Translate

Wednesday, 18 April 2018

Throwing in the towel





After many years of talking complete bollocks, Textusa finally retires to spend more time with her psychiatrist

Well folks, having been thoroughly battered in recent weeks it was bound to happen sooner or later. Having handed the baton to one of her seconds this week, probably too wounded by the utter devastation of being kicked out of her Facebook group to continue, Textusa finally realises that one cannot fool all the people, all the time. With her credibility lying tattered around her ankles, like a motheaten pair of drawers, she has succumbed to a lethal dose of "Blogger Fatigue"

So, the kindest thing to do would be to leave it here, draw a discreet veil over her mangled corpse and let the ravages of time take their course.


But we don't want to do that........


  1. Sometimes things happen when does not expect them to and this is one of them: we are stopping writing.
Oh really? 

  1. The decision caught us by surprise as much, we hope, will catch our readers.
Ha ha! You mean Maria decided and she's the boss. We understand 

  1. We were not expecting to stop, we were writing a post about whether Pamela Fenn’s apartment was the one it’s stated in the files – the one directly above 5A – or if it was the one 2 floors up. It’s a post we will write and keep to ourselves.
Good. 
  1. But not keeping secrets from anyone, one only has to read Carol Tranmer-Fenn’s rogatory, it’s all there.
    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CAROL_TRANMER.htm
Because it makes all the difference 


  1. Then, we were going to follow it with a post about the Big Round Table.
You have been spared, people 
  1. Instead we have done only a Post-Scriptum, a second one, on it on the current post. We recommend readers scroll up because it’s worth a look.
In fairness, it is hysterical; a perfect blend of lunacy, self-aggrandisement and completely unconscious and unintentional hilarity. 

  1. Unexpectedly, the current post has superseded our most ambitious expectations. Added to its content – the absurdity of the fictional tennis conversation between Gerry and David – there were the comments, both published and unpublished, both from friends and foes. All together it is basically all we wanted to have summarised in a single post.
You have been repeatedly tested and found wanting, and god knows how many posts you have binned 

  1. To publish a new post, would be to see bury the perfect note on which we feel we should stop.
I suppose it was a perfect note. Never have you sounded more panicked or desperate and never has it been more obvious that Maria has bailed out and left the two of you with the rotting corpse. 
  1. The only reason.
Oh behave 
  1. We know that the readers who have come to trust our decisions will fully understand.
Any reader who trusts your decisions needs to give a power of attorney to a close relative, for their own safety 

  1. It’s been 9 and a half years, almost 700 posts.
Each one filled to the brim with top-quality conspiralunacy 
  1. We believe that we have influenced, especially in the last years, the flux of events of the case – like our latest achievement of stopping short the paedo-offensive – makes us feel proud of the work done.
Seriously, do you actually BELIEVE that? A decade of being the laughing stock of McCannland, taken seriously only by a handful of certified loons and with theories so deranged that even Bandicoot Bennett takes the piss out of you? You have achieved nothing, ladies.  

  1. A crime where so many good people have turned bad. To them we recommend revisiting the Biblical story of the prodigal son. In it, when the son leaves he doesn’t think he’s doing wrong. He’s wrong but he’s convinced that he’s right. When he realises that he was wrong he asks for forgiveness and the father forgives him. What the son didn’t do was to leave knowing he was wrong and expecting forgiveness in advance if and when things went wrong. We don’t think any religion works on credit sinning, where one knows one is sinning but expecting later on for the slate to be cleaned just because they ask.
What? 

  1. When one has seen Mr Amaral put against a wall and shot by bullets that one supplied, one cannot then cry that those who pulled the trigger are animals.
Mr Amaral wasn't remotely damaged by you, mainly because you're a lunatic and of absolutely no importance 
  1. Playing Florence Nightingale to the wounded we helped wound is simply being a hypocrite.
Oh do behave! 

  1. The time of his life he lost, the profession he had to abandon and all other consequences the man had to go through in the hardship one helped to put him in, will be in one’s conscience.
Seriously, this is even more deranged than usual, which I suppose is fitting for your swansong. Darlings, one thing you will notice is missing from any court transcript is mention of you, your barmy theories, or any indication that Mr Amaral ever nursed a Textusa-inflicted wound. (Unless he hurt himself laughing; I know we did) 

  1. After being exposed – more or less publicly and these last some know and some don’t – seeing the minions of the other side angry, deflated and even inactive means that we are spot on.
Answers on a postcard please..... 

