Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Tapas Quiz Night, Question #7/?

Question: Who was able to steal from the Ocean Club, or, more precisely, from its Tapas Bar, at a time exactly when the eyes of the whole wide world were upon that exact resort?  
Answer. Arséne Lupin, or maybe not. It's a trick question, as we honestly don’t know who really did it, but the whole thing is so preposterous that if you did happen to answer something ridiculous as Bugs Bunny, we’ll give you the full marks.  

Maddie was abducted on May 3rd, so her parents say, and as both friends and strangers and do seem to confirm.

The latest person that we got to know that did exactly that, thanks to our own private and exclusive Insane, was a Mr. Philip Edmonds, apparently a stranger to the couple, who has, so says he, a picture of Maddie taken on that exact same day.

One has to wonder if it was taken after the famous “last picture” by the pool.

If it was, then it should be the one to get all the publicity instead of that one, shouldn’t it? Obviously, to protect the privacy of this gentleman’s sons, their faces should be blurred upon its publication.

We, on the other hand, say that if we must use the term “abduction” to describe what happened that night to Maddie, then it was God who used a human hand to abduct the child from this life and call her to His side.

On May 3rd, Maddie left this world, our world, and the world was violently shaken by its collars and made sure that it was fully aware of that exact fact. If you didn't know, then the world media, led by the British Media (who knew exactly what they were doing) made sure you got to know. We may then allow for some ignorance in the first 24 hours, but as of May 5th there wasn’t a living soul that didn’t turn his/her eyes towards PdL.

On May 6th, all those not included as "living souls", such as those that had worked the whole previous day in some mine, or in any other job, or situation, that excluded any social contact with the outside world, joined the remainder of us in this collective hysteria of looking for a girl that, unfortunately for her, hadn’t gone that far after all.

And what else happened on May 6th, the peak of attention from the whole wide world on PdL? A Tapas dinner, of course. And what is so peculiar about this Tapas dinner, that is worth mentioning?

Well, as the world was explaining where EXACTLY allegedly the parents and friends sat when the alleged abductor did the alleged dastardly deed, a person was able to steal, I repeat, STEAL, two meals from the Tapas Bar! Who dared such, ask you? We don’t know who, but whoever it was s/he had guts. That, we must give it to him or her. First, s/he stands in line to be able to reserve, and it seems to have been the 4th in line.

He reserved, show the records, a meal for 2, for 7:20.

Provides NO room number, and then does one defying move, which, for us, makes us think that it was Arsene Lupin indeed, that FICTITIOUS gentleman-thief, that pulled this off: he goes and identifies himself as “Thomas Cook”, the booking agency that competes directly with Mark Warner at the OC!!

Is that a daring move or what?!? It certainly is. Either folly or utter bravado!!

At 7:20 Mr. “T. Cook” arrives, is CHECKED and allocated table #209. He then has his meal, accompanied by someone, certainly a partner in crime, or, possibly a damsel to be seduced by being swept off her feet by the luxury offered by the Tapas Bar.

Done his evil deed, exits, never to be seen, never to be billed. What audacity!! You think I’m making this up? Check it out for yourself:
Unless, of course, this piece of paper is anything BUT a reservation sheet, and its only purpose, as with all other “Tapas Reservation Sheets” was to provide the idea that there were dinners that never happened.

But that would mean that both the guests whose names appear on these sheets, as well as the OC Staff who wrote them up and handed them to the PJ were in on something, wouldn’t it?

Finally, there’s only one thing that makes us be skeptical about Mr. “Thomas Cook” being Mr. Arsene Lupin. The latter is totally and completely FICTIONAL, while we believe that the first IS NOT.

We think that Mr. “Thomas Cook” happens to be real, very real. And not only real, but REALISTIC, because s/he chose not to be involved in this whole HOAX and made sure that his/her real name didn’t appear.

Post Scriptum: My personal situation remains unchanged, unfortunately. So please do continue to consider me "absent". Each day is just each day. Thank you so much for your messages of love and support. They've been a decisive strengthening factor, and show how caring humanity can be. Thank you.


  1. This is the first record of anyone else staying at OC who was not a Mark Warner guest eating at Tapas. And then we don't get a name attached to it.

    Those booking forms were a big mistake not 'allowing' anyone else from any other travel company, or more likely an apartment owner who would not have a package with dinner included, into the Tapas bar.

  2. Slowly but steadily you're convincing the skeptical and quieting down the fanciful. These booking sheets are evidently made-up. Only by own strong will can things be seen differently. What I'm thinking is that all these people trusted in those that took charge of things, and if I was in their shoes I would have trusted them too. And if I were in their shoes today, I would not be happy to have trusted.

