepotentes de uma maquinação diabólica que perdurará para além das nossas vidas.

    Vão ficar na história pelas razões mais horrorosas.

    Esta praga veio para perdurar.

    Não consigo perceber porque não aparecem os exemplares do livro de Ga , mais os DVDs.... Ou será que constituindo arguidos atrás de arguidos é uma artimanha para evitar de os entregar, por terem sido destruídos?

    Também não entendo as razões pelas quais os nossos Cidadãos , constituídos arguidos pela máquina diabólica, não os processam!!!!!!

    É que já são mesmo muitos . Porquê ??????

    Sempre foi de mais e cada vez mais se amontoam as razões para aqueles destruidores serem processados e castigados por tudo o que têm dito e feito.

    Não percebo tanta calmaria aqui neste meu País.

    Não percebo porque não consigo mesmo entender.

  2. Let's see if I understand this because there is a grey area that is not available for everyone: G-Team is the most powerful team and somehow someone that was related to Gamble established this connection to press David Payne to cooperate?

    Were the Paynes dragged for a homicide cover up without their will? Was because of Payne that a Social Worker was sent to PDL? To make pressure on the Paynes? Had David any handicap in his personal life that could be used against him?

    Was this family that came forward to change this police statement? Did Fiona flight to Lisbon for Gonçalo's book injunction against her will?

    Is this the meaning of "submit" David Payne's to Gamble's .... it just slides in perfectly"?

    Who invite the McCanns over to a "PdL party" anyway? If David was not in charge after all... who was?

    How do you know the names of G-Team and those that flew from PdL after the bomb has exploded? Were those that are in those special time sheets?

    Mackenzie, Fosterand so on....? Do you know what are these persons professions, who are they related with in England? Jez and his wife have plenty of media contacts. Fish in the water.... was rachel that call media or was Jez?

  3. Anon
    Jun 17, 2011 6:21:00 PM

    1. The G-Team is certainly the most powerful team. It was the team that soon took over “operations” by itself.
    Let’s suppose you own the most fashionable night-club in town. The G-Team is made up of those people who you’ve TOLD the bouncer to let them in as they arrive. People he shouldn’t even DARE address, besides a submissive and polite “Good evening, please do come in…” . He should just let them in as politely and as respectfully as he can. That’s how powerful they are.
    David Payne earned, for reasons that are not relevant here, a right to “enter” your “nightclub” and has earned the right to “invite” people to come along with him. Those that are with him, deserve the same trust and respect he does.

    2. Payne’s were not dragged into anything. What most likely happened was that before the fact that he had just accidentally killed a child, he most likely called the “party-coordinator” (G-Team or O-Team?) and asked him “Houston, we have a problem, what do I do?”
    The Payne family has acted in free-will from the first moment, in SELF-INTEREST. Fiona flew to Lisbon in SELF-INTEREST. The same reason David Payne has tried to fade into the background: SELF-INTEREST.

    3. "Submit" David Payne's to Gamble's .... means that Gamble told Payne and the T’-Team what to do, and not the other way around

    4. We believe that the Payne’s invited the McCanns. David knew the “owner” of the “nightclub” and obtained permission” to “invite” the McCanns. Swinging groups are made of people who trust each other, and newcomers have to pass an “initiation rite” more or less complex, according to the importance of people that already belong to it.

    5. The names of the G-Team are easily obtainable from the internet. All is required is patience and objectiveness in the research.

    6. At this point in time, it’s irrelevant who called the media. What is important is that the media was called, and that the media “accepted” the call. About the professions, as said, all the information we’ve obtained, was public. It might now have been deleted, but when we searched, it was there for all to see.

    Thank you for your comment.

  4. Let me thank you.

    Now I understand the meaning the "women was dancing till late while children were in the resort (supervised by ...') " nightclub? hum....

    There's more in the box than we're expecting...

    I always had a feeling that people in the back of McCanns could have some influential and connections but that were not the related with royal people in England. You know people from good home. So now I know, why Cameron let McCann's down (when they thought they were doing a great job.... asking a review).

    What we read in the newspapers about McCanns and what is really going on with them in England are not the same thing, so they might be facing hard least I hope so! I always said McCanns fall will be in UK not here!

  5. New people who seek to enter a "swinging circle" surelly must be 100% analysed by the other members, they have to make sure that those new comers are beyond any doubt, that they can be trusted and allowed in. Imagine what damage an infiltrated reporter could do in a group constituted by high profile influential people, what a scandal, how many lives and reputations torn to pieces!

  6. This lawsuit against Dr.Sargento, H.Carvalho and M.L.Goucha must be from someething that happened long ago. Are they being sued separetely or in the same complaint? If it is only one lawsuit, then it must be about one of the programmes they did together, and it must have been in TVI (Goucha is in TVI), "Crime, disse ele" section, included in Goucha's morning programme, "Você na TV". I say it must be from long ago because H. Carvalho and Paulo Sargento have not been in TVI for some time. H. Carvalho is working for SIC, and Dr. Sargento has not been a guest in Goucha's show since then.
    I'm only guessing here, but maybe it is about a computer generated animation that Dr. Sargento made a long time ago, that showed the events og the night of the 3rd May, according to the Tapas9 statements and that, of course, proved how highly unlikely it would be, not to say impossible, for an abduction to have taken place in those circumstances.
    Time will tell...but if the McCanns and their undescribable lawyer Duarte really dared to mess with those 3 gentlemen, they have no idea what they got themselves into! They are people who won't be messed aroung lightly, oh dear, get cover, the shit will hit the fan!!!

  7. Let the McCann's sue more people, special in Portugal. That is going to work against them and their despicable lawyer who is losing the credit every day. Her reputation is so low, that nobody wants to be associated with her name. Who are the McCann's to sue a journalist like hernani de carvalho who cover some war theaters and trough his cronics in tvs , exposed many crimes against child's, letting the country being more aware and off-course, the children more protected against who abuse them? Most of the time, were the parents who abuse their children. McCann's don't like that fact. On Madeleine case, reallity seems not to be different then what large studies show to us.

  8. No wonder they were going to get away with everything. If it wasn't for this blog, we would all be insisting on the negligence lie. Textusa, you've shown to have a lot of courage. Not for going against the McCanns, but for being a lonely and a different voice, going against the mainstream, on which, speaking for myself, we were all believers of. They lied, and we perpetuated their lies. Not intentionally, but we did. There were some who've pretended to be "friends" but now we can see that they were intentionally fooling us into believing the McCanns.
    Thank you Tetusa. History will hopefully give you full credit.


  9. OK
    so now I have researched the internet to find the mystery guessed who jetted off the following day. Someone who you would not have guessed would holiday in PdL Ocean Club during that week. It all seems to fall into place nicely with this theory. Hats off.


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.