  1. The tangled web is indeed complex but possible to decode. To those questioning whether they have been spotted, it’s most likely they have. It would surprise many how many people are not who they seem to be. So we’re evidently not talking about the evident ones.
Ah, as you were. It's just more paranoia about who's who and me supposedly being Walker thingy. 

  1. As we said to DE F, if the cap fits, wear it, if it doesn’t then don’t.
I don't think that's what you said, actually 
  1. If you want to put a cap on our head, please go ahead, we know exactly what fits and what doesn’t.
Whatever, it'll have electrodes coming out of it 

  1. (Cont.)
    Reply
  2. (Cont.)

    And talking about minions, it has given us great pleasure to see Insane recently resume his Walkercan1000 twitter account to tweet in support of Wetherspoon.
And here we are again.

You know, if some day you ever do discover who he is, I will be laughing my arse off when you realise you were wrong all along 
  1. If we didn’t know better, we would even think that he was trying to distance himself from another twitter account whose holder is a fierce pro-Remain supporter, in an attempt to convince people that they are not one and the same.
Sorry, can't help on this one. God knows who she's stalking now 

  1. The fact that we stop writing doesn’t mean we are leaving or quitting.
Oh, shame 
  1. We’re simply stop publishing posts.
Well, at least that's something 

  1. We will watch until October to see what Theresa May decides on the case and if she doesn’t decide by then, let it be clear that we continue to support the payment of the wages of the officers allocated to Operation Grange until whoever is in power will politically decide the outcome, which we truly hope will be in favour of truth.
That's good of you. However, it's not your taxes that are paying for it, so kindly fuck off 

  1. As Blogger has a limitation of 200 comments per comment pages, if and when required, we will do what we have done on previous occasions and that will be to publish “Post for comments” which will have no content.
Pretty much like your regular posts 

  1. That means we will continue to accept and publish comments and do that ourselves.
You'll be back, dear. You won't be able to help yourselves 

Friday, 13 April 2018

Sisters are screwing it for themselves

Evening all,

Well, today's offering comes to you from a different Textusa. Although she pretends there's three of them, it's really her and two tagalongs, a bit like Draco Malfoy and his two lumpen sidekicks.

Today, a sidekick had a go. With hilarious results, as they say. Buckle up, guys


The help and the tennis

The tennis courts - ideal for working up an appetite for shagging the neighbours
1. Introduction

There is something in the case that is consensual that it is unclear and that to us is absolutely key.
No there isn't. 

We would even go as far as to call the person involved, close him in a room and ask him the question he was asked before and to which he has given a very vague and unclear answer to say the least.
Oh really? 

That person David Payne and that question would be “about what EXACTLY you intended to help Kate McCann with when you went to the McCann apartment at around 18:30 on the evening of May 3 2007?”

Er, I think you will find he was asked that and answered it. Just because the answer wasn't "I went to get my leg over" does not mean it was the wrong answer 


And until he gave a clear answer he wouldn’t be able to leave the room. And if he asked for the presence of his lawyer, then that would be arranged.
Not allowed, actually. We have things called laws. I don't expect you to understand 

And we attribute the extreme importance of clarification of this particular thing because, like water and olive oil, this offered help and tennis simply don’t mix not matter how hard one tries.
Oh I think they probably do. Try harder. 


2. Tennis court and swinging

A close friend of mine asked me one day what had made me first thing of swinging in relation to the Maddie case.
Was this ''close friend'' wearing a white coat at the time, twinkles? 

I told her “David Payne’s trip to the tennis courts, that is what triggered swinging in my mind”. And to this she replied with an incredulous “…and from just that, you came to the conclusion of swinging??”
She was, wasn't she?



Yes, the reader read it right. It was not his visit to apartment 5A but the one he made to the tennis courts that made me certain that swinging was at the base of the case, although then, I naively thought that only the T9 were involved in the events of May 3.
Ah, the fragile innocence of youth 

Then I had not realised that it was not only them but most guests as well, the Ocean Club management and part of its staff, Mark Warner management and staff and British immigrants of Praia da Luz and around Lagos who were also involved in the hoax.
And what made you realise that? The shape of the hoops at the pitch and putt? The suggestive nature of the salt and pepper shakers? Or was it a sudden catastrophic brain hemorrhage? 

