11 May 2009


Why it's hard to warm to ice-cold McCanns




STILL SEARCHING: Kate and Gerry McCann

DID any of you see the McCanns on Oprah on Thursday night?

Two years on and isn't it amazing how we're still all glued to watching Gerry and Kate discuss the disappearance of their young daughter Maddie?

While I couldn't even begin to imagine their anguish, I couldn't help but be shocked at the size of their palatial home in Wales.

After all, these were a couple who left their three young children alone in a small apartment, while they went off to enjoy themselves for the evening at a bar down the road.

Surely a family of their obvious wealth could have afforded a nanny to help them out, or at the very least a babysitter for each of the evenings they went out and left the kids?


I've said it before, but what would have happened if they weren't both influential doctors? What if they were just working-class people who scraped up enough money for the holiday, couldn't afford a babysitter and just took a chance?

The McCanns have always seemed to me to be a little cold in their dealings with the world's media in their quest to find their daughter.

So I couldn't believe my ears when Oprah asked how they now treated their twins. "Are you afraid to let them out of your sight?" asked Oprah. I assumed, like everyone else, Kate would say, "Of course!"




But instead, Kate looked a bit distant for a moment before coming back with, "Eh, well... we have to let them live their lives. And we have to let them grow."

I nearly fell off the seat! Anyone who I've discussed the situation with before would agree that you'd have the other kids tied to you at all times.


Hopefully for the sake of Maddie's younger brother and sister, the mystery of her disappearance will be solved sooner rather than

Like in the case of Philip Cairns, whose remains Gardai were once again searching for this week in Dublin, I'm hoping for both families' sakes that these latest developments might put an end to their nightmares. No family deserves to continue with not knowing where their child may be.


viv said...

Stevo on 3 As has put a transcript of the Oprah interview on. The McCanns story is just the most incredible load of unbelievable old cobblers IMO and Oprah is really pretty challenging. She gives them the chance to wholeheartedly apologise for leaving Maddie alone, they do not take it!

Narrator: In their first interview in America, Oprah talks to Madeleine McCann's parents

Oprah: You have been vilified all over the world. What do you want to say about that?

Do you think that someone was watching your family?

Will there come a point when you will say enough?

What life is like now without their daughter.

Do you believe she is still alive?

The new search for Madeleine next.

Oprah VO: Someone somewhere knows what happened to MM. It's a story that captured the world and terrified parents all over the world. Two years ago, two years ago, little Madeleine vanished on a family vacation in Portugal. She was only 3 years old.

It was the spring of 2007. Kate and Gerry McGann were enjoying a family vacation in PDL Portugal with their two year old twins Sean and Amelie and 3 year old Madeleine.

Clip - Kate: They were having a great time and the kids and Madeleine in particular was having a ball.

Oprah VO: The McCanns were traveling with several other families and some nights the parents would put their children to bed and meet up at the resort's Tapas restaurant less than 100 yards away. The adults would take turns checking on their children every half hour.

Clip - Gerry: It seemed a fairly natural sort of thing to do was so close so you could actually see the apartment.

Clip - Kate: There was absolutely no way if I had had the slightest inkling that there was a risk involved there that I would have done it.

Oprah - VO: On the fifth night at around 10 o'clock it was Kate's turn to check on the children

Clip - Kate: It was on the third check which was my check erm that I went erm, and I discovered Madeleine had been taken and I just ran and say not Madeleine not Madeleine not Madeleine and I can just remember saying that over and over and over again.

Oprah: Madeleine was missing and the search was on. The next day her parents Kate and Gerry held their first press conference. It would prove to be the beginning of an international media frenzy.

Clip - Gerry: Please, if you have Madeleine, let her come home to her mummy, daddy, brother and sister

Oprah - VO: Within hours of that emotional plea. News of the McCann's tragedy traveled around the world.

Various clips...Beckham/Pope etc.

Oprah - VO: After searching tirelessly for four months with few solid leads the McCanns became suspects or what the Portuguese call Arguidos.

Lawyer in Portimao: Kate and Gerry McCann have both been today declared Arguidos.

Oprah - VO: With that stunning news Kate and Gerry decided to leave Portugal - the last place they've seen their daughter Madeleine.

Gerry at EMA: Whilst it's heartbreaking to return to the UK without Madeleine, it does not mean we've given up our search for her. Despite there being so much we'd wish to say we are unable to do so except to say this "we have played no part in the disappearance of our lovely daughter Madeleine".

Oprah (Studio): Well Kate and Gerry were officially cleared as suspects in the case of their missing daughter last July and the McCanns are here today for their first interview in the United States. Thank you for joining us.

Kate and Gerry: Thank you

Oprah: I know this is a really hard time cause it's two years exactly.

Kate: It is yeah

Oprah: Uh huh...how are you?

Kate: Erm [sigh] we'll we're still going. Erm, we're working really hard and we have our better days and our not so good days erm but we're persevering and we're pressing on whilst there's hope.

Oprah: Anniversaries harder than other days or about the same?

Kate: I, I cannot believe that two years has passed I mean I cannot believe it's two years since I've seen Madeleine and she's had two years without being with her family where she should be, so from that point of view it's a real significant mark.

Oprah: Do you believe she is still alive?

Gerry: There's absolutely no reason to believe that she's not alive and I think that's the key thing and...

Oprah: Is that wishful thinking, hopeful thinking or is there some part of you that feels it, senses it, or does...just does not want to give up

Kate: I think it's partly fact in that you know, there's no evidence at all to suggest that Madeleine's come to any harm. Erm, part of me that, you know I do feel she's there, you know that connection is there, now whether that's just because I'm her mother and erm that will always be there that bond I don't know but, I don't feel that she's that far away you know

Oprah: Well I, you know, I'd read something that said there were times even you know early on after she err went missing that you would say I want I hope that whoever has her gives her her blanket I hope that whoever has her is keeping her warm I hope that whoever has her...

Kate: I mean it's funny, it's you know, I mean as a mum it's things like that you worry about as well you know. Is someone brushing her teeth. Is someone rubbing her tummy when she's not feeling well. You know, it's all those things as a mother you do and you should be doing and...

Oprah: But then do you let yourself go to the worst sometimes?

Kate: I mean I do I think it's natural and you know I know people mean well and they say don't let yourself go there and it's not going to help going there but as, as a mum inevitably there are times when I do and they're the times that I kind of dip down erm obviously I'm going to worry about her constantly you know...

Oprah: I would imagine there have been many times when you have dipped down. In this past two year cycle so much has happened what has been the worst for you were there times when you thought you wouldn't get through it?

Kate: I mean I think nothing is gonna be worse than those early days really. It was horrific, it was awful and I don't believe there can be a greater pain.

Gerry: It's something that you know, no parent should have to go through. It is just the most devastating horrible sensation err fear for your child and your whole existence, your family existence.

Oprah: Yeah, yeah, we'll be right back with Kate and Gerry McCann

Clips in Rothley: slushy music...

Kate: You know we tried very hard erm to have a baby and err it took many years err until I got pregnant and the day Madeleine was born it was the, the most special day of me life and I did actually believe she was a real gift to us...

...I just can't believe how I you know...after five years of desperately trying to have children to suddenly having three it was great it was just lovely we were just so happy..

...I never had a day where I took my children for granted erm having been through what I'd been through. But you actually forget how precious life is erm until something awful happens and you realise just how perfect our life was.

Twinkly music - Gerry/Kate looking solemn.

Kate: You know it's only a couple of years since I've seen her but for someone so young erm I just thought she's quite amazing

Video from Xmas 2008...happy and you know it...

Kate: It's obviously quite hard thinking about it....sorry. She was just really good company you know just err. She just I mean...she just she's like my little friend sort of all the time...

...the ones that Madeleine has done I just can't pull down to be honest. Yeah it says here "Madeleine Donegal - Easter/2007" and that was erm the April we went to Portugal.

You know I look back and think oh why can't we just rewind the clock and it takes you back to really happy memories you know, things that you really enjoyed and it's just a reminder really of what isn't here anymore.

Oprah: Ooh..that’s hard...it's hard. The McCanns are here today for their first interview in the United States. Well you know you have been vilified all over the world for having dinner with your friends that night and the proximity you know less than a hundred yards away and leaving your children, the twins and Madeleine alone. And I'm sure you have beaten yourself up many times over that. Obviously if you could do it differently you would at this point.

Kate: Absolutely.

Oprah: Yeah, so what do you want to say about that?

Kate: I mean erm as you say I know I can persecute myself everyday about that and I feel awful that we weren't there at that minute and somebody took an opportunity to take Madeleine erm but if there'd been a second where'd I'd had to consider is this ok to do this it just would not have happened, it just would not have...

Oprah: Because this was, you all had done this every night for five nights straight, is what I'd read. So you'd done it every night and never thought err we are endangering our children or maybe we shouldn't do it.

Gerry: I think no we felt very safe and, and a quite a lot of resorts in Europe there is a baby listening service and we were, we were doing that ourselves within the group in actually going in to the apartments.

Oprah: So there's a group of seven friends was it?

Gerry: There was nine adults in total erm and that's what we were doing and really we were just checking to make sure none of the kids were crying.

Oprah: How man, how many children are being checked on there?

Gerry: There were eight

Oprah: Eight children?