  3. It appears to be little more than a provisional booking, and is probably for Thomas Cook staff or reps who are actually shown on the accommodation list, by the way.

    I don't know why you have to create a big drama out of everything

  4. "It APPEARS to be little more than a provisional booking, and is PROBABLY for Thomas Cook staff or reps who are actually shown on the accommodation list, by the way."

    As you said for the umpteenth time - if you believe there was provisional booking, or that there is evidence that happened, then produce it. You haven't. Getting casual about it doesn't prove anything.

    Or, for you, the words "appears" and "probably" make them facts?

    Please do what you demand others to do and refer to the PJ Files to justify your conclusions.

  5. Anon
    Sep 14, 2011 11:13:00 AM

    Are you implying that the OC Staff is lying when they say that the Tapas was very requested by the guests due to its limited capacity (they even had to queue up)? Because from what you're saying, it seems that the T. Cook Reps got preferencial treatment. Because if they were able to reserve, then 2 other guests were not, which doesn't seem neither reasonable nor a sound commercial practice by either the OC pr T. Cook. And I don't think MW would be happy to know that their guests wouldn't be able to be seated at Tapas because T. Cook personnel took over some seats.

  6. What thriving restaurant could survive with so few covers? Usually restaurants book each table more than once or even twice per evening.

    Whoever had the idea to make up these booking sheets never owned a restaurant or worked in one.

  7. "Are you implying that the OC Staff is lying..."

    What YOU are implying is that if the whole of the Portuguese police force were so easily fooled about such a simple thing as there being no Tapas meals, and completely failed to spot a huge cover-up involving OC staff and other guests, then they were as stupid and incompetent as the McCanns allege.

    If you agree with the McCanns on that, it's no wonder this site hasn't been taken down!

  8. Insane, when GA started to understand what really was going on, he was pulled off the case. The "huge cover-up" you refer, wasn't easy to spot, taking into account that it was pushed by those everyone thought that their job was to serve justice. The PJ were neither stupid nor incompetent, and at least had someone with balls who came forward, unlike all counterparts in Britain, who've sold their souls for what we don't exactly understand, but, hopefully, will remain in their conscience (and yours by the way) for the rest of their (and your) days.

  9. Are you seriously suggesting Mr Amaral agrees with any of this nonsense, or would have come to these ridiculous conclusions had he remained on the case?

    Strange - he spent 6 months on the case - yet not one mention in his book of mythical tapas dinners, or tables that didn't exist. He must be so touched by you all writing off his efforts and trying to make him look like an idiot

  10. Anonymous Sep 14, 2011 10:17:00 PM said:

    "...will remain in their conscience..."

    In order that something remains in someone's conscience, they have to have a conscience in the first place.

  11. Ross

    They do have a conscience. It's what keeps them coming here.

  12. Insane at Sep 14, 2011 10:30:00 PM
    First, as we’ve said repeatedly, we owe loyalty only to the truth. We don’t want or seek GA’s approval. Your abusive and nonsensical accusation of us suggesting anything about his agreement on whatever is written on this blog is as ridiculous as yourself.
    Second, for someone to claims such precision with detail, GA was not on the case for 6 months. He was for 5, almost to the day, as he picked the case up on May 4th, and was exonerated on Oct 2nd.
    Third, the McCanns were named arguidos on Sep 7th. This status is not an end result of an investigation, but rather a constitutional right of the citizen to be warned that there is an investigation pending against him. As soon as the Police find that someone is suspect of committing an infraction or a crime, is obliged to notify the person of that. There obviously are exceptions to this during the investigation phase but basically, in Portugal, you may not know all the diligences done by the Police on a case pertaining yourself, but you’re entitled to know that you’re being investigated.
    This to say, only on Sep 7th, was the case formally focused on the McCanns. Only then did the investigation start to prioritize, formally, on the couple’s possible direct involvement.
    As you know, against all logic to what I’ve just said, the McCanns left, or rather were pulled out, of the Country, two after they were made arguidos.
    Out of your 6 months, allow only for 1 month, without the presence of the main suspects, for GA to be able to uncover this huge cover-up.
    Very soon, whoever was pulling the strings, realized that GA wasn’t a person to be tamed. Unlike his counter parts in the British Police, namely, but not only, in the Leicester area, he kept to the oath he made when he accepted office, and just wouldn’t concede to external pressures or to concessions of personal favours. Only that can explain, for example, why CFT’s original statement was never sent to the PJ.
    Here, one word of recognition to the other PJ inspectors that stood by their verticality during the trial in Lisbon. On the operational level, the PJ showed the world that honor is still in use.
    The fact that GA showed no signs of submission made it clear that if started to investigate fully the McCanns he would soon uncover the suspicious behavior of the OC, the guests, the ex-Pats, the media, the British Police and both Portuguese and British Governments. Naturally, and understandably, was taken off the case.
    Lastly, we admire the man, respect his professionalism, envy his courage and fully understand the pressures he was subjected to as well as the consequent limiting implications to the accomplishment of his mission. If that is your definition of an idiot, then GA is, in our book, one of the biggest we’ve seen. You, on the other hand, by the same definition, are one major intellectual philosopher.