I do believe that my friend to this day continues to think that I jumped to a rushed conclusion but I only answered honestly because it was that tennis court talk between David and Gerry that made me see that it was swinging they were trying to hide.
Yes, she still thinks that. It's why she won't sign your release papers 

Why, is what we hope to explain in this post.
Oh, we really wish you would 


3. The McCanns and the Pope

And to make things worse about my friend thinking that I had made a premature conclusion out of nowhere about something, I’ll share with readers what was my state of ignorance about the case when that lightbulb moment happened.
I shudder to think how low the wattage is 

The Maddie case had caught my interest like with the rest of society and followed it with the average interest of the average citizen.

Very soon after Madeleine disappeared, I thought the parents were lying.

But what clinched that they were lying was the Pope visit.
Uh huh - go on....... 

Before Maddie disappeared, on April 23 2003, Pope John Paul II received, inside the Vatican the President of one of the most known Portuguese football clubs, FC Porto, Mr Pinto da Costa.
If you are going to tell me the Pope was swinging with Mr da Costa, I may have to beat you senseless 

"Good evening, your Holiness, my Mrs is across the other side of the tennis courts with her knickers in her handbag. Enjoy! 

Mr Pinto da Costa is a charismatic personality in Portugal. Since April 17 1982 he is the longest President of a football club in functions in the world. Then, in Portugal he was known as the “Portuguese Pope”. So, this visit of the “Pope” Pinto da Costa to Pope John Paul II made the news all over Portugal.
Fascinating 


But, however charismatic or popular in Portugal Mr Pinto da Costa is or may be, in the grand scheme of the world, he’s was just the President of a Portuguese football club, even if that football club had won international titles.
Okaaaaaay......... 


When the McCanns met the Pope Benedict on May 30 2007, they were the parents of Maddie the allegedly abducted 4 yr old girl in the Algarve, then the world’s most well-known human face and the human being who was being most looked for in the entire world.
You mean a rough-arsed common-as-muck doctor with a semi-permanent sneer? And her husband? 


"Thank you so much for this, it's such an honour"    "You're welcome, your Holiness"

Yet, unlike it had happened with a President of a Portuguese football club, the Vatican protocol had the Pope meet them outside, very, very briefly and all quite awkward.


And the McCanns didn’t appear at the Vatican impromptu. Their visit had been announced in the media and Maddie was on almost every front page of every newspaper in the world. And yet, the Pope only met them outside.
It was never billed as a private audience and it was a different Pope. If you are going to go on flights of fancy, at least get the basics right 


That, as a TV watcher, confirmed to me that the Pope knew the parents were lying. For some reason all refs to this encounter have been removed from the Vatican website.
Don't be a fucking idiot. 

And what does this have to do with swinging? 



4. The moment of rage

Fast-forward to when Mr Amaral published his book.

That means that between the visit to the Pope and then, I never went online to search about the case.
So what? 


In that time, like the majority of the Portuguese, I felt that the Portuguese simply had conceded once again to British pressure by not charging the McCanns in September, by letting itself be humiliated by allowing the couple to leave the country, by beingsubmissive when kicking Mr Amaral off the investigation in October and by archiving the case in July.
They couldn't charge them, they had no way of preventing them leaving the country, and the archiving is entirely procedural 


So, until then I was simply, right or wrong, one more fatalistically resigned Portuguese citizen who witnessed, once again, Portugal bow to the external British pressure.
What a wimp. 


One day, not sure if in July or already in August, I was in a big commercial outlet and saw Mr Amaral’s book on sale.

I picked it up and like anyone who picks up a book that has pictures for the first time, I went straight to them.
Oh bless - you went straight for the pictures.  




Waiter, bring me another esplanade - this one is completely inadequate

And when I saw the picture of the Tapas esplanade with an arrow pointing to a flimsy small table saying that it was the location where a group of 9 was having dinner, I immediately sensed that the case was much more than I thought it had been.
Ah ha - and did it say "This is the precise table where the nine were sitting - isn't it wee?"


And when my eyes ran over the drawings (later would see them as pictures in the PJ Files) of Chapter 11 (pgs 122 to 130) I was furious.
Furious, eh? Gosh. 


A drawing. Apparently, it made Textusa furious

The British had not only humiliated the Portuguese by having the couple flown off but had joked with them. Clearly no one had been abducted from that room and saying that someone was could only be insulting a person’s intelligence, or in the case, insulting an entire nation.
''The British'' had nothing to do with it, they were always free to go. And I'd like to understand how you made these deductions from a pencil sketch.


I took it as blow as the huge and humiliating joke at the expense of the Portuguese that it was.
Sensitive little soul, aren't you?


That made me go on the internet where I found the case.
I wasn't aware you'd ever lost it.

Fascinating though this is, could you get back to the tennis, please?