Gerry: Yeah

Kate: Three, three families

Gerry: Can I, can I just say I think the worst thing about you know, the fact that many people have blamed us and villified us and and with hindsight you know it was clearly a mistake with hindsight but the worst thing for me about that is there's an abductor out there and that person stole our child and went into an apartment and took a child and he's anonymous and blameless.

Oprah: You believe it was a he?

Gerry: Almost certainly a male almost certainly

Oprah: And is that because one of your friends Jane...

Gerry and Kate: Tanner

Oprah: ...had seen was err explain to me because I had read that she was coming out of her villa at nine fifteen. So let's go back to that night if you don't mind.

Gerry: Yeah

Oprah: Let's go back to the night. Nine oh-five, you all are at dinner and you made the-the-the check at nine so you're checking every half hour.

Gerry: It was actually nine o'clock while the whole group were in the restaurant and one of our friend's Matt already went up and checked his err daughter and as he came back I went up to check on Madeleine [hesitation] and the twins and I went into the apartment and err really just checking the crying and the door...

Oprah: Checking to see if there was any crying

Gerry: Yeah that was it and the door was erm open more, I'd, I'd left it just ajar about 5 degrees and we checked them before we left and they were sound asleep

Oprah: Which door are you talking about?

Gerry: This is the bedroom door, to err their room, the three children were in the same room so I actually stepped into the room and the twins were sound asleep and Madeleine was lying in her bed exactly where she was when I left, Cuddle Cat up beside her head on her blanket and err and I closed the door and went to...

Oprah: And this is about nine-oh-five?

Gerry: Just yeah, so I went outside and I was outside the apartment and I met err one of the other guests and he was coming the other way with his kid and I actually crossed the road to erm to chat to him and we were sort of chatting for about five minutes and during that, Jane went to check on her children and it was at that point she was just passed us going up to the corner and she saw a man carrying a young girl with almo.. she described independently the pyjamas that Madeleine had on and she didn't see the child's face she didn't you know she saw me there she'd seen that I'd just been in the apartment and so she at the time she thought it was something odd but it didn't raise enough alarm bells to challenge the person or anything

Kate: The child was barefoot and bare armed and he had a quite heavy jacket on so I think it was one of those things that just seemed a little bit odd but obviously it's not until later on that you realise.

Oprah: So this is the sketch of that person that err your friend Jane err remembers seeing but Jane, Jane didn't say anything when she came back to the table, yeah, because she saw you standing there.

Gerry: Yeah yeah

Oprah: So erm you discovered that Madeleine was missing so you checked it about 9:05 another friend sees this man at 9:15 and you went back to check again at...

Kate: Well actually at 9:30 I stood up to go and check on Madeleine, because it was my turn. And at the same time Matt our friend stood up and we both started walking and he said well I'm going to check on G***e they were the next apartment to us he said "I'll check on Madeleine" and he hesitated a bit and then he said "no, I'll check" so he went to check at half nine came back said fine everything's fine so I then went at 10 o'clock the next check erm...

Oprah: Did he see her in the bed at 9:30?

Kate: No he just went in and listened and there was no crying

Oprah: So he came back and said everything's fine cause you all everybody's just checking to see if there's crying and there's no crying so everything's fine and so then you went at ten.

Kate: I went at ten and I went into the apartment and there was no crying I stopped and there was no crying. And then I just noticed that the door was quite open

Oprah: Which door?

Kate: Their bedroom door sorry, and we usually have the door as Gerry said sort of not closed but ajar just so that a little bit of light gets in and it's not too dark in the room so I thought oh Matt must have gone in and left the door open

Oprah: same thing he thought

Kate: Yeah, so I thought well I'll just close it over again, and as I went to close it over it slammed shut and I thought and it was like sort of you know a draught had caused it to shut so I turned behind me and I thought are the patio doors open and they were closed and I thought well that's strange so then I opened the door thinking I'll open it ajar a bit again and that was when I kind of looked into the room and when I just looked and it was quite dark and I was just looking and looking at Madeleine's bed and I was thinking is that her that I was looking for why isn't Madeleine there? And then in the end I walked over and thought oh, she's not in bed and then I thought maybe she's wandered through to our bed and that's why the door's open so I went through to our bedroom and she wasn't there and then I kind of see then I'm starting to panic a bit and I ran back into their room and literally as I went back into their room the curtains that were drawn over just "foooosh" flew open and that's when I saw that the shutter was right up and the window was pushed right oper. And that was when I just knew that erm someone had taken her. So I, I mean I ran to the window and I didn't know what I thought was going to see but I ran to the window and then I quickly hmm quickly looked through the wardrobes I had I suppose this temporary thought she was cowering in a wardrobe or something anyway she wasn't there and I just ran out and soon as...

Oprah: was she in a closet, in a closet?

Kate: Yeah just in case, just in case she's hiding or something I don't know and then I just went flying out the backdoor and erm ran to Gerry and just as soon as I saw the table where they were sitting I just started shouting "someone's taken her, Madeleine's gone" you know and erm that's how it all started really but erm [hyperventilates]

Oprah: Why did you feel immediately, I'd heard that you'd said "They've taken her, they've taken her"

Kate: nnnn....I didn't say that I said, said "somebody's taken her Madeleine's gone". Well from the way I found the room it was obvious because a child could not open those shutters and the window

Oprah: uh huh

Kate: erm so it was obvious to me

Gerry: You know when she came back and she she shouted "someone's taken her" and there was just disbelief

Kate: Taken her that's fine they all jumped up and they were saying if Kate don't worry she's fine, she's fine she'll be there she'll be there and I said she's gone, she's - tak, somebody's taken her you know it was just like...

Gerry: And the way the room was you know.

Kate: It was just like disbelief you know...

Gerry: The way that window was and the shutter up and the window open there was no way Madeleine could have done that err at that age and err it was just terrifying.

Oprah: Madeleine was almost as they said four or sixth birthday will be May 12th erm and recently the McCanns had this age progression done by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children with the hope that the search for their daughter Madeleine will continue. Here's what three year old Madeleine looked like when she disappeared and here is what experts believe that she will look like today. Almost six, on May the 12th is her birthday. We will be right back.

Narrator: Coming up....

Oprah: First of all tell us why you seemed not as emotional

Rothley sequence

Kate: In the last kind of few hours that I spent with Madeleine were lovely. Erm she was really tired, very very tired, erm after she'd tea, dinner erm we went back to the apartment erm, bathed all the kids, and then we, we sat on the couch and we read some stories and, had a few little treats and we were all cuddled in and it was nice. It was erm it was warm and loving and erm. And I can remember it quite vividly. Mmmh. Yeah I can visualise it as I'm speaking.

End sequence

Oprah: Well two years ago Madeleine McCann vanished while on vacation with her family in Portugal. Her parents Kate and Gerry are here today because they want the world to know they are still searching for their little girl and they believe that someone, somewhere knows something about her, her disappearance. How often do you think about those last moments?

Kate: Quite a lot I mean, they were really special actually it was funny in a way because that night at that time was more significant than previous nights I remember everything I mean she took my engagement ring off and put it on her finger which she she did quite frequently and err...you know I can remember the stories I read you know.

Oprah: What did you read?

Kate: Oh it was one of her favourite stories which is called Mog which is about a cat and, I mean a story we read which seems ironic now but the story we read erm the last story is "when you're happy and you know it"

Oprah: uh huh

Kate: and err...

Oprah: And so when you came and realised that your daughter was missing and you're in a foreign country at the time you made a decision you know an effort to try to get her picture out to try to err engage the media, is that true?

Gerry: It wasn't [sigh] so much a conscious decision after a few hours erm some of our friends were saying that we'd contact the media, contact the media you know at least Portuguese police were saying no, no media, no media and we were desperate at that point

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: The overwhelming feeling was like helplessness. Absolute helplessness I mean you're absolutely desperate I mean this is our daughter who you just love beyond words and every second is like hours you know...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: and nothing can happen quick enough...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: so you just want as many people as you can out there looking...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: praying...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: closing borders, you know...

Gerry: I think yeah...

Kate: to try and get her back

Oprah: I think that's a really powerful statement I never actually, never thought of it that way before but I'm sure other parents who are watching you or anybody who's had a child missing understands what you mean when you say "nothing can happen quick enough"

Kate: And you know Oprah...

Oprah: ...nothing can happen quick enough...

Kate: It was so dark...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: it was dark, erm I've never had such a long night it was dark and you're just praying for the light you know to come up to get out there it's just...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: There's a feeling of utter helplessness as well and erm it's interesting cause although there's been a lot of negative those early days there was just an incredible power that people wanted to help us

Oprah: yeah in the early days

Gerry: yeah yeah I mean and

Oprah: and then that turned

Gerry: it did yeah

Oprah: Yeah, can we go back to that press conference that was four days afterwards cause there was a press conference that was held err just four days after Madeleine disappeared Kate made another plea to the public for her return, let's watch that.

Press Conference Clip:

Kate: Madeleine is a beautiful, bright, funny, and caring little girl. She is so special. Please, please do not hurt her. Please don't scare her. Please tell us where to find her or pla - put her in a place of safety and let somebody know where she is. We beg you to let Madeleine come home.

