Friday, 6 March 2015

All the world's a stage (3/3)


Foreword: As this post was lengthy it was posted in 3 parts. Today, we are publishing the third and final part.

However, this week we realised that what was left to be published was still too big for a single post.

Because of that we have decided to take a part of it out, although originating from some of Stephen Carpenter's words, it takes us to a totally different subject. If there aren't any surprises, this will be published next week as a post called “Luz's secret service”.


6. The Laundryman plot

Laundryman, Mário Marreiros, had to be discredited.

In the exact same way the Greyhairman plot was to make Raj Balu and Neil Berry win credits the Laundryman plot is to make Mário Marreiros, the laundryman, lose his.


The fact that he would have told the PJ that he saw a guest, Neil Berry, in an odd place at an odd hour, had to be countered. A shadow of suspicion had to be put to over him.

Then, whatever he had said, his words must be taken by PJ as those of someone trying to shrug the guilt off his shoulders and doing his best to point fingers at others, in this case Berry, to distract.

The laundryman makes his appearance on the stage, via a mysterious van. A van that appears completely out of context when Carpenter is describing where his apartment is located.

“DC Ferguson: That’s true, I see.

Carpenter: The bushes were all around here, we were on the ground floor, it was all open here, and that’s why I now think (inaudible) you know, that the idea that, humm... for which I mentioned in the interrogation that there was a van from the laundry that parked and other things.”

So he sees a van parked in the cul-de-sac. Is that mysterious?

The true mystery about the van, as will be seen, is why is the van has ever become mysterious.

We believe that some or most of Ocean Clubs administrative services, like maintenance, laundry and cleaning are based in the building in which Fiji Palms is part of. Fiji Palms is where Carpenter is staying in apartment FP02.

We know that the building has the indoor pool, the crèche and the 24 hour reception. So we find it perfectly natural for that cul-de-sac to be used by vehicles used by the Ocean Club for its client support services.

Why does Carpenter say it’s a van from the laundry? He speaks not of any logo on it or of any other mark that would identify it being used for laundry. Is it even from the Ocean Club? As we'll see later Carpenter doesn’t see anyone near it, drive it, load it or unload it. So why call it a laundry van?

We will come back to the van later.

Now let’s see what Carpenter has to say about Laundryman.

As we said in the previous week, Balu and Berry “sent” him looking for Greyhairman and then they exited the stage.

It’s in these searches for Greyhairman that Carpenter “finds” Laundryman.

DC Ferguson: …It is likely that my papers are not in sequence because this page is more about the details of the search of the apartments near Gerry's apartment and speaks of the laundryman.

Carpenter: Yes, yes.

DC Ferguson: And of the reconnaissance done.

Carpenter: I remember that, yes.

DC Ferguson: You spoke with a man who later showed you a garage where there was a bed.”

Carpenter says he finds this garage together with Dave Shelton, whose name he doesn't remember although having spent quite a long time with him:

Carpenter: … I can't remember the name of the individual, who I also met by chance, and who was doing a little of translator, what was his name again, who helped to open the doors.

DC Ferguson: Was it John HILL?

Carpenter: No, John Hill was a Mark Warner employee, I forgot his name, but he...humm also knew the local Estate Agent and different people who helped to get the keys of the owners or potential renters, some of whom were on holiday.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: And once the garage door was opened, it wasn’t a garage for single a car, it was like a "capsule", that went back about six or nine metres as it became larger where there was a bed in the corner, and all else, and it was when we were looking for this, searching this, the English man with greying hair who I didn’t know who he was, but who had explained to me.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: Humm... this garage belonged to a Portuguese man, the laundryman.

DC Ferguson: Yes.”

Dave knows the garage. Dave knows it belongs to a Portuguese. Dave knows it belongs to the Laundryman.

Now is the time to explain why we’re certain that Laundryman is Mário Marreiros. The reason is very simple, there are 3 people working in Ocean Club’s laundry and 2 of them are women: Vera Arez and Sílvia Cravinho.

The only laundryman Ocean Club has is Mário Marreiros.

Dave must know him and his son because he answers the question put to him by Carpenter about who lives in the garage:

Carpenter: And while we entered there [the garage] I asked who lived there, he replied that his [the Laundryman's] son lived there and then there were toys because I was concentrated on the fifty year old English man [Greyhairman], this one is Portuguese [Laundryman], it was only afterwards when I later thought about what we were searching for, it didn't occur to me but I think it was because of this that I mentioned in my statement two weeks later, because I think there were some distortions.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: Of course with Murat, there is Murat and the Russian individual, you know....I thought that well, we might well be looking for the totally wrong person and the fact that a bed existed in the garage and some children's toys.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: I thought, ohhh...it’s worth mentioning this and that's the reason I mentioned this in my statement.”

A garage with a bed and children’s toys out of context lying around and this doesn’t raise red flags when looking for a possible abducted little girl?

No, because Carpenter was concentrating on Greyhairman, remember? Why Dave doesn't react to this as one would expect him to, we don't know.

Now, here Carpenter makes a big mistake. Garages in Portugal are commodities. Only in the last 25 years have buildings, all over Portugal, started to have communal parking spaces in their basements. Before that, there weren't that many cars and there were always enough parking spaces in the streets.

This lack of garages is aggravated in tourist regions like the Algarve. Buildings tend to exploit all their space, so are all made up of apartments which can be sold for seasonal use, or rented for holidays.

Garages are a luxury. Very, very rare. In the Algarve even more so. One may find communal garages but individual ones are very hard to find. Not that there aren't any, in fact we found 3:


We don't know if there any others but certainly anyone living in such a garage would be common knowledge in Luz.

The garage described seems to be quite big but is too small to be communal. And a bed, cupboards and toys in a communal garage is something completely unrealistic.

In the area Carpenter describes he searches, around block 5, there are no individual garages. Only a communal one at the end of Rua dr Agostinho da Silva, in a building that is not part of Ocean Club and it doesn't look like “Laundryman's garage”:


So we would really like to know exactly where this “Laundryman's garage” was located and who supplied the keys to open it.