5. Mr Amaral’s book and Praia da Luz


Those who have the original book, know that there’s only a small map of Luz on the 4th page in which the Ocean Club appears as covering the area that goes from the Baptista supermarket, including its parking lot, all the way up to Blocks 4 and 5.
It's just a general location, not a set of blueprints, idiot


No reference whatsoever to where the tennis courts are but one could deduce that they would be inside that enclosed area that appears in the photo illustrating where Jane says she saw Tannerman, without know how big that area would be.

What?
We know EXACTLY where the tennis courts were - they were right next door to the Tapas. So what the actual fuck are you on about? Also, that was nowhere near where the Tannerman incident occurred. 


The Paraiso Restaurant - Big Round Tables a speciality, swingers welcome

So, after reading the book, the only detailed information then out about the case, all the data I had about what had happened in that crucial end of the evening of May 3 was that this man, David Payne, had come from a beachfront restaurant called Paraiso (which appeared in one of the pictures) and on his way to his apartment to to change into tennis gear and collect whatever he needed to go play tennis suddenly decided to take a detour, enter the closed facilities where the tennis courts were located, go there and talk to a man, his friend, who was allegedly playing tennis there, and ask him if he could go help that man’s wife in their apartment and after obtaining that permission he went and did just that.
Hmmm - fascinating

Er, you do know this is all bollocks, don't you?

Nobody has ever suggested that David Payne sought out Gerry McCann to ask him anything, and especially not if he could go and ''help'' Kate McCann. 

Where have you dreamed this from?


To this day, we are still don’t know what kind of help Payne offered and that Gerry accepted.
Except that neither has suggested this was the case. Have you not read the files?


And then and there, I knew it was swinging.
Oh here we go......
Not because of the question but because tennis courts were involved as well as 2 men, one playing and the other not and the absence of an objective reason for that encounter to have ever happened.
Come again?




6. The permission

That, and that alone, in my mind, shouted swinging.
Maybe I shouldn't have asked ''Come again?''


Before being accused of having a filthy mind let me explain my reasoning:
Too late
the only reason David Payne and Gerry McCann would have together come up with such an absurd story (later we will see how really absurd it is) could only be that they wanted to legitimise Payne’s visit to Kate.
They were two families who were close friends and who were on holiday together

Why the need for that legitimisation?
Indeed. Why?


If Fiona Payne had asked David to pass by 5A for some milk or sugar for the next day’s breakfast or plastic plates for next day’s lunch, for example, would David have gone to the tennis courts to ask Gerry for permission? No, he wouldn’t. His presence in the apartment had been legitimised.
You do understand there is a tiny flaw in your argument, don't you? At no point was it ever suggested that there was any seeking of ''permission''. That was YOUR invention, Textusa-light. 

All you have succeeded in doing is inventing a reason to explain something which was your own invention in the first place.


He would have walked up, knocked on the door, asked for whatever and left. And no one would find that strange.
It wouldn't have been strange at all.


But no one remembered then to come up with such a simple explanation for his presence in that apartment.
No explanation was required


When those deciding had to come up with some reason for David having been in the McCann’s apartment, their brains were so filled with adrenaline , showing all was done in haste and under pressure, that their judgement was clouded and weren’t able to see how simple it would have been instead of inventing the permission by the tennis court absurdity.
But YOU invented the ''tennis court permission' absurdity!


The invention of that absurdity showed that someone thought that a legitimisation was needed to ‘normalise’ the fact that a married man had been in a married woman’s apartment without the presence of their respective spouses.
Yes. You.


And if there was that need for that authorisation from that woman’s husband, then it could only be because someone thought them being seen together without it, would appear that they were engaged, or attempting to engage, in some sort of adult interaction.
Yes. You.


Only that could justify the need for David to have a “written” note of approval from Gerry for him being in that apartment and it not appear unusual.
Wait - there was a note, now?


And the fact that Gerry gave that “written” approval, rules out a possible affair between David and Kate.
So you are suggesting that..............no, I give up. What the fuck ARE you suggesting?


The public permission from the woman’s husband to show normalcy could only be that the intended/attempted adult interaction between her and David was of his knowledge so a scenario of wife-swapping/swinging.
But YOU invented the permission. To explain the swinging, which YOU also invented.
There was no ''permission''


Knowing how falsely prude British society can be about sexual scandals it was evident to me swinging, or attempted swinging was the heart of what was being hidden.
And here we go again with the 'pretend' knowledge of British society, something of which you are not a part.

So as someone who is, let me explain.