Oprah: Well the tabloids used that press conference against the McCanns saying that Kate's lack of emotion implied that she was guilty, so, first of all tell us why you seemed err not as emotional.

Kate: I mean there were two aspects really, I'd spent seventy two hours I think crying erm and then suddenly almost feel like a little bit numb it's really hard to describe you know

Oprah: Yeah so I just want to verify that cause I had read that before the conference a behavioural expert spoke to you

Kate: certainly in the first week yeah

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: and they said it's quite important that you don't show any emotion erm because the abductor could get some kind of I don't know some adverse kick out of it and I tell you when someone says to you, you know if you do this or you, you know you get a feeling from them that if you do this it could be detrimental in some way to your daughter

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: I mean it's huge pressure on you to, to do that I mean the last thing I want obviously is to cause any extra further harm to Madeleine so...

Oprah: do you regret taking that advice?

Kate: No, I mean it was advice that was given with the best intention

Oprah: yeah

Kate: and I have to take expert advice you know I mean

Gerry: Who can judge how you're going to react?

Oprah: right...

Gerry: You know how many people have been in that situation?

Oprah: uh huh...we'll be right back

Narrator: Coming up

Oprah: And then there were the hurtful rumours that you accidentally caused her, her death.

Clip: Kate holding Madeleine as a baby

Oprah: How has your marriage been through all of this because a lot of marriages, a lot of people get pulled apart

Gerry: Hmmm, I think you know a child abduction I think could destroy any family, there's no doubt about it erm it's, it's one of the most devastating things and then if you look what's happened to us subsequently but we, we've been supported tremendously well

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: and I think that's helped us stay strong and stay together

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...and obviously we're really united in our goal and our love of Madeleine and Sean and Amelie.

Oprah: Once you were made official suspects, erm what was that moment like for you?

Kate: [sigh] Oh it was err, there were two things really I mean one it was incredibly upsetting cause you know just when you think things can't get any worse but actually it made me very angry erm and I know anger is not a good emotion but, it suddenly dawned on me that they weren't looking for Madeleine. They weren't looking for Madeleine and they weren't looking for the abductor and I just, I just felt so angry on her behalf I thought she just deserves so much more than that and suddenly when that happened and I got angry I just felt strong I just thought I'm going to fight you to the death for Madeleine you know, she needs us to be there and I just, suddenly, I don't know I just kind of got strength from somewhere.

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: I think though that that when the policeman told us they were going to be reinterviewed as arguido I mean it's a slightly odd legal situation, it really means a person of interest to the enquiry it's not really you know that you're being charged you can be declared arguido if you're have to answer questions which may incriminate yourself but I think Kate just turned round and said "what are you trying to do, destroy our family?" you know and you'd already had the biggest insult you could have as a parent and then to be accused or err it was suggested you were involved in your own daughter's disappearance...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...that was pretty bad.

Oprah: And then there were the, the, the hurtful rumours that you drugged Madeleine or that you gave her sedatives that you err accidentally caused her, her death.

Kate: [long pause] I mean we know it's all lies

Gerry: It's just nonsense you know there's no that people can have theories and that's all it is there's no evidence to support any of that and it's absolute ludicrous you know and it's....

Oprah: Did you understand at first though because in our country I don't know obviously you've heard of the Susan Smith case which was over fifteen years ago woman who stood up

Gerry: Yeah Kate's....

Oprah: and killed her children...and I think that's what changed the way everybody thought about child abduction particularly in our country after Susan Smith L-I-E-D in public

Gerry: it's it's...

Oprah: ...and, and it turns out she's the one that put her children in the lake.

Gerry: It was, it was interesting though cause Kate's aunt who lives in Vancouver she was talking about when we'd been accused of having lack of emotion and she, she cited this...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...err woman's case and saying she was screaming and wailing and balling...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...you know and you think you know that doesn't mean anything you know

Oprah: yeah it doesn't mean anything...

Gerry: but it, it was and it's quite hard you know you can you just deny things and it's like well you know, does a denial change anyone's mind

Oprah: mmmh...

Gerry: ...and it's quite hard you know once you've been smeared like that it's actually how do you prove, how do you prove a negative

Kate: How do you prove innocence?

Oprah: Yeah. Her birthday is May 12th.

Kate: [makes tut noise]

Oprah: And will you celebrate that birthday? Will there be an acknowledgement of that birthday?

Kate: We haven't planned anything yet certainly last year we had a party, just close family and we had a birthday cake and Sean and Amelie knew it was Madeleine's birthday and erm sis

Oprah: Do they remember her?

Kate: Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, they're amazing honestly

Oprah: they're four now, they're four...yeah

Kate: yeah, yeah...

Gerry: I mean it's hard cause they're older than Madeleine was when she was taken now err but those days when you just when things are really bad and you just want to crawl under a rock and never and just say make it all go away Sean and Amelie will just come out with something like "when Madeleine comes back I'm going to give her this" and they talk about her all the time you know she's, she's a big part of their life now and err and you just think you know if Madeleine walks through the door, if we find Madeleine today for Sean and Amelie it'll, it'll feel like she'd never been away and that it err it when you're really struggling they just give you that energy and drive to, to carry on and, and I suppose it's like one of the things we were saying a lot just now is we can't give up never give up on Madeleine.

Oprah: So when you think of her though do you think of her as her almost four year old self or do you think of her as the photo. Let's show the photo err again of what we believe she would look like today. Do you think of her as being...

Kate: No I mean I think of her as she was really cause that's the Madeleine that we know and that's the Madeleine we have memories of and you know the pictures of when she was nearly four tell a story you know we can relate that picture to our time with Madeleine erm I, I don't actually know this little girl you know erm but

Oprah: but if she came back....

Kate: Oh yeah...

Oprah: ...you'd be willing to yeah...

Kate: Oh yeah I'd know 'er if she went past me I'd know 'er for sure

Oprah: We'll be right back.

Rothley Clips:

Sean and Amelie on swing: We're just, we're just, we're just gonna pick some cheese

Kate pushing swing: Getting some cheese on the moon ok

Kate VO: Life has to go on you know if we didn't function then we'd achieve nothing.

Kate to twins: C'mon then I think we need to get ready though.

Kate: If I was so consumed with the, the pain and grief then you know I wouldn't be doing my job as a mother to Sean and Amelie and not for Madeleine you know we still need to find her.

Kate: It's those times that obviously all the emotion comes flooding out and whilst that is important you couldn't do it all the time so yes you know, meals have to be cooked washing has to be done.

Gerry: Bedtime, let's get a story ready

Kate: Sean and Amelie know that we're looking for Madeleine. Now they obviously love their sister very much and for them that's become, that's our job really erm and they know it's ok to be sad

Oprah: How has this affected the way you parent Sean and Amelie? Are you afraid to ever let them out of your sight?

Kate: I think it, it definitely has affected erm I mean it's important I suppose to get the balance I mean they, they have to live, they have to experience life. And there are times when you have to let go a bit...

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: ...for their development.

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: It's hard

Kate: it's difficult

Gerry: yeah...but they also understand now that we're here erm asking people to help us search, for Madeleine and that, you know that image is err, we're looking for a, a six year old girl now.

Oprah: Well I, you know I, I heard you were criticised, villified for washing the Cuddle Cat that was in her bed what seventy days later err do you still carry the Cuddle Cat, that' the Cuddle Cat

Kate: Yeah I do, it's with me [laughs] Yeah I mean I, I find that quite bizarre really I mean Cuddle Cat always used to get washed you know

Oprah: So seventy days after Madeleine was gone there was a story in the, one of the tabloids about her washing away the DNA from the Cuddle Cat but it had been SEVENTY days.

Oprah: Have you ever come close in a lead. Have you ever come close to thinking that you were close to finding her?

Gerry: [sighs] err...I don't think so really it's, it's, it's hard because you almost don't want to let yourself to go there so I think that in the early days and weeks we used to hear about sightings often through the media and lots of family and other people would get very excited and, and sometimes they had you know, almost no credibility whatsoever and until we have some sort of evidence, you know like photograph or, or something then I think we wouldn't allow ourselves to really think this is it

Oprah: to get hopeful

Gerry: too hopeful, yeah...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...was hopeful but not thinking that you're there. It's happened for other families.

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: You know we, we other people might think you know, they're deluded, you know Madeleine's not it has happened Elizabeth Smart and we've met the Smart. You know there's two ways I think Madeleine'll be found this age progression picture...

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...someone now where Madeleine is around will recognise her and that's why we want the image out there...

Kate: ...a match.

Gerry: as far and as wide so they'll do it or the second thing is we'll identify the abductor and...

Kate: ...or...

Gerry: ...that's key

Kate: ...or somebody knows something because at the end of the day this man is known to somebody you know, he's someone's son, someone's brother, someone's cousin, someone's neighbour, someone's colleague, someone's partner, so he's known to someone and even if these people don't know that he definitely did it they might have a suspicion and it's just I guess it's somehow reaching out to them and saying please come forward you know.

Oprah: We'll be right back.

Snow White video then NCMEC clip:

Ernie Allen: We're currently in our forensic imaging unit err these forensic artists every day are ageing the photographs of long term missing children. Nine hundred children have been recovered successfully.

Ernie: The photo in the centre is the photo we used of Madeleine McCann so this is the photo of Kate McCann on the left at age five or six and the photo on the right is of Gerry McCann at the same age. So what our artist will do is to create a combined image that we believe is representative of what Madeleine looks like today.