Then Carpenter makes the link between Laundryman and the mystery van:

DC Ferguson: Fine, now (inaudible) describe to me the Portuguese man, the laundryman, yes?

Carpenter: Yes.

DC Ferguson: I am certain that I read about this at the beginning, which (inaudible)?

Carpenter: I think that after, and coincides after with the fact that he was the laundryman and the van parked there, because as I have already explained, we were here in a small street above here which linked to the main road and to everything beside here on top, the rest was all pathways and I think that on two or three occasions I thought...this is a dead end road, there was this van was parked there, I never saw anyone and once more assumed that it would be the cleaning staff and only this thought coincided with the presence of the laundryman, that is if there was any answer to be given in relation to the connection between the van parked there and the laundryman.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: Murat here, I thought and the laundry thing here.

DC Ferguson: Yes

Carpenter: And because of it once more a reason why I mentioned the subject.”

A van that he never sees being used. It’s just a parked van:

DC Ferguson: This is the part where you mention that there was a van, and as you said was parked at the back of Robert Murat’s garden, and you never saw anyone use the van, but you remember assuming that it had something to do with the cleaning staff.

Carpenter: Yes, to transport the bed linen and towels.

DC Ferguson: Yes. It says here that you never saw anyone drive it, you know only that you saw it parked, did you ever notice that it was missing or do you remember always seeing it there'

Carpenter: Humm, no...it was not always there, it was about two or three times that I saw it.”

What would be strange would be not to see any vehicle parked there. The cul-de-sac has parking spaces!


The Google Maps image shows cars parked there. And Google Maps' Street View shows vehicles on it.



One, a van. Could it be “Carpenter’s van”?

But then comes the surreal moment:

DC Ferguson: Of what age did the laundry man appear to be?

Carpenter: Humm, I don’t remember clearly what I said, but obviously sometimes Europeans appear being older, because…

DC Ferguson:... (inaudible) the sun.

Carpenter: Yes with the sun, and a bit out of character, was what I stated in the statement (inaudible).

DC Ferguson: I’m trying to locate the front pages where you mentioned, but there is no description.

Carpenter: Forty five to fifty years old, I think.

DC Ferguson: I'm only thinking what age the man would have, the man that I met was difficult to say, but he would have been of an age to be able to have a small child living in the garage or it could be expected that the had a grown up child.

Carpenter: Oh, I think he would have been of an age able, you know.... of eighteen years, twenty or twenty two years old living in the back of the garage because it had large cupboards and other things, but to live in a garage it requires someone of eighteen years old or more, for a question of safety and even because it isn’t the best way to live.

DC Ferguson: No. Then as you say the children's toys seemed to you to be out of context'

Carpenter: Yes, yes.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: Yes, mainly because I’m thinking of someone aged eighteen or slightly older.”

Fascinating. Simply amazing. Carpenter describes a man he’s never seen but says “the man that I met” is 45 to 50 yrs old and skin darkened by the Sun.


He then tries to explain how he gets to the 45/50 number: because he estimates that whoever is living there is 18 to 22 yrs old so Laundryman must be around 45 to 50 yrs old.

Then why the talk about the Sun making people looking older than they really are? Was it or was it not a pure mathematical estimation?

He did say in 2007 “the man that I met was difficult to say. To be very clear about this phrase this is what is in the PJ Files in Portuguese: “o homem que eu conheci era difícil de dizer”.

So where, when and under what circumstances did Carpenter meet Laundryman?

Didn’t we tell you that Carpenter was a fascinating man?

Maybe what he really meant to say was “the man that I was shown was difficult to say”. That would probably be more truthful.

But the irony of it all is that Marreiros, the laundryman, has said nothing to the PJ. The Black Hats cannot know because Marreiros was heard in Portuguese by a Portuguese. No need for anyone else to be present.

We are almost certain that Murat was trying to find out what Marreiros had said on May 8 when Gonçalo Amaral says the following in his book: “He [Robert Murat] has tried, in a furtive way, to look at the police files”.

Gonçalo Amaral must have based his words on what Inspector Pedro Varanda had to say on May 11, 2007: “It should be mentioned that this suspicion would be further consolidated, following the fact that I became aware that ROBERT MURAT tried furtively and insistently to look at the various procedural pieces that are part of the present inquiry, while the signatory looked at them, in order to carry out the inquiry of DIANNE WEBSTER.”

Dianne Webster was heard for the second time on that day, Friday May 11, and we now know that it was on the morning of that day that Murat was put on the PJ's radar. His every move was from then on being observed with the utmost attention. Thus the report from Inspector Pedro Varanda.

As we said, it's our opinion that when Marreiros says “he does not know of anything suspicious that could be related to the events” he's not saying what he saw simply because he just wanted to distance himself from the case.

But, after having heard Carpenter and all about the Laundryman's garage, son and out of context children's toys, the PJ just had to go back and speak to Marreiros again. This is what we think happened:

“Where’s the garage your son lives in?” they asked.

“Eh? What?!” he answered.

“You know the one with the bed, big cupboards and children’s toys..” they insisted.

“What???” he answered again. “Who has said that?!” he asked.

“A British guest says he saw children’s toys in a garage where your son lives” they answered.

“A British guest told you I had a garage? Is that so? And a son living there with children's toys? The 'Bifes' want to make me a patsy?! Well then, let me tell you about a 'Bife' guest who I saw the evening the girl disappeared, where exactly I saw him and I'll even tell you who he is because I saw him again the next day parading himself…”

If Carpenter hadn’t brought up Laundryman, we would never have known about Berry being in the stairs.

That’s what happens when you over-egg an over-egged pudding that wasn't a pudding in the first place and so didn't need any eggs.


7. Miscellaneous Feet-in-the-mouth

But what makes Carpenter fascinating doesn’t end in the 3 failed plots. During the course, or discourse of both his statements (one on May 17, 2007, the other on April 21, 2008 and both mixed up in the latter) the complexity of all the inner plots gets, in our opinion, the better of Carpenter.

In an attempt to connect the irreparably disconnected and patch up what is visibly shredded, Carpenter tries with this and that detail to bring some sort of what he thinks to be realism to a an absurd tale.