No-one gives a shit about swinging. Car parks are full of 40-somethings busily dogging away the long spring evenings, people one barely knows seem intent on furthering the acquaintance by sending dick pics, bars are full of folks swiping their way through Tinder profiles - nobody gives a shit. This is Britain today - not some bizarre version of it you seem to have picked up from a 1970's sitcom


And that permission by the tennis courts was what THEN sparked me into thinking that swinging was the big secret.
But YOU INVENTED THE PERMISSION, Fuckweasel!


THEN, I didn’t know that Barra da Costa had mentioned swinging,
Of course you didn't
I didn’t know there was someone saying it online before the files were released as we showed in our post “The best answer”,
Of course you didn't
I didn’t know that the only common word that was forensically searched for on all 9 apprehended computers was “swing”,
Of course you didn't

I didn’t know that St Phunurius was a nearby property locals told the PJ held sex parties which was visited by the police because it was in some way linked to Robert Murat,
It wasn't, as was stated by the police
I didn’t know that there was a woman who tweeted that she witnessed a promiscuous environment when she booked there by accident,
Not least because it would be another 7 years before she would tweet that. And also because she's a nutter. 
I didn’t know that there were too many nannies for an off-season resort,
There wasn't
I didn’t know the guest booking sheets had been doctored,
They weren't
I didn’t know the creche sheets had been doctored,
They weren't
I didn’t know… I didn’t know… etc.

I didn’t know all this but I felt convinced that it was all about swinging.
Of course you did.


So, the answer to my friend was summed up into the following sentence: “I knew it was swinging because of a permission a married man needed to have at some tennis court from a woman’s husband to be with her in their apartment without giving any reason for being there.”
Except that what you state as the sole reason you thought it was swinging - the ''permission'' - was YOUR OWN INVENTION to make it look as if there was swinging going on.

Can you not see this? We are in a chicken/egg situation here.

You heard of the visit to the flat. You decided it was swinging. You invented the ''permission'' to take part in the 'swinging' and then used it as evidence of the 'swinging'


Idiot.



7. The particulars of a tennis court

And the fact that the permission was sought after and given in a tennis court, any tennis court, was what ignited in my brain that this whole episode was absurd.
Eh?


As I said, I didn’t know the details of the inside of the Tapas area, much less the details where the tennis courts were in relation to it, so in my mind I pictured a tennis court, any tennis courts.
Well, why not? I mean, they were right next door ffs


I imagined there would be 2 or 3 with a fence around them.
Riiiight.......


The particularity about the tennis game is the space it needs to be played.
Erm........ where is this going?


Not talking only about the court itself but the space around that it needs for the game to be played according to its rules.
It's just like being at Wimbledon


They state, if we’re not mistaken, that a ball has to bounce completely outside the line to be considered as out.
Er, that generally is the definition of 'out'. Yes, I just checked with the All England Tennis Club and they confirmed that for the ball to be ''out'' it has to be out. Well done!


So, for the game to be played it has to have enough space outside the markings to allow for a ball hitting the line if only slightly and be played between that moment and where it is to bounce on the ground again.
Have you ever played tennis? I am guessing the answer is going to be a ''No''


The player receiving the ball has to have space that allows swinging his/her racquet and continuing the play.

For that reason, tennis courts have normally a distance of 6 metres at each end and 3 metres to the sides.
Yes, that's still part of the court, you dimwit



The dimensions of the court are 24 metres in length and 11 in width.


So, the fencing around a single tennis court is a rectangle with the minimum dimensions of 36 metres by 17 metres. Like it happens at Tapas:
Seriously, because I am losing the will to continue, what the fuck are you going on about?



That makes tennis not to be exactly a game in which one can easily communicate for chat on the side with a player playing it .
Eh?


The player has to come to the fence and unlike collective sports like football, rugby or field-hockey, where a player can come quickly to the side-line to be asked something and the games continues without him or her, in tennis there are too few players.

That means that if one of the tennis players has to stop and come to the fence even for just a quick talk, the game is interrupted and the other player(s) have to wait until s/he to returns.
You mean, in order for one player to come to the side of the court for a quick word with a spectator, the play has to stop?

Well, yes it does, otherwise it would be cheating, you see? What with the opponent not being there to return the ball and all. It is considered more sporting to wait until they are in a position to receive.

Or I suppose you could just ask for permission to fuck their wife, whichever floats your boat.


To prolong such a conversation is disrespectful to all the other players waiting, so not exactly the right location for a man, out of the blue, to go and interrupt to ask a player if he can go help his wife, without having a major reason, such as an emergency, for doing so.
You do realise this was just some holidaymakers having a knock up, and not the final of the US Open, don't you?