Kate [hugs Ernie]: It's nice to see you

Ernie: I really want you to understand circulating the photograph of a child who was not quite four, two years later err is not good enough. This is our age progressed image of Madeleine.

Kate: I mean I think it is a reminder of what we've missed out on and particularly you know what Madeleine's missed out on.

Gerry: If that Madeleine walks through the door tomorrow it'll be like she was never been away.

Back in Studio:

Oprah: That was Ernie Allen from the National Center For Missing and Exploited Children. They do amazing work there showing the McCanns what they believe Madeleine erm might look like today. I hear you keep her, Madeleine's room ready for her.

Kate: Yep, no it's all ready and waiting [sigh]..

Oprah: Do you go in the room often?

Kate: I do yeah, I go in about twice a day.

Oprah: Do you talk to her?

Kate: I do usually I mean I, I must admit I tend to open and close the curtains morning and evening and just say hello really, just tell her we'll still going and you know we're going to do everything we can to find her.

Oprah: uh huh...

Oprah: Are the Portuguese Police still looking?

Gerry: Well what's happened is erm the file is officially closed and it, and that was a really difficult period because in Portugal they have a thing called Judicial Secrecy and you're not meant to know what's going on but that was closed last July and then we were given the files on DVD in Portuguese so we have a small err team which is funded from erm Madeleine's Fund and we really hope that people who were in Praia da Luz who might have information and we've asked the local community in Portuguese to come forward and again in combination with a sighting so you know this for us this is a very active search and Kate...

Kate: ...there's no....

Gerry: Kate spends...

Kate: ...there's no law enforcement agency though actively looking for Madeleine I mean obviously you know

Gerry: the onus is on us which you know is pretty frustrating actually

Kate: ...we're driving this

Gerry: ...but as parents you've just got, got to do everything.

Oprah: So have you gone back to work?

Gerry: Yeah I made a decision to go back and for two reasons, one I, I felt it was important that the twins had normality back in their life and erm and me going to work was, was normal and I think almost for selfish reasons I needed to be thinking about something else.

Oprah: Yeah, we'll be right back.

Oprah: Will there come a point when you will say "enough"?

Kate: I mean, I think even if you wanted that and there are days when you just want to get under the duvet or you just want to be in a coma till it's over just to, relieve the pain and get some peace but you can't. I don't think they'll ever get a day if we're still in this situation where we feel we've done everything I, I don't think any parent could, even if you were thinking I need, I need a rest, I need something.

Oprah: Do you think that somebody was watching your family?

Kate: I do now yeah.

Oprah: uh huh...

Oprah: You think somebody was watching you over a period of days or?

Kate: Yeah, which is horrible

Oprah: uh huh...

Kate: I mean it makes you feel sick actually when you think about it

Oprah: What do you want to say to that person?

Gerry: It's not too late to do the right thing you know, they can give her up. They can tell us where she is. They can hand her over, to a priest...or...someone in authority. They can do the right thing.

Kate: Madeleine should be with us. Madeleine should be with her family. She's got a little brother and sister who want her back in her life you know and please you know if you don't want to think about Gerry and I think about Sean and Amelie you know and, bring their big sister back you know.

Oprah: We'll be right back.

Website Ad [www.findmadeleine.com]

Oprah: You recently went back to Portugal...

Gerry: Yeah

Oprah: ...er what was that like for you?

Gerry: It's difficult erm but you know I feel nothing against Praia da Luz or the Algarve as such because child abductions happen all over the world and it's the perpetrator

Oprah: uh huh...

Gerry: ...and we don't know where that person is rather than the apartment or the resort or Portugal

Oprah: ...or the people of the town

Gerry: no, not at all and they were, they were really supportive and

Oprah: and you're right, abductions happen all over the world

Gerry: that's right and I think you know, the best thing for everyone is if we can find Madeleine and who took her

Oprah: uh huh...

Oprah: Thank you so much

Kate: thank you

Oprah: ...for this conversation today...thank you

Gerry: thank you for the opportunity

Oprah: and listen I, it has happened before, it has happened before and so I wish the best for you.

Kate and Gerry: Thank you

Oprah: If you have any information you're watching anywhere around the world go to find Madeleine dot com, find Madeleine dot com

Oprah: Bye everybody

Kate and Gerry: Thank you

Oprah: Thank you.

Wizard said...

Yesterday on the ‘Fátima’ programme, courtesy of JM’s blog. Interview with Amaral and criminal psychologist Paulo Sargento.

Gonçalo Amaral says: “It’s that at the time of the events, only a few days later, we tried to speak with the twins, and what this couple told us, was that they didn’t express themselves well [communication skills], despite being two years old, that they couldn’t speak very well and so on, as a matter of fact it seems that two years later they’re doing better, they’re now four years old, so it’s normal. But at the time, they would know something or they might know. And that’s it; we didn’t force it, because these were two children.”

I would have thought a brief interview with the twins 2 years ago could have proved productive if handled sympathetically by a forensic child psychologist. But the McCanns stopped that from happening.

I just wonder whatever happened 2 years ago was traumatic and as such might be remembered longer. Could the twins have even the vaguest hint of a memory of the evening of 3rd May 2007? I suspect they might.

The problem of course is they have been fed for the last two years the story of an abduction by a monster which no doubt at this point in time they believe.

I still think a chat with them by a professional could elicit some fact from deep within their memory. It isn’t impossible.

Di said...

Hi All


Reading the Oprah interview I am not so sure Oprah was completely taken in by Kate & Gerry. I know all the questions were approved by K&G well in advance so they had plenty of time to get their answers right. I don't know whether it is Clarence who is advising them on their answers, if it is, he is not doing them any favours, they just seem to keep digging a deeper hole for themselves.


When my children were two they could certainly string a sentence together. In fact I can remember being shocked by some of the things they said.

However the twins have not got the best role models for communication skills have they! I wonder if like their parents it is all yeahs umms whoosh and you know.

Di said...

I have just watched the Sic interview with K & G, video on Joana Morais.

Gerry says they are the only one's proactively looking for Madeleine. Now whose fault is that Gerry you could have had the investigation reopened at anytime but you chose not to.

Kate says "why does GA not want to find Madeleine". He very much wants to find Madeleine Kate, is that perhaps why you are so worried. You say he is derailing the investigation. Is it not your two so called PI's that are doing exactly that by announcing they know who has Madeleine, it is one of 5 people in Portugal. Talk about feeding information to the supposed abductor so he can hot foot it out of Portugal. M3 all over again springs to mind.

The one thing I did notice was how nervous Kate & Gerry were, Gerry in particular was very twitchy.

Wizard said...

Hi Di,

I think you mentioned yesterday what happened to the actress that was playing Kate in the C4 docu. Here's the answer.

A source at Mentorn Media – which produced the documentary for Channel 4 – told that the initiative to remove those images came from Gerry McCann, explaining that “the decision was made after the documentary by Gonçalo Amaral was broadcast”, as we had already reported. According to the same source, “the representation of what Kate had done on the night that Maddie disappeared was not convincing and raised some doubts”.


Wizard said...

Evening All,

I understand Gerry is going back to Portugal again.

The old codgers he employed (retired police officers) allegedly say Madeleine is held by one of five suspects they have found during their investigation.

This I believe is a very senior moment by them – LOL

Thie story just gets more ridiculous by the day.

viv said...

Hi Wiz

I too was shocked to learn the McCanns even refused to allow the twins to be debriefed. This would have been a very obvious thing to do had there been some strange man in the childrens bedroom, the McCanns even seem to want to hint the night before also. The police obviously would have used trained pyschologists and to me it is just further confirmation the McCanns had a lot to hide.

As to whether the twins would have any useful memories now, personally I doubt it. As you say the McCanns have covered for that eventuality by constantly implanting in their heads the idea of Maddie being taken by a monster and even getting them to play the game. It just angers me that SSD have allowed them to keep doing this to these two.

What the twins will think in years to come is clearly playing on Gerry's mind. I watched an interview they gave to SIC TV last night and Gerry said well if the twins ask in years to come what did you do to find Maddie we want to be able to say we tried everthing (not verbatim). This is all that matters to this man, just one complete coverup, even from his own children. I doubt they will be so forgiving!

viv said...

Good grief!

So now it is Kate who is the unconvincing liar is it? How about both of them?

“the representation of what Kate had done on the night that Maddie disappeared was not convincing and raised some doubts”.

Could this be a further attempt to set in the public's mind the idea that Kate is somehow responsible, again detracting from the one who actually was?

If they still enjoy a harmonious relationship, I will eat my hat!

viv said...

Lol Wiz, the old codgers believe and Gerry believes them,

how utterly stupid!

viv said...

oh and I wonder why Kate is not rushing back to Portugal to be reunited with Maddie, almost in time for her birthday..

you could not make this up!

viv said...

Di, well exactly, did Gerry not realise the public thought it was ludicrous first time around when we heard it from M3

What a criminal waste of money to keep putting on these fantasy shows!


Is it not your two so called PI's that are doing exactly that by announcing they know who has Madeleine, it is one of 5 people in Portugal. Talk about feeding information to the supposed abductor so he can hot foot it out of Portugal. M3 all over again springs to mind.

viv said...

