The Blacksmith Bureau
November 12, 2010
Collusion
for beginners
 |
| move one and move all |
timelines MATADOR
We are aware three people involved in the creation of the first two: Gerry McCann, David Payne and Russell O'Brien. Where? In the apartment 5A. When? Between, say, 23h30 and 2h00 on the night of 3 / 4 May. Need more details? Few: O'Brien, who had only been seen in possession of them by police Portuguese, has been questioned about them: that was in 2008 and then had forgotten all about them, even their very existence.
Timeline Third
This is different from the other two. Is a typed document that, according to David Payne, "represented the point of view of the whole group." It was completed after the initial police statements given on May 4 but before the second round of questioning on 10 May.
The group requested to bring their second interviews so they could refer to it! The request was denied. So far, in the light of day.
Grounds
The possible reasons are numerous and obvious. What is the explanation "not guilty", the participants have been given and that, in fairness, we should accept? After three and a half - no one! They do not accept or rebuild clarify movements claiming to have done. That is the crux of the question, "Why not?"
Gathering all the evidence is more favorable explanation is that the group conspired to distort tests in order to protect against potential charges of child neglect.
any other credible explanation is less favorable for the group.
Evolution
research groups in the "first cut is the deepest" when compared with other statements the first post and remain absolutely the same time is that there is no evolution. If changes, natural changes in the memory, should show a random pattern of disorder, since no one remembers the same things the same way.
Without
However, if there are changes that are clearly a pattern evolved and orderly conduct of the initial divergence close match, then something is wrong and the suspicion of collusion, conspiracy to arrange false evidence and dubious-reach level red flag. If at that moment in history remains fixed, no further development, then it's time that people start talking with their lawyers.
Evolution and the Tapas Nine
There is an unmistakable trend towards convergence in the T9 test, indicating the construction of a timeline that fit Persons facts. We can not bore the reader with all the many examples but will give only one, the early evening.
The testimony of nine witnesses who were at the Tapas Bar on 20.45, minutes up or down, it is quite clear. O'Brien's first timeline is based on what he saw and knew: "20h45 everyone in the pool for dinner." The second, after consultation with Gerry McCann, repeats: "20h45 pool." In his first statement to the police make a change, says he was "over" the 20.45 but now Payne says the group was not there. They arrived, says, five minutes later, 20h50.
David Payne, who helped create the first two timelines, was ahead in the game: he declared that arrived at the bar "on" 20h55 - but had not square with his family change: Fiona Payne, a very acute observer who was not involved in the first two timelines, said he had left at 20:45 to make the journey of two minutes to the bar. Dianne Webster says that "on" 20:45. None of them mentioned the encounter on the way Oldfield.
Famous for fifteen minutes
Oldfield did not mention the encounter with them but it contradicts the three, saying they came at 21.00. Rachael Oldfield agree with the timing of her husband but remember that they came after Matthew, who apparently was doing his famous first night surveillance, which matched the first statement to the police of a group of couples that everyone was doing surveillance "every fifteen minutes." Go! Fifteen minutes was not in the chronology and the creators knew it. Matthew catch up! To complete the confusion Jane Tanner O'Brien said his family - he had written "20.45, everyone in the pool" - Had reached 21.00!
The day after these statements to the police and after discussions with the Payne wrote a third timeline. It is an absurd document while so dishonest that shoe fits these different memories in a narrative unsustainable. By the way, "Every fifteen minutes," was never mentioned.
And it was not a joke to fit every half hour. Payne changed the statement to his wife and his mother to say that "were coming" to the bar at 20h55, confirming that the meeting with Oldfield not previously mentioned. The vagueness of "were way "then becomes a farce by the clockwork precision of the" listeners MO at 20h57 (!) ... "
Although these changes could they explain to the police? David and Fiona Payne, after three and a half years have not yet done. Along with Kate McCann did not participate in the second round of questioning on May 10, leaving the old Dianne Webster on her own.
Early in his second statement Webster introduced a useful detail not previously mentioned, that although it was always dinner reservation for 20:30, the group "never met before 20h45/21h00" due to chronic lateness.
later "remembered" that had arrived late because he only managed to get to the restaurant on 21.00. Asked if he had "crossed" with someone (Obviously Oldfield included) down the road. Go! He said no.
(A year later, interviewed by police in Leicester missed the text again and fell into something closer to the truth - arrive at 20h50 or 20h55 - and, perhaps remembering some interesting conversation in another place, he added hastily "... er and what is not mentioned in the first statement in Portugal was that I vaguely remember seeing Matt, I was going ... "Go!)
In his second interrogation Matthew Oldfield was well informed about the third timeline, except Payne's fiction about the" listening Oldfield from 20h57 ... "Even Jane Tanner, who had not previously remembered nothing about the late arrivals except O'Brien, was a huge outburst syndrome Memory Recovery.
"recalled" that Oldfield had left "a few minutes before nine." Oh, and I remember talking about it before leave, announcing that he would quickly put him to the group, mecachis even recalled that "on the road took the opportunity to take a look at the rooms of children."
further deepens, like hypnosis. Jane Tanner reached the climax when "reminded" that Oldfield had crossed the Payne and Dianne Webster on the way and "made a circuit of listeners in the apartments." To be frank about it, and this applies to most other claims, "how did she know these things? I did not. Not remembering anything. There is, for whatever reason, trying to falsely corroborate the story of a friend to the police, a story about having no knowledge confirmatory. It would not be the last time.
a finished work of art - Timeline 3
2030: normal booking the group for dinner at the Tapas restaurant - like all week (Sun-Thur)
2035: Gerry McCann (GM ) and Kate McCann (KC) arrive at the restaurant table tops.
2040: Arrives Jane Tanner (JT), followed shortly thereafter by Matthew Oldfield (MO) and Mampilly Rachael Oldfield (RMO).
2045: Arrives at the table Russell O'Brien (RJO)
2055: MO returns to apartments for surveillance in the apartment downstairs, passing David Payne (DP), Fiona Payne (FP) and her mother Dianne Webster (DW) as they walked to the table.
2057: MO heard outside the windows of all apartments on the ground floor next to the parking (5A, 5B and 5D) to ensure they were sleeping. At this point, all the shades were drawn on every window.
2100: MO back to the table. Handle the first dishes.
[Omitted things post arrival]
Done - for now
So we see the evolution a current version, creating a fictional story that none of them could have known if it was true, which never deviated.
But you could say, is all this fuss just for ten minutes? Yes, because it is a vain attempt to make his alleged actions fit within the limited time that can not adapt to them, as, later, even moving around ten minutes, could not adapt / adjust to the alleged acts of Jane Tanner, Gerry McCann and Mr. Kidnapper: They were moving the pieces around the board but were moving as one, like a board game or Rubik's Cube, affected all others.
When Rachael Oldfield, asked by the BBC after the interviews rogatory if "history" had changed she replied, "No, because there never was a story to change."
Really?
 |
| You come here often? "You will return? |
Posted by John Blacksmith
Mercedes Translation
To comment: Here