In doing so he fills his statement with things that it simply would have been better not said. The lapsus linguae.


7.1. The Carpenter family lapsus linguae

Has the reader noted that Carpenter leaves his apartment very early in the morning and doesn’t return to it? The closest he is to it is when he hears Murat’s voice but from then on he really seems to have had a busy day!

What did his family do all day? How did his family know what he was up to?

We don’t know.

The crèche records show no one from FP02 registered. There's a Lobster's page with no date that we're assuming to be that of May 4. It hasn't got anyone from FP02. The Jellyfish one of that day also doesn't have anyone from that apartment.

For all we know, or from what he seems to tell us, Carolyn Carpenter, 5 month FC and IC aged 3 and half spent their entire day holed up in their apartment with a view only of the thick vegetation of Murat's property.


7.2. The resort's welcome meetings lapsus linguae 

On the day of arrival:

DC Ferguson: Approximately at 16:15 of that same day [Saturday, April 28] you attended a crèche meeting …

(…)

DC Ferguson: “On Sunday, April 29, Carolyn and I participated in the Mark Warner’s tennis group morning coffee where I met Gerry, Kate, Julian, Curtis , Rachael, Annie, Georgina, Annie’s sister, and Ann, there were other tourists whose names I have forgotten. There were, in total, approximately 16 people in that morning coffee and tennis was one of the activities that you, or both of you signed up during the week”

Gerry contradicts this. He says tennis meeting was on Saturday and makes no mention of a crèche meetings:

“Subsequently, at 17h00 [Saturday, April 28], the whole group, including children, went to the TAPAS situated at the back of the apartments, next to the pool, to attend a welcoming committee arranged by MARK WARNER where they met with instructors in tennis and sailing and other resort employees, which ended at 18h30, glasses of sangria having been served to them.”

Welcome meetings are held by some holiday companies. They usually try to sell coach trips to tourist sites. But to explain how a crèche works?

What about childless couples? Did they have to listen?

Same about tennis. Those not playing the sport had to sit through it? Carpenter says that only 16 attended the tennis morning coffee but the question remains, so did Ocean Club hold small meetings for their activities?

And if one signed up for different activities that had meetings at the same time? Which one was one supposed to attend?

Jez Wilkins says he only joined tennis on Monday. So, no essential information given at that coffee morning. At least none that stopped him from taking part in the activity.

The welcome meetings are about general things that interest all. Holidays organised by Mark Warner in the Ocean Club sound more like boot-camp than a holiday.

And a crèche meeting? What for? Isn’t this kind of information given at the crèche itself to every guest who requested to know details about it?

Those who didn’t check in on Saturday couldn’t use crèche because of lack of appropriate knowledge?


7.3. The McCann's trip to the beach lapsus linguae 

DC Ferguson: …So during the week, you played tennis with Gerry about three times'

Carpenter: Ah ha.

DC Ferguson: On Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, it says here that you got on well, that he was of easy communication, was fun, he talked to you about golf which was his elected sport but wanted to improve his tennis during the week. On Sunday or Monday he sprained his ankle, but even like that he was able to play, and on Sunday morning he only played tennis with Kate, that you saw them both practising sport and they passed by you at the bar on the beach and that was Sunday or Monday around noon.”

Gerry and Kate only say they left the resort together on Tuesday after lunch on their famous trip to the beach. Not on Sunday nor on Monday. Carpenter says nothing about the kids being with them or about any buggy, double or single.

So what were the McCanns doing at the bar on the beach on Sunday or Monday around noon?


7.4. The tennis with Gerry lapsus linguae 

But what matters is that Carpenter says he plays with the McCanns 3 times: Sunday. Monday and Tuesday.

Then later on in the interview he says he also played on Thursday:

DC Ferguson: Do you remember if you saw them before the evening [of May 3]?

Carpenter: Humm... I think that we played tennis during the afternoon of Thursday.

DC Ferguson: Yes.

Carpenter: I'm not sure of which, I think it was on Thursday that there were four individuals with whom we used to have tennis lessons together, and I think that I mentioned that in my statement, I would say that it was on Thursday that we played tennis and I think that it was about that we talked in the Tapas bar area.

DC Ferguson: OK, if you played tennis with Gerry, do you have any idea at what time it was?

Carpenter: Humm... from two to four or from two until any hour in the afternoon, I think it coincided with leaving the kids in the crèche and picking them up.”

Why not just say that the only day he didn't play with Gerry was on Wednesday? After all, he played with him all other days.

What a fascinating memory Carpenter has.


7.5. The interactions with Edmonds lapsus linguae

DC Ferguson: “We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and I saw a man sitting at the table next to us with three children.

Carpenter: Yes.

DC Ferguson: “He was going to take a plane on the next day to Switzerland, as the children's mother lived there, I had never met him before that night but, he ended up joining us for a coffee, he was a MW tourist.”

and

DC Ferguson: And I imagine that your attention would have been turned to your family and (inaudible).

Carpenter: Yes, because we obviously had our two with us and we were on this side of the table, the individual alone with the three small children was here and IC was playing with them, so we were more or less a group if you wish to call it that, of which they were part, I think that all the ten members were there, and then we talked one with the others here and on the other side of the table.”

What Carpenter says above is like one saying “I took my cat to the local kennel and he had lots of fun playing with those dogs”.

Boys aged 6, 7 and 8 do not play with girls. At that age, boys play with boys and girls play with girls and each find the other gender unworthy of any sort of attention. That simple.

And much less with a 3 and half yr old one. Boys play with boys and in a foreign country, on their own, we’re certain the 3 Edmond boys played together and not with Carpenter’s daughter.

About Edmonds and his possible early departure from Praia da Luz we have challenged readers both in the blog and on Facebook to present any other evidence, besides Carpenter's words, that it happened.

We have yet to receive a single input to that effect.

About Philip Edmonds we will do a separate post. But as far as we know, Carpenter is the only source stating that Edmonds left earlier. He's not exactly the most reliable of sources. But he is a source who hasn't been denied. Because he's telling the truth or because to deny him would mean having to explain the absurdity of his claim?