Di, I completely agree about Oprah.

What she has always wanted to do was get this couple on the show to give their bizarre explanations. She wanted to ask them why they left their children five nights in a row.

She never intended to do the McCanns any favours. This is good journalism. You have a couple of hopeless liars and she allows them to just come on and try and explain. They made the most terrible job of it, you cannot explain the inexplicable and Gerry's hostile body language towards Kate and suggesting he is a liar (shrinking away up against the sofa) was palpable.

When the McCanns are arrested Oprah will be celebrated, she is not stupid!

Wizard said...

Hi Viv,

I think your right about the reasons why the McCann’s would not let the twins be interviewed back in ’07. I suspect they were too frightened what they might possibly say. As you point out this was the act of parents with something to hide.

I bet even today, after all the brain washing the twins have had; the McCann’s would still be uncomfortable about them being interviewed. I just wish someone would ask as it would be interesting to hear the reasons the mc’s would give as to why the twin shouldn’t be asked questions.

Wizard said...

Whilst on the subject of the twins. The McCanns’ tell the twins that their big sister is still alive and she was taken by a big bad monster.

Whoa ……I see they didn’t have much psychology training in their medical degree. Their kids must think to themselves it happened to Madeleine it could happen to me. It the stuff future nightmares and neurosis are built on.

I hate to think of the damage this approach is causing.

Di said...

Hi Viv, Wizard

I totally agree the monster senario is unbelievable, talk about giving your children phobias!

Also the fact that Amelie wears Madeleines shoes and clothes. Under normal circumstances, hand me downs I have no problem with. However, Madeleine is missing, if this was my child those items would be so precious they would be put in a memory box or as Kate keeps saying in Madeleine's untouched bedroom.

I just cannot imagine a loving mother wanting to watch Madeleine's sister wearing Madeleine's clothes under these circumstances.

Di said...

Posted by Jeanne d Arc 3A's


“Os pais de Maddie fazem um show para camuflar a sua mentira”

O polícia português responsável pelo inquérito sobre o desaparecimento da menina é categórico: Maddie morreu e, apesar da sua aparente angústia, os seus pais estão implicados. Num livro explosivo, “o inquérito proibido”, conta como, devido a pressões políticas, foi impedido de demonstrá-lo. Um trabalho de Christian Rappaz na revista “L’Illustré” publicada hoje na Suiça. Tradução do original.

O inquérito da sua vida. Ocupou Gonçalo Amaral dia e noite, entre as 22 horas de 3 de Maio de 2007 e 2 de Outubro de 2008, data da sua saída para a reforma antecipada: o processo Madeleine ( Maddie ) Beth McCann. Uma menina inglesa de 3 anos desaparecida do apartamento de férias da Vila da Luz, Algarve, enquanto os seus pais jantavam num restaurante do complexo hoteleiro, a umas dezenas de metros.

Amaral tem agora 50 anos. Filho de trabalhadores, quinto irmão de seis crianças, ele mesmo pai de duas raparigas de 4 e 9 anos. Teve de deixar as suas funções de inspector porque, diz, “em Portugal e noutros lugares, a politização da polícia obstrui o trabalho desta e impede que justiça seja feita. Como no processo Maddie, cada vez mais inquéritos são asfixiados ou arquivados antes do seu fim.” É desde então consultor judicial na televisão, cronista num grande diário português e ensina criminologia.

Gerry e Kate McCann, os pais de Maddie, ambos médicos, transformaram em drama planetário o desaparecimento da sua filha há dois anos ( ler artigo em anexo ). De David Beckham a Cristiano Ronaldo passando pelo papa Bento XVI, organizaram uma enorme mobilização e criaram um fundo de apoio que atingiu 6 milhões de francos (suíços) em três dias.

Gonçalo Amaral foi afastado do inquérito que a polícia lusitana arquivou oficialmente em 21 de Julho de 2008. Mas Amaral reencontrou a liberdade: a de contar a sua versão, a sua convicção. A sua palavra de polícia.

Quais são os elementos que vos permitem acusar com tanta convicção os pais de Maddie de mentirem ao planeta inteiro?
Há muitos. Primeiro, tal como os dos seus amigos, os seus testemunhos e as suas declarações revelam um grande número de imprecisões, incoerências e contradições. Há seguidamente o odor de um cadáver confirmado pelos cães pisteiros e a existência de vestígios de sangue atrás do sofá do apartamento confirmados pelas análises preliminares. Pode-se presumir que a menina caiu atrás deste móvel, talvez devido a que os seus pais lhe administravam regularmente sedativos, como de resto reconheceram. O mesmo na constatação de odores e vestígios de sangue no automóvel alugado pelos McCann três semanas após o desaparecimento de Madeleine. O único dos onze automóveis controlados que reteve a atenção dos cães. Há igualmente o testemunho de um casal de Irlandeses que afirma ter visto Gerry McCann com uma criança nos braços na noite dos factos. Por último, há as impressões digitais de Kate McCann na janela do quarto de Madeleine o que indica claramente que ela abriu esta janela, sem dúvida para fazer crer na tese de rapto, enquanto declarou que a janela já estava aberta aquando da sua chegada ao local às 22 horas, hora à qual constatou o desaparecimento de Madeleine e deu o alarme.

A intervenção de Gordon Brown?

É a sua verdade, que não é apoiada por nenhuma prova…
Não é a minha verdade, são as conclusões de um inquérito efectuado durante catorze meses por mais de uma centena de polícias e especialistas. No que respeita aos factos, os resultados indicam que as amostras analisadas coincidem a 75% ao perfil ADN de Madeleine.

Porquê, então, todos os índices não constituem provas suficientes?
Porque estes resultados necessitavam, ainda, de confirmação e teria sido necessário proceder a outras investigações com base nestes dados. Os últimos sem dúvida. Pode-se, por exemplo, perfeitamente imaginar o corpo de Maddie dissimulado num congelador entre 3 e 27 de Maio. Tudo isto devia ser completamente investigado. Infelizmente, foi neste momento que surgiu a vontade de arquivar o caso e em que fui afastado. Em que o caso foi realmente asfixiado.

Por quem e porquê?
Boa pergunta. A pôr ao ministério público português. Houve discussões entre o primeiro ministro britânico Gordon Brown e o primeiro ministro português José Sócrates. Que conversaram, o que decidiram? Mistério…

No seu livro, vai até ao ponto de sugerir que a adesão da Inglaterra ao Tratado de Lisboa foi sujeita ao arquivamento do processo?
Não afirmo nada, digo simplesmente que circularam rumores neste sentido.

“Espero, impotente, a queixa dos McCann”

São acusações particularmente graves e haverá uma imensa responsabilidade se porventura a tese dos pais se verifique …
Não se verificará. Maddie morreu, os seus pais sabem-no. O seu comportamento demonstra-o. Após ter posto em cena o rapto, imediatamente fizeram passar a tese de rapto junto dos meios de comunicação social sem aceitar outra hipótese. A esse respeito, conhecem-se muitos pais que, enquanto a sua filha supostamente foi raptada, contratam um chefe de comunicação antes de um advogado? Recordo-me igualmente de uma declaração de Kate McCann à imprensa, feita alguns dias após o drama: “dentro de dois anos, reencontrar-nos-emos ainda para procurar Maddie.” Como podia mostrar-se tão categórica? Por último, porque deixaram quase imediatamente, Portugal após ter sido postos sob investigação, enquanto as investigações que financiavam com o fundo de apoio prosseguiam?

Porque mentiriam e demonstrariam tal cinismo?
Porque cometeram uma falha deixando as suas crianças sozinhas e foram ultrapassados completamente pelo arrebatamento mediático que eles mesmos provocaram. Assim dito, a simulação de rapto é algo habitual neste tipo de caso. As estatísticas provam-no. Desde 1960 até aos nossos dias, na Inglaterra – mas estão muito próximas em qualquer país ocidental, constataram-se 1528 homicídios de crianças. Oitenta e quatro em cada cem deles mostram a intervenção dos pais e mesmo em 96% alarga-se aos parentes. Na grande maioria dos casos, os pais inventam uma história de rapto.

O porta-voz dos McCann tem evocado a ideia de uma queixa contra si ?
Espero-o com impaciência desde a saída do meu livro em Portugal, há um ano. Isso permitiria reabrir o inquérito e explicar-me com eles perante um tribunal. Mas os pais de Maddie não têm visivelmente desejo de que a verdade apareça.

Acusam-no de querer ganhar dinheiro às custas da filha deles…
O argumento é fácil e demonstra que não têm muitos outros. Não é verdade. Escrevi este livro de modo a que a opinião pública possa tomar conhecimento dos bastidores deste inquérito e as suas conclusões. Fui obrigado a abdicar, mas quis defender a verdade e os valores que foram os meus ao longo de todos os meus vinte e sete anos passados na polícia. Hoje, o processo Maddie está arquivado e os seus pais não têm nenhum desejo que seja reaberto. Pessoalmente, agi como a minha consciência pedia.
A minha missão está terminada.