And you do realise that it was Gerry McCann who asked David Payne to drop in to see if Kate needed help, and not the other way round?

"and err Gerry had asked me just to pop in and check everything was alright err with Kate or you know again I can't remember the exact reason whether he was just making sure it was alright that he could stay there and you know more time but you know he'd asked me to pop in."


The permission story was just too absurd to be true, in any tennis court.
YOU INVENTED IT, you fucking moron!

Actually, here's the thing. Your ''Sister'' invented it, and the three of you are so fucked up that you can't even keep on board with who invented what



8. The particulars of the Tapas tennis courts

But, the absurd becomes laughable when one gets to know the tennis courts at Tapas.
Oh sweet Jesus


A fucking tennis court

As everyone now knows, the 2 courts are on a different level in that space.

It was only after being inside the Tapas area that one can really understand how out-of-the way from the rest of the space that these courts really are.
They're not



They are at the farthest corner away from the main entrance to the area.
They are literally right next door to the Tapas. And the kiddies pool. As you can see in the bastard photo. Or has Sky News 'digitally remastered' that too?



The entrance to the space is almost hidden and made up of a stairs with 13 steps. The difference in height between the top and bottom of stairs (rest of Tapas area and tennis courts) is around 2.0/2.1 metres.

From the light cloud, I deduce this photo was taken on a Tuesday

A not that important detail is that the 2 courts are not level with each other as can be seen above.


The one furthest from the Tapas bar was is about 30/40 cm higher than the one nearer. Making the difference of heights between the kids’ area and the courts to be about 2.0/2.1 metres to the one nearest to the Tapas bar and 1.70/1.80 metres for the other.



We don’t know on which court was Gerry playing in. The only indication we have is that 14:30/15:30 he played on court #2 and even then, we don’t know which one that is.

So, this is the scenario.

David on his way to the apartment decides to significantly detour out of his way into the Tapas area. Inside that out of the way area, he heads to another out of the way area there, the tennis courts, to ask a man who is on the other side of the fence, about 2 metres below who is feet 6 metres away if he could if he could go help the man’s wife, without giving any reason why she would need this help, and the man below and apparently far away, gives his permission without knowing exactly what he has given permission  for.
Okay, this is really starting to piss me off.

For those wondering what the fuck is going on, allow me to explain.

This post wasn't written by the person most of you know as Textusa, ie certified lunatic Maria Santos. Maria masquerades as ''three'' because she has two hangers-on. This post was written by one of the hangers on.

This hanger-on, let's call her shitforbrains for short, is stating that the reason she believes in the swinging is because David Payne sought permission from Gerry McCann to visit Kate McCann in the McCann apartment.

And where did shitforbrains get that idea from?

She got it from Textusa, who famously wrote :

"My supposition is that David saw Kate pass-by running, all sweaty and sexy, clothes clinging to her body and, sure enough, got aroused. He then went to the tennis-court to get the green light from Gerry, or most likely, just to tell him to stay out of apartment for the next hour or so."

So here we have the delicious irony of Textusa no2 quoting the invention of Textusa no1 as the reason for believing in the 'swinging' theory



Or if Gerry came close to the wall:

Hey Gerry, you can see our house from here

Does this make any sense?


No, it doesn’t but believe it or not, it’s the official version of events.
Er, no it isn't.
The 'official' version of events is as I quoted above. You are quoting from what Textusa no1 describes as her ''supposition''


It only makes sense if it was what we say it was: an invented story clearly seeking a justification for David Payne having been inside the apartment together with Kate without either Fiona or Gerry being there.
Except nowhere does that version of events exist apart from this blog.



9. Where’s Gerry?

But besides the absurdity there are 2 sets of circumstances that may surprise the reader surrounding this absurd absurdity.
I sincerely doubt that, but let's have a go.


The first is that there’s no way for David to know that Gerry is playing tennis.
Of course there is. They were meeting up for the Men's tennis evening.


This is what Fiona has to say about what she knew of the whereabouts of Gerry that afternoon:

“When they were asleep, I think that day, I know Dave had been talking about trying to go wind surfing because the weather was better. I'm just trying to recall. I think mum had tennis possibly, I think I just stayed at the apartment, Dave possibly, sort of halfway through the afternoon, while the kids were still asleep, went off to do some wind surfing and I think Matt and Russell had already gone down to do, to take a boat out a bit earlier, so the men were sort of out of the picture, and I don't know what Gerry was doing. Erm, as I say, mum, I can't remember whether mum was with me or not, she possibly had played a bit of tennis, I think she might have played a bit of tennis with Jane, I don't know, I can't comment on them, but I was around, I was around the apartment'.”
That was earlier in the afternoon before most of the group went to the Pariaso. What does that have to do with anything?