7.6. The crossing of the street lapsus linguae

 When describing crossing Rua Dr Francisco Gentil Martins:

DC Ferguson: “When I crossed the road outside of the reception I remember there were cars parked, I remember having taken some time checking if I could cross the road because there were cars parked to my left and I was carrying IC in my arms. They were approximately six metres away from me and I calculate some (inaudible) metres from the back of Gerry's apartment, I don’t remember anything about these cars, it’s normal for cars to be parked at that place and in the morning no longer there.”

(…)

DC Ferguson: My wife Carolyn mentioned to me on the following day that she vaguely remembered having heard someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this after we had crossed the road in the exterior of MW reception and before entering our home. She does not remember from where the sound came or whether it was in a despairing tone, not paying more attention and only remembered the following day when we learned of Madeleine's disappearance

(…)

Carpenter: …the actual leaving of the restaurant, the way towards home, looking to my left to check that the road was clear and I didn't hear anything, humm.... Carolyn vaguely remembers hearing "Madeleine, Madeleine" and that was all until the next morning when I watched on TV.”

This is so ridiculous that it is quite amusing to debunk.

Carpenter forgets 2 things. First, that it’s 21:30 and that any car travels at that hour with their headlights on, so if any car was moving on that street at that time it would have been seen with sufficient anticipation and safety.


The second is that he’s British. A Brit when crossing a street instinctively looks right, never left. Because in UK that’s from where the immediate traffic is coming from. In Portugal one looks left, then right and then left again to cross the street. In the UK one looks right, then left and then right again.

To say he looked left is to go again instinct ingrained a whole lifetime. It doesn’t happen.

What Carpenter is trying to get across is that at 21:30 there’s no one on the street. Gerry, Jane, Jez and Bundleman have left the stage.

Carolyn’s Carpenter hearing “Madeleine, Madeleine” is just to add dramatic effects. No reasonable person on hearing that, wouldn’t go immediately to the police on hearing the news the next day.


7.7. The 4th (or 5th) man with little girl in arms lapsus linguae


But what really, really stands out in the crossing the street episode, is that we have ANOTHER man with a 3 and half yr old girl in his arms in Luz!!!

How many are there now? We have SY's Créche Dad, we have Smithman, we have the Portuguese on cellphone seen by some British woman (who was the reason for SY digging up West of Luz in June) and we now have Carpenter.

That’s 4. If we add Bundleman, there’s 5. All between 21:15 and 22:00. Amazing!


7.8. Carpenter the multi-tasker in a very, very small world lapsus linguae

Then Carpenter does a full circle by bringing up 2 characters from Jez Wilkins statement, Curtis and his girlfriend:

DC Ferguson: And then the Mark Warner staff, obviously it was before your return while you were still investigating, the staff had photos of Madeleine that you handed to an individual called Curtis and his girlfriend for them to distribute.

Carpenter: Ah ah, yes.”

Carpenter the translator-pusher, the searcher, the investigator and now the photo distributor. Very, very active guest we would say.


7.9. The “who-you-gonna-call” lapsus linguae

When he returns home and when on May 14, and decides to intervene in the process, who does he call?

DC Ferguson: Certainly you followed the development of the events on TV.

Carpenter: Yes.

DC Ferguson: Humm... then you say that on the 17th May you sent an email to Sky News about the description of an individual with about fifty of age, humm.... on the May 14 you caught the end of a report on the news which mentioned that Robert Murat had been referenced as a suspect.

Carpenter: Yes (inaudible) I spoke to the Sky reporter, I think Ian Woods, humm...did I put that there?

DC Ferguson: Its here, yes.”

Carpenter: Ah yes, yes and afterwards, humm...with Murat, well... I just caught a glimpse of him on TV, it was more my wife who phoned Philomena afterwards who then suggested that we contact the police support service.”

Now, from where does Philomena McCann’s phone number appear?


7.10. The missing v abducted or is it the other way around lapsus linguae

 Then we have Carpenter's outrage at the fact that people are treating Maddie as a missing girl instead of an abducted one:

DC Ferguson: On Saturday morning, or on May 5 you spoke to a BBC TV reporter.

Carpenter: Yes.

DC Ferguson: You told them that you thought that some of the reporters were being unfair and incorrect because they were treating the situation as that of a missing child and not of a child who had been abducted.”

But, wasn’t he one of the first to assume she was only missing when he says “afterwards we walked to the beach in the attempt to find the scent, whether she had strayed alone or had fallen into the sea.

If he really believed she was abducted, wouldn’t he have said instead whether the abductor had abandoned her at the beach or thrown her into the sea?  Did he also NOT buy the abduction?


7.11. The Carpenter family dinner lapsus linguae

One question must be asked: why didn't the Carpenters, on Thursday, May 3, use the same MW's night childcare services they used in the other nights?

Carpenter doesn't refer to any special event to celebrate that night. He doesn't give any reason for this change of routine.

No reason given for wanting to spend 2.5 hours in the Tapas having dinner with a baby and a toddler after on all other possible nights the family uses MW's available night childcare services.

But by coincidence, on the night Maddie vanishes, the Carpenter family decides, for no apparent reason, to spend, and we really mean spend time (between 19:00 and 21:30) and have dinner together.

And without a buggy, at least for the toddler as Carpenter says he carries her. The MW's double buggy Kate says she used for the family beach trip would have come in handy for this family wouldn't? Or were those only supplied to the McCanns?

But looking at the Tapas reservation sheet for that night, there are a couple of things that don't add up with the Carpenters:


Shouldn't the reservation be for “2 + 2” instead of the “2” that is there?

Shouldn't there be a “high chair” mentioned for the baby?

He doesn't speak of any high chair, or where the baby or their daughter IC and what they did during the 2.5 hours, in his colourful and detailed descriptions of the Tapas bar on the night of May 3. We're simply not buying the story about a 3 and half yr girl playing with 3 boys aged 6 to 8, and much less for that long.

Anyway, two adults, a baby and a toddler having a wholesome family time of fun for 150 minutes.