Leia esta entrevista, na sua integralidade, na edição à venda ou nos arquivos do “l’Illustré”, em linha a partir da quarta-feira 20 de Maio de 2009


"The parents of Maddie made a show to hide their lies"

The Portuguese police in the investigation on the disappearance of the girl is categorical: Maddie died and, despite its apparent anguish, their parents are involved. In an explosive book, "the survey prohibited", counts as, due to political pressure, was unable to show it. A work of Christian Rappaz in the magazine "L'illustris" published today in Switzerland translation of the original.

The investigation of his life. Gonçalo Amaral occupied day and night, between 22 hours of 3 May 2007 and 2 October 2008, date of exit to early retirement: the Madeleine (Maddie) McCann Beth. An English girl of 3 years of missing the holiday apartment in Vila da Luz, Algarve while her parents dinner in a restaurant of the hotel complex, a few tens of meters.

Amaral is now 50 years. Child workers, the fifth of six children brother, himself the father of two girls, 4 and 9 years. Had to leave their duties because of inspector, says, "in Portugal and elsewhere, the politicization of the police and obstruct the work of this prevents justice being done. As in Maddie, more investigations are asphyxiated or filed before its end. "It then provided legal counsel on television, daily columnist in a large Portuguese and teaches criminology.

Gerry and Kate McCann, Maddie's parents, both doctors, turned into a global drama the disappearance of her daughter two years ago (read article attached). From David Beckham to Cristiano Ronaldo through Pope Benedict XVI, held a massive mobilization and created a fund of support that has reached 6 million francs (Swiss) in three days.

Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the investigation Portuguese police officially closed on 21 July 2008. But Amaral rediscovered freedom: to tell their version, their conviction. The word police.

What are the elements that you can acknowledge with much conviction to the parents of Maddie lied to the entire planet?
There are many. First, as their friends, their testimony and their statements reveal a number of inaccuracies, inconsistencies and contradictions. Then there is the smell of a corpse confirmed by pisteiros dogs and there are traces of blood behind the sofa of the apartment confirmed by preliminary analysis. One can assume that this girl fell Mobile ago, perhaps due to their parents managed to sedatives regularly, as we recognized. The same observation of the odors and traces of blood in the car rented by the McCann three weeks after the disappearance of Madeleine. The only one of eleven controlled cars that retained the attention of dogs. There is also the testimony of a couple from Ireland who claims to have seen Gerry McCann with a child in her arms the night of the facts. Finally there are the fingerprints of Kate McCann in the fourth window of Madeleine which clearly indicates that it has opened this window, no doubt to believe in the theory of abduction, said that while the window was open at the time of their arrival at to 22 hours, time which noted the disappearance of Madeleine and gave the alarm.

The intervention of Gordon Brown?

It is the truth, which is not supported by any evidence ...
Not my truth, are the findings of a survey conducted during fourteen months for more than a hundred police officers and specialists. With regard to the facts, the results indicate that the samples correspond to 75% the DNA profile of Madeleine.

Why, then, all indices are not sufficient evidence?
Because these results need further, and the confirmation would have been necessary to carry out further investigations on the basis of these data. The latter no doubt. You can, for example, well imagine the body of Maddie hidden in a freezer between 3 and 27 May. All this should be thoroughly investigated. Unfortunately, it now appeared that the desire to close the case and I was away. Where the case was really stifled.

By whom and why?
Good question. The prosecutor put the Portuguese. There were discussions between the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the Portuguese Prime Minister José Sócrates. To talk, which decided? Mystery ...

In his book, go to the point of suggesting that the accession of Britain to the Treaty of Lisbon was subject to termination of proceedings?
Do not say anything, I just rumors that circulated this.

"I hope, helpless, the case of McCann"

Charges are particularly serious and there will be a huge liability if perhaps the parents' argument is found ...
There will be. Maddie died, their parents know it. His behavior shows it. Having put in the kidnapping scene, immediately did pass the theory of abduction with the media without accepting another hypothesis. In this regard, it is known that many parents, while her daughter was allegedly kidnapped, hire a head of communication before a lawyer? I also remember a statement from Kate McCann to the press, made a few days after the tragedy: "within two years, we will find further search for Maddie." How could show up so categorical? Finally, left almost immediately because, after Portugal had been put under investigation, while the investigations, financed from the fund to support continuing?

Why lie and show such cynicism?
Why have a flaw leaving their children alone and was completely overcome by the media frenzy that caused them. Thus said, the simulation of abduction is common in this type of case. The statistics prove it. Since 1960 until the present day in England - but are very close in any Western country, it was 1528 murders of children. Eighty-four per cent of them show the involvement of parents in 96% and even extends to the relatives. In most cases, parents invent a story of abduction.

The spokesman of McCann has raised the idea of a complaint against you?
I hope it with impatience from the exit of my book in Portugal, a year ago. This would reopen the investigation and explain to me with them before a court. But the parents of Maddie are not visibly hope that the truth appears.

They accuse him of wanting to make money at the expense of their daughter ...
The argument is simple and shows that do not have many others. Not true. I wrote this book so that the public can be aware of this background investigation and its conclusions. I was forced to abdicate, but wanted to defend the truth and values that were my over all my twenty-seven years in the police. Today, the process is terminated Maddie and her parents have no desire to be reopened. Personally, I acted as my conscience demanded.
My mission is completed.

Read this interview in its entirety, the issue for sale or in the archives of "l'illustris", online from Wednesday 20 May 2009.

bath theory said...

If Gerry is going back and the so called policemen have 'narrowed' it down to 5 people then they could be entering the end game we have all spoken about...

NAMELY, a paid policeman of the McCann's miraculously finds the body and the saintly couple are now at peace. The McCann's claim it is because they have spent countless hours finding details that allowed their 'experts' to find Madeleine.

Watch this space and when Gerry returns watch who enters the church this time.

Di said...

Hi Bt

I have thought of that myself.

There is no doubt they need closure and it has been said Gerry is going back to PDL when his PI's need him to, regarding these 5 suspects.

The question is, will Madeleine be found alive or not.

Di said...

Good post from Inspector Clouseau 3A's

Long time lurker. Can I just say to begin with that I have never believed them from the very beginning. As Ian rightly states the argument between Gerry and Tanner was just scripted play acting as was the intervention of the hired ex officer of the law. Gerry is so desperate to get his version of where he was standing whilst talking to Wilkins he even manages to squeeze it onto the Oprah show. Now why is this so important? In this little scenario created by Gerry and Tanner the only person’s statement that any of you should be taking any notice of is the one from Wilkins, due to the fact that he is telling the truth. He did speak to Gerry at the time and place that he states and the reason that he didn’t see Tanner was because she wasn’t there, hence Gerry’s desperate attempts to place him on the other side of the road as his reason for not noticing her – note to the hired inspector, this is extremely relevant to the investigation.
Here is where I have a different opinion to some of the posters on here. Tanner didn’t see an abductor; this was worked into the story after the event. This explains why she didn’t immediately relay this sighting to the grieving parents upon hearing of Madeleine’s abduction, as this had yet to be worked into the timeline. Her excuse that she didn’t want to upset them is quite frankly incredulous.

Now to the checking, they’ve really got themselves in a pickle over this. Firstly we need to take into account what Kate said when recounting her version of Madeleine asking why they hadn’t come to them when they were crying. Kate stated that she and Gerry spoke for a while and decided from then on to be even more vigilant with their checking, a system that Gerry is now keen to point out was their own listening service, the emphasis being on listening and not visual checking, helpfully explaining to us why somebody didn’t notice if Madeleine was there or not on the 9.30 check, a check that I also don’t believe ever happened, something else worked into the timeline to suit. If this was being more vigilant what on earth was the system used beforehand.

Now for Kate knowing that she knew instantly that there had been an abduction. Her first stab at it was relayed to us by a friend (she couldn’t tell us herself because of the secrecy laws) that cuddle cat was high on a shelf that Madeleine couldn’t reach, so obviously the fiend must have put it there, just the sort of thing that fiends tend to do, even ugly ones. Unfortunately a photograph appeared showing cuddle cat on the bed. xxxx. How’s about, as I opened the door to the apartment (I’ve no idea which door she means) the bedroom door slammed shut thus indicating instantly that something was afoot causing me to run back to the Tapas bar screaming in my best hysterical voice, they’ve taken her. This is where team Mccann start to earn some of the donated money. I think they have come to realise that this version isn’t exactly bomb proof as on the 9.30 check the door which had been left open, again with the aid of a vernier angle gauge, would have slammed shut as the checker was leaving the apartment. So we arrive at the latest version as shown on the partial reconstruction that the door didn’t slam shut instantly but waited until Kate was about to close it, having checked first that Madeleine wasn’t elsewhere in the apartment because she wasn’t quite sure if she could make her out on the bed. Now I’m not the sharpest tool in the box but I reckon that 99.9% of the worlds population would have just walked into the room and LOOKED! But I’m forgetting aren’t I. They were only providing a listening service.

So there we have it, the wind blew it shut. Not in the previous half hour but at that precise moment. People say “you couldn’t make it up”. Team Mccann would beg to differ.
Just a thought, when they release the DVD of the documentary (got to keep the money coming in) will it contain a deleted scenes selection?

Di said...

Inspector Clouseau's follow up post

How the McCann’s must be regretting the made up sighting by Jane Tanner. In hindsight If they’d just waited for the Smith sighting to become known it would have saved all that effort in trying to come up with a coherent timeline attempting to show everybody checking everyone’s children but leaving enough time for an abduction to take place. It doesn’t work does it?