  13. A lot was made by the BHs of a statement by the PJ saying that they made a mistake to 'arrest' or make the MCanns arguidos. I think the words 'too soon' have been omitted. Maybe if they had waited just a little longer the arrest would have been because charges could be made.

    There must have been some pressure on the PJ to make them arguidos when they did if they were not really ready to do so.

  14. A censored comment from Insane
    “Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 14, 2011 5:07:00 PM:
    @ anon(and (censored)) 2.12pm
    Produce any evidence that shows that booking is in any way suspicious.
    This is s bit different to the ''blood'' spot that wasn't - there are forensic reports which illustrate that. (censored).

    @ Anon 2.35
    Not implying anything.(censored)
    Also, you don't seem to understand how this works. It would appear that the tapas bar had an agreement with Mark Warner to provide dinner for up to 20 covers per night. What makes you think there was anything to prevent them accepting bookings from Thomas Cook over and above this? There is nothing to indicate anyone got preferential treatment.
    This entry on the booking sheet, three days after Madeleine disappeared, is meaningless. (censored).”

    The fact that Insane insists on the production of “any evidence that shows that booking is in any way suspicious” can only mean that he suffers from a reading deficit syndrome. Either that or he’s clearly demonstrating that he’s not minimally interested in any kind of discussion within reason.

  15. Insane’s last comment:

    Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 15, 2011 7:42:00 PM

    “Do not censor my posts. Either reproduce them in full, or do not print them at all.


    Patience has its limits, and enough is enough.

  16. The Tapas list for me, were made up and will be very interesting to understand up to each point the persons named on that lists know the mccann's. The carpenters show, yes, they know the mccann's. The way mr. Edmond defend the mccann's shows, they were not strangers for him. The silence from all that persons speak volumes and I just can presume, their names appear on the lists with them agreeing with that. That's why they are struggled by what is coming up...they helped the cover up of a crime involving the dead of a child. Wonder, which motives were behind that. I just see as a motif, something very personal, very sensible and subjected to some kind of recrimination for the majority of the society, where I include some close relatives of these people. As a motif, I just see the swing. The swing connected all that people. The Tapas 9, meet others in PDL, enlarging the group. They cover up the dead of a child to cover up the swing.
    The clue to solve the case, lies on the managers of the resort, the Tapas 9, the Tapas list and the nannies. There is no many people involved, but who was involved, was forced by the circumstances. Now I understand why PJ said, they want to do the reconstruction with all guests in the resort, not only the Tapas 9. Police suspected something was going on inside the resort and that could explain why the body was concealed. If was the swing...wonder if is it legal for MW to allow such activities in a family hotel. People can do it in their houses, under their privacy. A hotel is not a house. MW will end up with all his resorts investigated .
    What I find amazing is the involvement of the Anglican priest to cover the cover up. Did he know the mccann's from previous holidays, due to the same activities?

  17. On a closer look of the Tapas sheet - somebody really needed to go over and over the date with a pen ... running out of ink or modifying something??

  18. It seems to me that even if it were for TCook Reps, then it would have been written below the other names and not on the end of the line. It also seems that the line has been corrected, that there was a name there in fact.
    About Insane, thank you Text. He can go back and laugh and scorn all he wants in his blog, or make another infantile attempt on Joana's.