A small baby would not be able to sit in a high chair and certainly not for 2.5 hours and the 3 year old must have been stir crazy sitting at a table for that amount of time which shows it’s not realistic.


8. Questions

No, not from readers to us. Those are welcomed in the comments.

Questions from us to readers. To a very specific group of readers: our detractors.

They ask us: why would so many people lie for a group of people they didn't know from anywhere?

We return that question to them, so please consider it our question #1.

On our two previous posts “Bladderman” and “Planting a spy” we have put questions #2 and #3:

#2 - Why would 2 members of a group of 9, Gerry McCann and Jane Tanner lie for a person, Jez Wilkins, who Gerry had only supposedly met that week playing tennis and who Jane supposedly had never seen before?

#3 - Why would an ex-pat, Robert Murat, and a guest, Stephen Carpenter, who supposedly have never met each other have synchronised statements describing something that evidently didn’t happen?

At the end of the current lengthy 3-part post we ask 2 more questions:

#4 - Why would a guest, Stephen Carpenter, lie to protect other guests, Raj Balu and Neil Berry?

#5 - Why would a guest, Stephen Carpenter, lie to make an employee of the Ocean Club, Mário Marreiros, a suspect?

38 comments:

  1. Thankfully there is this human instinct which makes us inclined to over-egg the pudding when we lie or tell stories !
    Another fascinating insight into how they attempted to cover up the truth.Thanks Textusa and look forward to learning more about Luz's secret service. Also cant wait for the post relating to Edmonds

    ReplyDelete
  2. What Dave and Carpenter did (they didn't) was an invasion of property by 2 people who hadn't been given permission by owners.
    No time either to seek permission of owners to search their properties. The implication of the search was that an owner was a possible abductor.
    If keys given by Real Estate Agent then he would be held liable. No time for Dave to go to Real Estate each time they found a closed door. Is Carpenter implying Estate Agnet just gave all the keys he had to Dave? Without police there? Only if wanted to lose his licence...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Textusa, with regard to Stephen Carpenter and the picture of him and his family,newspaper article, local council selling land for new buildings,developments,Stephen offers to buy the proposed building, to stop new housing development he must be quite affluent in offering to purchase the land or NIMBYISM! Grey Haired man(SC) Portugal apartment, Raj Balu, Neil Berry laundry man, Marrieros.

    One other interesting point,is that on youtube videos of Madeline McCann a certain individual named as Michael Walker,offers comments in support for Team McCann,could this be a relative of Kate,Gerry's who was added to the list of drivers of a certain Silver Renault Scenic,who had sensed a foul smell from the rear of the car and stated it was the couples used babies nappies causing the Odour, pictures of him with Gerry on the bech,Portugal?
    Sandy Cameron(Gerry's brother in law?) also a named driver said this smell was blood from Beef and Sea fish residues spilt in a carrier bag, Kate had said the smell of Cadaver on her clothes was from, dealing with dead people as a GP?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 6 Mar 2015, 11:19:00,

      Thank you for your comment.

      Two clarifications.

      First one, it's Michael Wright and not Michael Walker.

      Second one, Kate McCann has never said "the smell of Cadaver on her clothes was from, dealing with dead people as a GP".

      Kate's trousers myth seems to have started with Nationa Enquirer and developed by Lori Campbell. No quote attributable to Kate herself.
      http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/77sep13/AllVoices_03_09_2013.htm.

      Delete
    2. but who is Michel walker from youtube? Hows he connected?

      Delete
  4. Thank you Textusa for another great post :)

    One or two things jump out at me, seeing it so clearly laid out there, so as usual I'll have a reread later when I have more time.

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Textusa, stand corrected about cadaver odour on Kate's clothing,sorry if I am wrong.
    So glad you said Michael Walker is alias, Michael Wright, so why does he not use his real name,must be receiving remuneration from someone for the amount of time he responds on Twitter/Facebook as well.
    I am not a Psychologist,but understand as a human being the trauma a person must feel in any loss of life!
    "Forgiveness is not to hate."
    People do make mistakes in life and I do not wish to cast aspersions,but the "Truth must come out" to resolve this disappearance of Madeline McCann.
    No body just vanishes off the Earth with out leaving a trail of some sort, that is why "Detectives work backwards to solve any mysterious events."
    I can only hope that the Operation Grange is not a cover up and only time will tell when they reach their conclusion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi! The "Michael Walker" on the youtube comments is thought to be Jon Corner,the "Film Producer" friend of Kate and Gerry Mccann!
      rita

      Delete
    2. We don't know that Michael Walker is alias for Michael Wright.

      We were just correcting, to say that Anon 11:19:00 / 12:18:00 had referred to the wrong person in the context quoted.

      Nor do we know if it's an alias for Corner. We prefer not to speculate or encourage speculation on aliases.

      We won't publish any further speculation

      Delete
    3. Speculation is dangerous but facts aren't. Clarence Mitchell said Corner had played a big part in this, what's his speciality again?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 6 Mar 2015, 15:35:00,

      Could you please provide a link?

      Delete
    5. Thanks for your question Textusa, it was on Sky News about three weeks after the event.

      Mitchell looked like a frustrated babysitter. The only other reference I've seen on this was on Twitter, it came from Rothley Pillowcase, I believe Maria from Portugal is in contact and if she's looking in perhaps she could possibly verify.

      This is the only proof I have, although I suspect you are looking for more than this, I'm sorry, I saw it once and that was it.

      Hope this helps, even if it's only in a small way.

      Delete
  6. Just some thoughts :)

    We believe that some or most of Ocean Clubs administrative services, like maintenance, laundry and cleaning are based in the building in which Fiji Palms is part of.

    Yes, the laundry itself is what I thought SC was referring to when he said this:

    The bushes were all around here, we were far away from the rest, it was all open, and this is why I think (inaudible) you know, this is the idea that, humm...I think of when i mentioned in the interrogation that there was a laundry outlet where other things were kept.

    It's noticeable how keen SC is to make certain points and appears to be enthusiastic, and then has terrible memory loss at other times. So this bit:

    DC Ferguson: …It is likely that my papers are not in sequence because this page is more about the details of the search of the apartments near Gerry's apartment and speaks of the laundryman.