At the time the Smith sighting would have backed up their story a treat, child abduction followed by an independent witness seeing the abductor scurrying away. The timing of this sighting would then never have been an issue.

The problem is Gerry knew he’d been spotted and because of this, he couldn’t know whether or not this would be reported he needed to invent Jane Tanners sighting at an earlier time. Bizarrely this 45 minute gap between the two sightings, which was originally designed to negate the later sighting, is now being used to join the two together.

This also explains the original vague description by Tanner of the abductor. It didn’t need to be detailed because it was just needed as proof of their abduction taking place. This also gives a reason for Tanners ever expanding description of the abductor. They needed to ensure that their version couldn’t possibly be Gerry.

Of course they are now trying to make it look a bit like Gerry without it actually being Gerry to counter the later Smith claim that it was possibly him.

Too much information, they should have just kept it simple.


I agree with you, they should have kept it simple.

Off now x

viv said...

Hiya Di

I am afraid I still really struggle to equate the facts as I know them with the idea that Maddie died that night in the apartment. All the facts lead me to conclude that this was a planned event by Gerry McCann. To have gotten rid of a live Maddie by Gerry just carting her off to a boat makes absolute sense to me with what we know.


I fear you may be right, and there is a very good chance that the McCanns new detectives are going to lead to the finding of a live Maddie or her body. Just the sheer ridiculous nature of these new investigators and proclaiming yet again they know it was any one of five abductors and they know that one of these has Maddie; the use of all those actors to make a reconstruction and then not even using them (most notably in relation to Kate) demonstrates to me that no scheme is too ridiculous for Gerry McCann to pursue it.

I often think of that bizarre phrase of Gerry McCann and it is so apt, "it was a high risk strategy" this is how Gerry's mind works. A high risks strategy is worth taking in terms of what he personally stands to lose if he does not seek to pursue that strategy. And so, time and time again, we see this man's latest bizarre and high risk scheme being put into action. His high risk strategy to save himself from being completely undone.

I have to ask myself, if, as people claim, for some perverse reason he has political allies both in the Portuguese and British PM, why is he still pursuing such high risk strategies? Why has he not just moved on to the books and films he wanted to produce about the suffering of him and Kate?

There is only one logical answer to me, until he has got the police off his back, he knows he cannot do that, or ever feel safe from detection.

The more bizarre Gerry's strategies become, imo, the more desperate he is shown to be. LP actually have a very good record for solving complex crimes and I am absolutely convinced Stuart Prior will want the personal kudos attached to being the man who finally orders the arrest of Gerry McCann, David Payne, Russell O'Brien just for starters. After that quite probably Kate McCann and Jane Tanner. And I think there are more too, quite possibly many more, who are involved in a very sordid business that shows a total lack of regard for little children.

I believe that date draws closer and Gerry is very afraid, so is Kate!

viv said...

Di, I think Gerry did the most simple thing, abducted Madeleine from her bed, no forensics, no break in, no nothing. The simplest plan in the world to execute. I think his plan was to become incredibly famous and wealthy. But LP had other ideas.

Good post you copied especially:

They needed to ensure that their version couldn’t possibly be Gerry.


viv said...

and I think the Portuguese AG deliberately stated well the sighting could not have been Gerry McCann because witnesses placed him in the restaurant. Only his friends place him in the restaurant.

It was a good way to shelve the case and just let LP take over whilst at the same time, they hoped, stopping public discussion of this case and perhaps even allowing Gerry to think he got away with it. Our police are renown for playing this trick on suspects, so they become off guard and let things slip.

Soda said...


If it says soda above it is me Hope!!!! Do you think Google blogger may be Dyslexic???

Looks like it is time to play let's make Kate look bad now???

She is the liar and IMHO before long we will be drip fed stories on how she acted alone and will have to sit and watch Gery looking shocked and devestated for the cameras not able to grasp why his wife has lied to him...

I give up!!!!!!!!


Soda said...

Oh it did say soda!!!???

My last post says "she is the liar" It sounds wrong I am not saying she is the only liar but that is Gery's aim to make her out to be in it up to her neck alone???

Do you think that is why she is doing all the talking now??

BTW where is my Bin have I lost bin monitor for my posts???


viv said...

Hiya Hope and nice to see you again darling, I dont know what happened to your bin, but never mind!

Certainly in Sept 2007 as they were made arguidos I think there was an intense campaign via Gerry and Philomena in particular to paint Kate as an aggressive child abusing killer who screamed and could not be left alone with them. I clearly remember Gerry was stressing at that time how he apparently sent David Payne to see if she was managing! Does not seem to be wanting to stress that now though, does he?

But Gerry was very cold and unpleasant on Oprah as well recently and I do not think he is being very subtle once more. The fascinating thing is why does Kate go along with it, could it be she did kill Madeleine? I do not think we can actually rule any scenario out entirely!

Try as he might, I am all at a loss as to how Gerry thinks he can now distance himself from all of this, not least he has been the instigator of all these schemes and he is the one the Smith family believe they saw carting Madeleine off, that obviously was not Kate!

I am putting on a separate post about Huntley, to me, there is an awful lot said here that can be related to Gerry including being the one who always knows how to put on an act and what to say!


viv said...

A killer without a conscience

By Peter Gould
BBC News Online

How could anyone kill two innocent young girls? The question has been asked repeatedly in the months since the bodies of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were discovered.

Ian Huntley showed little emotion during the trial
We now know beyond doubt the identity of their killer: Ian Huntley. But why did he do it, and how was he able to carry out such a dreadful crime?

Now he has been convicted, prison doctors may get an insight into the mind of a man who killed without remorse, and then put on an amazing act as he tried to throw police off his track.

One expert believes that Huntley's behaviour has all the hallmarks of a psychopath.

It is a word that makes us shudder, conjuring up an image of a wild-eyed monster. But in real life, psychopaths can seem remarkably normal.

It is very difficult to believe this was not sexually motivated

Dr Julian Boon
They often possess charm and an ability to put people at ease. They are practiced liars.

What makes them so dangerous is their lack of conscience. They are focused only on their own satisfaction. They feel nothing for their victims - no compassion, no guilt, no remorse.

Dr Julian Boon, a forensic psychologist at the University of Leicester, has made a provisional assessment of Ian Huntley, based on what emerged at the Old Bailey.

"There is a strong suggestion here that we are dealing with a psychopath," he says.

"It is very difficult to believe this was not sexually motivated."

Those who knew Huntley say he had a fascination with schoolgirls. Before he met Maxine Carr, he had relationships with girls in their early teens.

Acting on impulse

In court, he denied that there was any sexual motive for inviting Holly and Jessica into his home. Yet it seems clear - as the Crown suggested - that the two ten-year-olds were a temptation he could not resist.

The girls were probably hoping to see Maxine Carr. Huntley, who was alone at the time, seized the opportunity.

Psychopaths treat other people as if they do not have an identity - look at what Huntley did with the bodies of the girls, trying to burn them

Dr Boon
"It is typical of psychopaths to act impulsively, if they think they can get away with it," says Dr Boon.

"The girls only had to walk past his house for him to have the opportunity to have his wicked way with them."

He believes the way in which Huntley attempted to dispose of the bodies is also highly significant.

"He had zero regard for the girls. They were just a vehicle for his self-gratification, says Dr Boon.

"Psychopaths treat other people as if they do not have an identity. Look at what Huntley did with the bodies of the girls, trying to burn them. It was done with callous self-interest.

"His reaction to their deaths was all about self-preservation. He put his own future before the girls'."

Carr's lies

It was striking that during Huntley's cross-examination at the Old Bailey, he displayed little emotion as he described how the girls died, and how he cold-bloodedly disposed of their bodies.

Maxine Carr played no part in the actual murders. When the girls died, she was a hundred miles away in Grimsby, at the home of her mother.

But she did lie for Huntley, by supporting his story in interviews with the police and the media.

She later told detectives that Huntley was afraid he would be "fitted up" for the murders because he had previously been accused of rape, a charge that was eventually dropped.

'Sheer manipulation'

Believing him to be innocent, Maxine Carr decided to support her partner. In interviews with the police, she said she could not accept that he killed the girls.

"Maxine Carr was acting under Huntley's influence," says Dr Boon.

"It would have been sheer manipulation."

Huntley invented a story that explained how the girls had left his house alive and well. In the days that followed, he appeared to be doing all he could to help find them.

He told reporters: "While there's no news, there's a glimmer of hope. I think that's what we're all clinging onto. It's just very upsetting to think I might be the last friendly face that these girls had to speak to before something's happened to them."

It was an extraordinary performance from the man who had killed the two girls.

"His participation in the search confirms my view that this is psychopathic behaviour," says Dr Boon.

"To behave in such a way, and to face the father of one of the girls as if trying to help, is totally self-serving."


There is also the question of how Ian Huntley managed to convince Soham Village College that he was fit person to employ as a caretaker.

They even asked him how he would deal with a pupil who made advances towards him.

"I have sympathy with the people on the interview panel," says Dr Boon.

"Psychopaths are so convincing. You cannot understate the way these people present themselves. They have a lifetime history of presenting the face that is required."