We will later see that she states that the men had scheduled to play tennis at 18:00. So, possibly Gerry could have been playing tennis but he, just like David could have been late and, for example still be in his apartment together with Kate.
Except that his movements are listed in his statement


So, David, enters the Tapas area assuming that Gerry is there but running the risk of him not being.
So what? They had returned because of the men's tennis evening, as previously arranged


And how is that important? Well, besides him making a needless trip inside the Tapas area, doesn’t logic dictate that if Kate needed any sort of help, Gerry wouldn’t have left the apartment in the first place? To help her with whatever she needed?
So you DO know what the purpose of his visit was? All this time you have been claiming that David asked permission to go and help Kate, but you actually knew that wasn't the case


No, instead, we have a man who without knowing if the woman’s husband was indeed playing tennis, assumes he is and then offers to help her with something that her husband saw no need to stay home to do himself.
He didn't offer to do anything - Gerry asked him. And they had arranged to play tennis



10. Hurry, to be or not to be?

But the second set of circumstances is the most fascinating.
I somehow doubt that


What few people realise is that when Payne remembered to go help Kate for reasons only he knows, he was in a hurry… to play tennis.
Er no - when Gerry asked him to help Kate


Again Fiona Payne in her rogatory:

“Erm, and then I remember it getting to tennis time, because it was men's tennis that night and the men had all rearranged the time to suit us and it was getting towards six o'clock and, you know, they were going to be late, so I remember saying 'Look, you better go because it's not fair, you've moved the time then you'll be late'. Erm, so I think that, that was sort of approaching five to six. And we were toying with the idea of getting the kids ice creams for pudding and then thought oh we probably don't have time, but then we decided well, you know, why don't you go off and go to your tennis and we'll just give them their ice cream and follow on. And so I think they left probably about, you know, that being Matt and Dave and Russell, around five to six, six o'clock time. And the, you know, the wives stayed behind with the kids, they had ice cream and then we followed on about ten past six and we just walked back up to, to watch them play a bit of tennis and give the kids, you know, a little playtime. Erm, and I don't think we stayed there that long that night because the kids were pretty, pretty tired. Erm, I'm trying to think, I'd say probably by seven o'clock we were, me and my mum headed back with the kids to start bath time. Erm, and Dave, we left him playing tennis for a bit longer. Erm, I think we'd bathed the kids by the time he got back, probably ten minutes later. Erm, and then I went for a run that night, after the kids were bathed'.”
See?
Pre-arranged.


We see no such change in the tennis booking sheets, with the exception of seeing that Gerry was moved from 15:30-16:30 slot to an earlier one 14:30-15:30:
The men's tennis evening was a block booking and nothing to do with the earlier slots. It is clearly indicated on the fucking sheet



Gerry who then was playing tennis again when David at around 18:15 remembers that he wants to help Kate and that he has to have Gerry’s permission.
No, that was your sister's fantasy version, possums


Gerry must have loved tennis (a vice he seems to have abandoned) certainly more than he did like any other sport!


So, at 18:15, David was Payne in a hurry prompted by his wife to go and play tennis but he decides to make rather a prolonged pit-stop by going inside the Tapas area, to the tennis courts, shout at Gerry he wants to help Kate, gets his agreement shouted back, heads for the for apartment 5A, stays, according to him, there for half an hour and according to Kate, a few minutes.
It wasn't a prolonged pit-stop, he doesn't shout at Gerry that he wants to help Kate and he never claimed he was there half an hour. Apart from that, spot on.


He only says that he admired the beauty of the children and does not register seeing an adult woman who only had a towel around her but most importantly never gets to, in any way, explain what he did all that time he says he was there nor in what way he helped Kate.
He didn't say he did not register her, nor did he say he was there for half an hour and he explained that his help was not required. Apart from that, spot on.


Reading the above, as others had started without him, one would think he had abandoned the idea of going to play tennis.

But that was not the case. Far from it. After this significant and prolonged detour, that’s what he decides to do: go and play tennis.
It was not a significant or prolonged detour. Apart from that, spot on.


Something he had been in a hurry to do at the start of all this.