    Carpenter: Yes, yes.

    DC Ferguson: And of the reconnaissance done.

    Carpenter: I remember that, yes.


    Sounds terribly keen doesn't he and there a more instances. Then when asked a difficult question:

    DCF: Of what age did the laundry man appear to be

    SC: Humm, I do not remember clearly what I said, but obviously at times Europeans appear older than they are, because of

    DCF...(inaudible) the sun.

    SC: Yes with the sun, that was what I said in the statement (inaudible).


    Struggling with that one isn't he, and he doesn't say that he can't remember clearly how old the laundry man is, he says he can't remember what he said in his original statement. What is that saying about if you tell lies you have to have a good memory?

    Thinking about what they did though, trying to stitch up Mário Marreiro to cover their own backs, that's disgusting. They tried to implicate him in the abduction of a little girl. Mr Carpenter isn't a man I would ever like to meet knowing he's capable of that.

    Do we know, by the way, that Mário Marreiro actually has a son?

    About Philip Edmonds we will do a separate post. But as far as we know, Carpenter is the only source stating that Edmonds left earlier. He's not exactly the most reliable of sources. But he is a source who hasn't been denied. Because he's telling the truth or because to deny him would mean having to explain the absurdity of his claim?

    Everything that SC was saying at that point, was for a reason, the takeaways, T9 (10?) sitting at next table etc etc so my instinct would be that mentioning PE was something that also had to be done for a reason. As regards whether PE left the following morning, which you asked about Textusa in the comments to a previous post, this much I do know:

    1) if I could afford a private jet I wouldn't be holidaying in PdL out of season. No offence, but with plenty of money and the world to choose from, with three children I would have thought somewhere like Disneyland or another child "activity centre" more appropriate.

    2) If I could afford a private jet I would not be flying at the (alleged) time of 4am, or is it leaving PdL at 4am. Either way, getting three children up, washed and dressed and all packed up and off to the airport in the early hours? No chance. That's what you do when you have little money and have to take a cheap flight at an inconvenient hour.

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nuala,

      Thank you, once again, for your comment.

      One minor (BIG) correction, which we also made and which cost us waisting some hours looking for something that didn't exist: the laundry outlet.

      We were also misled by the translation and tried really hard to to find the thing.

      The original states the following: "Os arbustos estavam todos aqui em redor, nós estávamos no resto chão, era tudo aberto aqui, por isso agora penso (inaudível) sabe, é essa a idea que, hummm... a qual eu penso que mencionei no interrogatório que há uma carrinha da lavandaria que estacionava e outra coisas."

      This translates into, like we wrote in the post: "The bushes were all around here, we were on the ground floor, it was all open here, and that’s why I now think (inaudible) you know, that the idea that, humm... for which I mentioned in the interrogation that there was a van from the laundry that parked and other things.”

      So no laundry outlet but one "van from the laundry that parked and other things".

      We must agree with you on one thing about the use of a private jet. But we do go "one step further" and ask: IF one could afford a private jet and IF there was REALLY an urgency to get out of Luz quickly, then why not depart on May 3?

      To take off in the dark, matters little if it is around 22H00/24H00 or if it is at 04H00. But as you say, it matters much when you have 3 boys travelling with you.

      But, as we have asked and continue to do so, we would really like to know where the 04H00 time of departure has appeared from.

      Carpenter only says "He was going to take a plane on the next day to Switzerland, as the children's mother lived there". Mentions no time.

      At this point in time, for us it's one of those things, like many others, taken as fact when it isn't.

      Examples of things people take as fact that aren't: Gerry having said "show me the body" or Kate having said - already corrected in current post - that cadaver smell in her pants was due her having contacted with 6 (?) corpses before coming to Luz.

      Delete
    2. Nuala,

      About Mr Marreiros and whether he has a son, all we know is that he's married and that he says he has a stepson who works in Barão de São João.
      http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIO_MARREIROS.htm

      He could also have a son, but we don't know about his family.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Textusa.

      I wondered about MM having a son because it's easy to sit in the UK giving a statement and saying there was a garage "lair". The PO taking the statement can't say "Let's pop in the car and we'll drive to where the garage is so you can show us which one" and back in Portugal it just wastes the PJ's time if they're looking for a non-existent garage, they're not going to force SC to return to Portugal to show them where it is.

      So SC's on safe ground with the garage, but MM having a son, that's easily checked by the PJ so SC would have to know it was correct.

      As you know I've come late to this case and am picking things up as I go along, and Mr Edmonds has just become very interesting to me, so I'll come back to that later :)

      Nuala x

      Delete
  7. You are right as usual Textusa, there is no evidence at all on the Internet that PE left Portugal/PdL Friday morning at 4am on a private jet.

    I understand there were forums that are long gone, I see Mirror and 3As mentioned, so perhaps it came from that time and has been repeated, like so many myths are, until it becomes fact, and no-one then asks about the origin of it - except you ;-)

    We know that PE might not be taking his return flight to the UK from Mark Warner:

    Client resides in Switzerland and will most likely be not taking our return flight. He will let management know upon his arrival.

    But the only source for PE leaving PdL on Friday is SC, who is not reliable.

    Going back to SC's statement:

    I met the following persons . . . A man with three children whom I met in the Tapas Bar and who I referred to as the "Tapas Guy" and a Portuguese man in a garage whom I will refer to as the "laundry man".

    Very little is said about PE in SC's rogatory. There was obviously more said in the original statement of 17th May 2007 which of course we don't have, but in the rogatory there it nothing about "Tapas Guy". Even when mentioning PE here he doesn't use the expression "Tapas Guy":

    We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and I saw a man sitting at the table next to us with three children. He was going to take a plane the next day to Switzerland, given that the children's mother lived there, I had never seen him before that night, but he ended up joining us for a coffee, he was a MW tourist

    The whole point of SC's original statement of 17th May 2007 was to get over the message(s) they wanted to the police, so I think it's fair to say that whatever he says about PE is important.

    So that begs the question, why was it important that the police thought PE left on Friday 4th May 2007?