  19. Foi mais de uma Pessoa a preencher esta lista o que ja por si e estranho.
    Temos diferentes formas de escrever as horas:
    7h, 7:20, 7h45. 9.00. Diferem na forma e no número 7.
    Temos diferentes forms de escrever o zero. As vezes e tracado. O zero tracado nao aparece nas listas anteriores a Quinta-feira (3 de Maio), mas aparece com regularidade nas listas posteriores ( sexta-feira, Domingo, segunda-feira). Parece que nao foi so a maddie que desapareceu a 3 de Maio, tambem desapareceu Quem fazia o booking dos jantares no Tapas. Porque? E a questao. Interessante seria podermos comparar as listas do periodo de ferias dos McCann com listas anteriores e com as de depois de 3 de Maio. Sera que encontravamos zeros tracados e a mesa confusao na marcacao das horas, com nomes apagados, cortados ou modificados?
    Tambem se nota que Quem inscreveu TCook, escreveu 2 pess em vex de PAX . Essa mesma Pessoa tera inscrito os Zelewitz as 8:15, porque escreveu o t da mesma maneira , e pessoas em vez de PAX.
    Os Williams Sao de MW ou de TC? Se sao de TC nao se percebe porque nao tem a referencia TCook. Se sao MW, ja nao deviam estar no resort porque regressavam a 5 de Maio.
    Muita materia para esclarecer sem duvida.

  20. A translation of Anon's Sep 16, 2011 4:14:00 PM comment made in Portuguese, which I think is very interesting:

    "It was more than one person to fill this list which in itself is strange.
    We have different ways of writing the hour:
    7 am, 7:20, 7:45 a.m.. 9.00. They differ in shape and in the number 7.
    We have different forms of writing zero. Sometimes it’s stroked through. A stroked zero doesn’t appear on the lists before Thursday (May 3), but appears regularly in subsequent lists (Friday, Sunday, Monday). It seems that it was not only Maddie that disappeared on May 3, but also disappeared Who did the booking for Tapas’ dinners. Why? That’s the question. It would be Interesting to be able to compare the lists during the time of the McCann’s vacation with the lists before and after May 3. Would we find stroked zeros, confusion in writing the hours, with names deleted, cut or modified?
    (note from translator: I believe that the words “e a mesa” (and the table) are typos that were left in the phrase after its possible rewriting, something that happens to all of us who type… if the interpretation is abusive, my apologies to the author)
    Also noted that Who wrote TCook, wrote 2 “pess” instead of PAX. This same person wrote in the Zelewitz at 8:15, because the “t” is written the same way, and “pessoas” instead of PAX.
    Are the Williams MW or TC? If they’re TC then it’s not clear why they have no TCook reference. If they’re MW, they no longer should have been at the resort because they should’ve returned on May 5.
    No question that there’s a lot of issues to clarify."

  21. Is Insane " Muratfan"? Don't he claim he has his own blog where everything is discussed? "Muratfan" use exactly the same strategy as Insane, questioning what people posts on other blogs, without adding anything to the conversation and without giving factual arguments. when contradicted, reacts exposing his ruddiness . "muratfan" claims he his supported by Carter-ruck. If he is Insane, we can understand why he spent so much time here. He is being payed for that. Is that where the money from Madeleine's Fund is spent? Is that the way Madeleine is being searched?
    I really find some similarities on this two characters, Insane and Muratfan.

  22. Agapito, who had Thursday as his day off and starts on Friday at 9:30 has a calligraphy very similar to who write the consumptions on the Tapas list for Tuesday and Wednesday. Look at the way he signs Agapito on his statement. The same "g" is in "sangria" and "Agua". Looks like, he didn't write more the consumptions after Thursday. Were the tapas workers changed from Friday 4? Looks like. If so... Why they were changed? To avoid contact with journalists?
    The Sunday list looks like a pile of contributors writing to set up the booking list, or a single writer who has the mission of use different handwriting to confuse the reader( police). If we look attentively, the first booking "reop" has the same "R" used by Pedro Ribeiro, a waiter in the Millennium bar who had also Thursday as his day off. Looks like workers from the millennium were used to write the Tapas list after May 3. Just my interpretation.
    Picking that from the files... Jose novo statement: ...."On that day (04 May 2007), at around 08H00, the witness' superior (George Robin Crossland) went to his home, asking him to compose a "document" in Portuguese informing of the disappearance of the female child from the resort, for distribution to the nearby population. ....The witness immediately proceeded to do what had been requested, having gone to his place of work, where he produced the "document" translated from a missive, written in English that had been handed to him by George Crossland." How many other things were asked that way, very early?

  23. To the reader with the requested unpublished comment, we would like to thank you so much for your support and we would also like to tell you that we fully agree with you.

  24. -------" As for the kitchen employee, MARIA MANUELA ANTONIO JOSE, given that she was not in service yesterday [neither] during the dinner [nor] when the disappearance of the child occurred, she was not interviewed. ---------". -PJ FILES.

    Was that the same Manuela who gave an interview to SIC TV saying she was working on the barbecue, 3 meters away from the Tapas 9 table, on Thursday 3?
    There is no two "manuelas" working in the Tapas. If is the same person, she have to be recalled to explain why she lied and to who she lied- the police or SIC?


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.