Is this a badly written script? No, to call this a script would be a huge insult to all script writers including all those with no talent.
And the script was written by your big sister, you utter chump



11. Conclusion

Anyone know any synonyms of absurd?

Do use them ALL please to qualify this episode.
Oh, we are dear. You can count on that


Note, this is not ill-playing a horrible script. This is the script itself. The only bad playing in it is the discrepancy of the time Payne spent in the apartment. The rest is played as “written”.
As written by ''Textusa'', you utter dimwit


And that time discrepancy is just another indication of a hastily concocted story. They didn’t account for a question about how long visit lasted? Of course they would.
And neither said anything about half an hour


The ridiculousness of the entire thing shows that this invention was rushed. It was done in haste and under pressure. It they had time and not a hundred other things to focus on, the would have come up with a minimally credible story.
It's Textusa's story. "Minimally credible" is an aspiration she has yet to achieve


Note, only the excuse was invented. Because if there was a need to concoct so hastily an excuse for David having been in the apartment, it was because he had been there.
It was invented by YOU. Fucksake. 


Note, as we said, this is the official version. We see many people interested in analysing the wording and body language used by the McCanns and very few questioning the lack of clarification about this help Payne offered Kate that evening.

He didn't offer anything. That is YOUR FUCKING INVENTION, you total loon


Postscript

There will probably be a number of these, as the answers to the questions posed on the comments page are truly epic 😀



In the circumstances, and seemingly pivotal to the events of 3 May, I've often wondered why neither David Payne nor Kate McCann were re-interviewed by the PJ, as the others were, on or around 10 May.
Reply



  1. DE F,

    Very interesting question and one that has fed that false urban myth that there are unpublished PJ Files.

    And before getting to the crux of your comment, and to set aside this myth, are we to believe that if either David Payne of Kate McCann had given some sort of damning statement that the PJ were not “allowed” to use (something so completely illegal in Portugal that it’s even quite insulting even to just mention it) that Mr Amaral would have been silent about it in his book or now?

    There are no second statements from either because they weren’t heard the second time.

Correct. For once. 



  1. We believe this happened because, as both were indeed crucial as to what happened and it couldn’t possibly be afforded any more discrepancies between the statements of these 2 (who were the only ones able to further clarify what really happened in that encounter) it was ensured that neither was heard again by the PJ.
Nope. 



  1. With Kate, it was easy as there supposedly was nothing she could say to enlighten the police that Gerry couldn’t, so hearing one would be like hearing both. So it was either arranged some social event or then it was asked for the police to respect her grief, as Gerry was entirely available to all.


Nope. Here is what happened.
She was in fact recalled for a second interview and attended the police station. They never got to her that day because they ran out of time, so she was asked to return the following day.

In the meantime, Alan Pike contacted them, concerned for her welfare, and asked for the interview to be put back for a few days. David Payne was not called to be reinterviewed 


  1. As to David, then the encounter was not seen as suspicious at all. Both parties involved had agreed it happened and the only relevant discrepancy was the time it lasted but that could be dismissed as one thinking that it lasted longer than the other. There was nothing then to fire a red flag to the police about this encounter.

There was no red flag, as the police didn't know about it. Nobody mentioned it in the first round of interviews or if they did it certainly didn't make it into their statements 


  1. So, both were kept far out of reach from the police. With loads happening and with so many throwing false leads at them, the second hearing of both simply did not happen.

Sheer fabrication, from someone clearly unfamiliar with the files 


  1. On hindsight, the fact that they were kept away from the police tells us that this meeting is indeed pivotal to the case. That’s when and where we think Maddie died by accident.

So you reached your conclusion on an entirely false premise, in that case.
It figures  

A little later:




DE F,

Besides your last paragraph (in which we agree to disagree and fully respect your disagreement) we fully agree with what you wrote.

But for them to have been heard, they would have to be present for hearing.

Now it is simplistic to say that the PJ would simply order them to be in the facilities at a certain hour and they had no choice but to be there. 



Kate was called, and she was present. They ran out of time 


However, reality shows otherwise. One just has to remember the resistance Mr Amaral encountered to use the clothing Maddie had on the holidays to get DNA samples.


Absolute nonsense. At no time did Mr Amaral try to recover clothing for such a purpose and none was withheld. Complete fabrication, no pun intended  


It was a resistance shown by his own hierarchy and not by the British.

Cobblers 


So we believe that both Kate and David were called to be heard on the 10th as they should, however the reason was given for both not "being able" to be there, Mr Amaral and his team just had to accept it and hear those that were "available" to be heard.

Also cobblers