    Because a lie is only told to hide a truth, I would deduce that he didn't leave on Friday 4th May 2007.

    One other little thing, SC doesn't know MM's name, hardly surprising because he'd never met him, and PE is put together with MM. MM becomes "laundry man" and PE becomes "Tapas Guy". Could it be that SC had never met PE either? He chatted away to him at Tapas, their children played together, they ended up having coffee together, he knows his plans to leaving for Switzerland in the morning, but he doesn't know his name?

    I would go even further:

    We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and I saw a man sitting at the table next to us with three children

    That is a very, very strange thing to say. I would expect "We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and there was a man sitting at the table next to us"

    That's a statement of what happened. What SC says is a statement of what was supposed to have happened.

    But perhaps I'm over analysing :)

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nuala,

      You got us thinking. Again.

      Answering your last question, yes, we think you’re over-analising Carpenter’s reference to PE. Mind you, we’re only saying this AFTER you made us think.

      We think you’re right when you say he mentions PE for a reason. The whole of his statement has remits, so whatever he has said must be looked upon under with that scope in mind.

      So let’s see what he has spoken about when he speaks about Tapas. 4 things (pgs 39/40):

      1. Edmonds

      2. A couple who he doesn’t remember the name, who sat in the table in front

      3. The man who turns out to be not one but 2, Neil Berry and Raj Balu, who are drinking and who he finds out, nd we have wondered both how and why, are waiting for a take-away.

      4. The Big Round Table and the T9, who are so close, that it was possible to talk to them, about interesting things, like tennis. Not about any Grand Slam tournament but the one they, tourists playing leisurely the game, had played.

      About #3 we have already explained.

      #4 in our opinion is to validate the BRT dinners. Amusing to see that although a big group of 9, who aren’t neighbours in the UK, so likely to bond strongly in Luz, find the need to talk to people from other tables, while having a dinner they know they have to interrupt at regular intervals. The night before, it was Jez Wilkins. That night was Carpenter.

      About #2, we think, like Carolyn’s “Madeleine, Madeleine” it’s a simple background prop. To fill up the stage. But even then, Carpenter doesn’t get this one right. When he arrives, at 19:00 pm, there are no families made up of only a couple: you have the Manns (2 +1) and the Bullens (4). Later, in theory, at 19:30, the Patells (2+2). At that hour we know that Cox (or Balu) have cancelled, so aren’t there. Could it be the Irwins who had arrived an hour early?

      About Edmonds.

      He refers, as you note, on very vague terms about someone he has significant interactions with. He fist mentions him on pg 37 “a man with three children who I met at Tapas Bar and to whom I will refer to as the ‘Tapas Guy’ [‘Tipo do Tapas’]” and then the two transcriptions we have on the post from pgs 39 (the going Switzerland the next day) and 55 (where IC plays with the Edmonds boys).

      We agree that at least a first name exchange would have happened. Steve and Phil would have known each other’s name at the end of such an evening.

      We think Carpenter points out Edmonds, as if to say the guests of the Ocean Club were multi-layered. Economically, professionally, etc. He’s giving PJ a heads-up, so that when they find another name that supposedly wouldn’t spend a week in a place like Luz, they would think, wait a minute, that Edmonds guy was also there, wasn’t he? It makes it seem a natural place for a group of doctors (a profession always associated with the upper-middle or even upper classes) to choose to spend an off-season week of holidays.

      Oh, you didn't notice him? That's because he left early. He told me he would. He had to go because of this thing about his wife living in Switzerland...

      Delete
  8. I just saw this on the JH forum as well:

    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3471p10-would-this-account-for-the-unprecedented-high-level-of-political-support

    Post at Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:05 am showing a screenshot of the MW guest list on 5th May showing PE still at the resort?

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
  9. Unpublished Anonymous at 7 Mar 2015, 18:13:00,

    If what you say is true and you have proof, it's something you should report to the relevant authorities, rather than report it to a blog, which has no way of assessing the veracity of what you allege.

    However, if what you say is true and you have proof available, this could break the case, so we strongly advise you not to hold onto this info, which would be perverting the course of justice, and, as we said, foward it to the appropriate authorities as soon as possible, if you haven't already done so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. Here's hoping.

      Delete
  10. This has just been posted by our good friend Rosemary Smith on our FB. What a compliment! Couldn't resist to bring it over:

    David Bankson, Poet

    "Puzzled"

    Trying to put the pieces together
    From out of the box from the attic.
    So many parts -- some broken, most missing,
    Yet must be pieced together
    To grasp the full image.

    The pieces already placed are moved
    Within this imperfect reflection;
    To move them, replace them, or change the whole section
    Before the figure in bloom
    Can even be observed.

    On returning, I noticed the picture
    Indiscernible at best.
    The irregular shapes and various parts
    Concealed and removed
    Beyond comprehension.


    Thank you so much, Rose!

    ReplyDelete
  11. ‘We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and I saw a man sitting at the table next to us with three children. He was going to take a plane the next day to Switzerland, given that the children's mother lived there, I had never seen him before that night, but he ended up joining us for a coffee, he was a MW tourist’

    The emphasis in this paragraph of the statement seems to be to show the children were by their side e.g. it was a family holiday (not a swingers party). To specifically mention PE may be to emphasise that no one was aware of the high profile of PE, that he was just another tourist. They would be aware that PE’s presence would be surprising to some and therefore it was necessary to downplay his presence – he was just another tourist – with kids. He may have been asked to also establish the fact that PE’s getaway was planned ahead rather than a hasty emergency exit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 7 Mar 2015, 20:24:00,

      There's no proof of any "PE's getaway". Anything said related to it is pure speculation.

      Delete
    2. Yes - no proof of PE leaving on 4th..
      If SC gave his statement in April 2008, and he had on his remit to mention that he met PE in TAPAS bar on 3rd May - with his kids - and that PE had said that he planned to fly to Switzerland the next day as the children's mother lived there .. there has to have been some reasoning behind this remit.
      PE was on the guest list as traveling from Gatwick with a note that he perhaps would not require the return flight as he resides in Switzerland. So why did SC refer to the child's mother living there and not that PE himself lived there.

      If there was a need for SC to give the impression that PE was planning to leave on the 4th and yet in fact did not - what lies behind that remit. I'm hoping that we'll get enlightened because its confusing me!



















      Delete
  12. DO NOT PUBLISH at 8 Mar 2015, 22:03:00 and 22:05:00

    Thank you for your opinions and sharing them with us.

    ReplyDelete
  13. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LOG2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT133&lpg=PT133&dq=owen+jones+bell+mccanns&source=bl&ots=XjnYEFnaI7&sig=2erxST1E2QKPoXl9cFLkA6lrUDY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VVn9VJ3HOsK0acCbgJAI&ved=0CBYQ6AEwBQ

    Interesting section on how much Mcs paid Bell Pottinger to keep them on front pages.
    Book called The Establishment
    Mcs spent £500k on PR to make sure they were on front pages.
    Where did that money come from?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://mobile.twitter.com/TeddyShepherd/status/574973334145925120/photo/1

      Delete
  14. Unpublished Anonymous at 9 Mar 2015, 13:11:00

    You say "as this was just something I turned up while browsing", could please provide the link that backs up your allegation(s)? Or links.

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  15. It’s with great pleasure that we inform readers that our series “All the world is a stage” post has generated a new kind of way to measure a post’s success: we call it the friendly trouble.

    Comments that have gone unpublished in apparent agreement with our opinions but getting the blog, through them, into potentially very serious problematic situations

    For example, outrageous and baseless attempts to get us to make statements about and accusations against a certain person. Just to get an idea, one comment goes as far as accusing him of murder in horrendous circumstances!

    Mind you, we’re only referring to the unpublished comments. The “DO NOT PUBLISH” kind can, as is evident, speculate freely. Which fortunately hasn’t happened.

    To those responsible for this tactic, please continue. Besides the smiles that you bring to our faces, we presently only have 862 unpublished comments and would love to overcome the 1,000 milestone soon, so let’s get to work, people!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow! That many comments trying to discredit your blog.

      So many people very, very afraid of what you're revealing about what really happened to Maddie, who was involved and what they did to try and cover up the truth.

      And did they really think you'd be so daft as to not recognise what they were trying to do ;-)

      Nuala x

      Delete
    2. Hi Textusa,ref;ALTWAS,family trouble.
      A certain person MW ordered Pizza's whilst in Portugal 4/5 May and talked to a staff member who told MW that her Father GB had seen a man and woman with a child at 06.00am on the 4 May 2007,
      Why did (MW) not report this prospective sighting of a missing child(his relation) to the PJ authorities?
      Surely he(MW) must have alerted Gerry and Kate to this person's being seen on the morning of 4 May 2007 by a potential witness, when returning with the food order?
      Why did the parents of the missing child not inform/report to the PJ of this "potential witness" of a couple allegedly sighted by the owner of the Pizza establishment the day after their daughter was last seen alive?
      MW was first quoted to the MSM, as "non of the Parents were not neglectful and full of booze". MW was one of three close family members who arrived in Portugal on the day after Madeline disappeared/Abducted? from 5a!
      MW, was to give a personal statement at the "Damages Trial" on behalf of Kate and Gerry, did MW, inform the Judge or PJ Authorities at any time of this information he had been told of, with regard to a missing child, Madeline?
      Blacksmith bureau latest article is precise to a tee about establishment cover ups, let us hope Sonia Poulton can interview the prospective Brighton MP Clarence, about the funds paid to him from the find Madeline Fund as a mouth piece for the Team McCann for Eight Years x £28,000-70,000 PA.
      Bell Pottinger Alleged £500,000 for MSM work?
      "Dirty deeds not done dirt cheap"

      Delete
    3. Another distraction sighting to keep the PJ busy.
      http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GEORGE_BURKE_BROOKS.htm

      Delete
    4. JBS doesn't mention cover-ups. He's not a believer in such things, as I understand.

      Delete
  16. http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-31821211
    In time, truth emerges.

    So it will happen with Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous 19.39 wrote about/posted link to " 96 Deaths Hills Borough Tragedy Establishment cover up". It is without doubt that the sad loss of the 96 person's who had their lives taken away prematurely.
    It was the Collusion/ cover up and twisting,distorting disinformation allowed by the different Prime Minister's,Home Secretary's,misuse of power with retention of information, multiple Police Forces deliberate lies,(Police Officers told to throw their vital information from their note books into a refuse Black bag).
    You may well ask the question as to why thousands of UK residents have very little confidence in the Police Force any more?
    Look at the little "Titbits" they are throwing to the MSM in the UK,Dead DJ's perversions and his colleagues with famous artists,media pundits, "Look over Here, Don't look Over there" Pantomime effort to secure a proper investigation into "Child Abuse's/ Deaths?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hi Textusa, I have just watched Newsnight on BBC2 , Bernard Hogan Howe asked how will the Metropolitan Police and other Police forces cope with the proposed reduction in spending given to his departments.
    After some deliberation,BHH came out with a classic, due to the afore mentioned costs, the Police would have to limit the spending on these investigations,due to the length of time elapsed, since the alleged crimes were sometime ago they are therefore more costly and take longer to resolve!
    Any one see a picture developing on Operation Grange now?
    BHH supposed comments" We have spent a considerable amount of time investigating the disappearance of Madeline McCann and found no conclusive evidence to bring the perpetrators to justice and will have to leave the file case as at the present moment unsolved"
    What a Farce if this happens!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Unpublished Anonymous to Textusa at 15 Mar 2015, 13:44:00

    You say “a year or so ago my attention was drawn to this case by a comment re…”, so when you find that comment again, kindly provide the link.

    We think you are the same unpublished Anonymous at 9 Mar 2015, 13:11:00 to our post “All the world is a stage (3/3)”.

    Then you said “as this was just something I turned up while browsing”.

    Then, we clearly asked you to “provide the link that backs up your allegation(s)? Or links.”

    You haven’t, instead you insist on trying in getting the blog to publish the same allegations.

    ReplyDelete

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.

Textusa