Ian Huntley felt no guilt for luring Holly and Jessica to their deaths. Everything he said and did during the days that followed reveals him to be a man without conscience.

He was cold, calculating and ruthless. His only regret was being caught; his only tears were for himself.

viv said...

self serving Gerry McCann, this could have been written about him:

He was cold, calculating and ruthless. His only regret was being caught; his only tears were for himself.

The only time we have ever seen Gerry look distressed was as he exited the police station at Portimao. It finally dawned he as not as clever as he thought!

But of course that would not stop him from valiantly scheming ever since to put himself in the clear, just like Huntley pretending to so earnestly be looking for that little girl(s) Cobblers!

Di said...

Hi Viv & all

Well the one thing we can be sure of is that Kate and Gerry certainly make plenty of slip ups, let's hope LP are taking note Viv.

Their next interview on This Morning should be interesting. It's really becoming the Kate & Gerry show now isn't it.

Di said...

Hi Hope

Where has Soda come from, anyway I like wine with mine so cheers..

I agree Kate is lying but I also think Gerry is too. If you look at his body language he is the one permanently tugging his ears touching his face etc., Neither imo are able to keep eye contact with the interviewer.

I remember ages ago a body language expert giving his opinion, he confirmed they were not telling truth.


Sorry, I think I am guilty of removing your bin, I had to recycle all those empty wine bottles, just doing my bit for the planet ;o)

Di said...

Hi Viv

That report is extremely interesting.

"Psychopaths are so convincing. You cannot understate the way these people present themselves. They have a lifetime history of presenting the face that is required."

Well we certainly see the faces required on camera, but off camera really tells the true story imo.

Soda said...


Oh if you are using my bin for recyceling that is fine...

Have not got a clue where soda came from I dont blog under any other name anywhere it is one of my google mail address's though so maybe it has switched e mails????

Soda is from my favorite book The Outsiders by SE Hinton one of the brothers in it was called Sodapop Cutis (Played by Rob Lowe in the film)but wine and soda cant be bad either!!!!!!!!

Enjoy my bin!!!!!!!! xxxx

viv said...

Hiya Di and Hopey!

I am going to Tunisia on Sunday for two weeks, so hope when I get back you have given me a bit of insight into this documentary they are doing. I don't know talk about leaving no stone unturned! Personally I think they will keep viewing the Oprah doc and being pretty upset about it. They must also be gutted about Cutting Edge because that was clearly not the way they planned it. Seems like Kate is fluffing her role big time.

I just watched a film, Would You Lie to Me. It was very interesting in showing lying traits. Erectile tissues in the nose start to itch, it showed you Clinton, Saddam and another doing just that. I immediately though it would be good if they put Gerry up doing that seeing as how he is so good at it.

In a way maybe Kate is more controlled and scheming than him. She never does that, self awareness!

But what they did flag up was that expression that people pull, sort of snarling and turning the side of the mouth up, just like Kate did when she said Maddie, just moved on, she went off to play..(no big deal about her crying alone). The gesture apparently denotes, contempt. I have to say Kate does demonstrate that sometimes. That silly gesture on Oprah, whoosh, is that mental health or contempt?

Apparently looking up and to one side can be someone actually telling the truth, they are accessing the information from their brain. But when they just stare you out, that can be when they are lying because they need to check your reaction and see how you are doing!

Those little micro gestures that people make when lying are interesting, they can just last for a fraction of a second but disclose what the liar is really thinking, disgust, contempt. I happen to think Gerry does that rather a lot.

On balance I am not sure whether Gerry tells more lies than Kate or whether he is just not so good at it. But he is also good at playing the victim and adopted this role very well before the Select Committee, I think he practised really hard for that one.

Does Kate do less performances because she does not have the overwhelming confidence and self-esteem that Gerry does, she critically questions her own performance? Gerry does have difficulty connecting with reality that is for sure!

viv said...

hiya Di

You are so right about off camera shows the reality, it certainly does with Gerry.

After the first interview with Jane Hill, immediately breaking out into a cursing and swearing session, then there have been others where he just laughs in a contemptuous way. He does not even seem to care what these interviewers may think. They are just the minority and they wont say anything, the performance for the viewers is what is important.

But a few times with Sandra Filgeuiras we really see the nasty side of Gerry, like when he ripped the mike off, he reacts either with a smirk or with fury, there is nothing normal about this man's emotions is there!

That petulant snarl when she asks about Murat and the domineering control of Kate as he drags her off..not nice at all is he!

viv said...

Oh and on that video of Stevo's just a few days after Madeleine went missing, the camera catches him through the window, jazzing about and gesticulating with hilarity, cocaine or just plain amused arrogance or both? Whatever there was something incredibly unnatural about that idiotic display that he clearly did not mean to be on camera, no more than on the top right when he does his I am the devil impression. I said to Stevo I think it was not long ago, on 3 As, I just get this visions of horns rising from his head and red eyes flashing. When he drops the mask, that psychopaths always try to wear.

That horrible shifty flitting around with the eyes as well, as things get tense keep looking at Kate and back again, trying to interrupt, you can almost see his tension rising. No Gerry you are not as good as you think you are!

bath theory said...

'Kate tried to commit suicide'

Maybe the fresh air of Tunisia will help you see this story more clearly Viv !! re Madeleine and whether she is most likely around or not. I am 100 per cent convinced she is no longer around. This article summarises it well.

from Joana Morais site

...The interview with Oprah Winfrey, analysed by a forensic psychologist

Paulo Sargento looks at the McCanns with clinical attention. He understands the contradictions, he identifies the signs of pressure that they are subject to. Innocent or guilty, they can’t escape from the machine that has taken over their lives.

interview by Carlos Saraiva

You have been suggesting that Kate McCann may commit suicide. What leads you to conclude this possibility?

I don’t think she may commit suicide. I received the information, before last Christmas, that she tried to commit suicide and was admitted to a hospital in Leicester, although there was never any registration of entry.

But how did you find out? Is your source trustworthy?

Well, it’s an English source, the same that on other occasions transmitted things that matched the truth...

Soda said...


Have a lovely holiday and when you get back our own weather should really have picked up...

I was watching Have I Got News For You last night and Ian Hislop said one story of an MP fixing their expenses was great but for this many it was like all his Christmas's had come at once...

If I were working in the Spin industry now for Westminster and knew that many favours had been called in to protect the McCann's I would be pursuading certain people that their cover up could be explained away with a (we were leading them on with trust so they would slip up and we would get justice for Madeleine line) and then hit the papers with facts that previously had not been allowed to be talked about...

Burying bad news is a well known phrase and if they want this to go away I belive a no holds barred expose of what went on in PDL on the 3rd of May 2007 could dampen down the flames...

They could even come out looking like the party who will never give up on children????

Wizard said...

Good Morning All,

I was just reading the Paulo Sargento interview on JM.

It may well be because he believes as I do that I thought it a great interview. LOL.

He made some insightful comments. We have often talked about Gerry’s controlling behaviour and Sargento highlights this by saying about the pair.

“He’s dominating and controlling, there is no doubt about that, but he has a major problem: he’s very impulsive. For example, I remember his reaction during an interview in Spain, when he was confronted with the possible death of his daughter. The man “freaked out”. In an admirable manner, Kate managed to calm down not only Gerry, but the entire film crew. She’s sitting in front of the cameras of a foreign channel, with ‘difficult’ questions. There are actors who are used to the media frenzy that wouldn’t have behaved so well. She is the key, she has been controlling through a more feminine strategy, careful to keep the relationships of status quo, not of rupture. In that sense, Kate dominates. Therefore, any weakness from her part is revealing."

"Now with this issue of her failing, we have been seeing a succession of silly acts: the entourage gives foolish replies, they make ridiculous sketches, they arrange for five persons to say that they saw a guy with pimples, well…”

With the alleged suicide attempt before Christmas, Kate’s mother also saying their were martial problems and Kate as we now know is isolated. She certainly is fragile as friends and family tells us.

I think Sargento could be right and as Kate’s health and strength fail the whole story will unravel because of the number of people involved. Kate most certainly is depressed and depressed people are unpredictable therefore the truth could well come out.

It will be interesting to see which rat first jumps from the sinking ship and which rat points the finger to escape from prosecution themselves.

It may well be rat number one was Kennedy.

Wizard said...

Hi Viv,

Have a good holiday! Talk to you when you get back.

Best wishes as always - Wiz

Soda said...

Hi Wizard

Can you imagine the relief of finaly being able to tell someone what actually happend that night and why you were compelled to keep lying?

2 years of hell for each of the 9 Adults on that holiday and if they think things will get easier over time they are so very wrong...

None of the group will be able to split from their partner (not that they may wish to) but if living with them is hell they have to stay as they need to stick togehter and know what the other is saying and doing no way will the want someone else breaking first...

Nothing can be as bad as what they have gone through over the last two years which is one of the reasons I belive Madeleine is dead (or they know where she is) because I dont think they could keep up this pact of silence and spin if they thought it could be preventing her from being found...

The worse secret I can think of that is holiding them all togehter is Peadophillia if this is the case they have a big reason to keep quiet. But how can any Mother keep quiet about such a sick abuse unless they are sick themselves and think Pedophillia is ok???

The weight that will leave their shoulders the second they tell the truth will be emense ok they may get a jail sentance but past that life will be for living again because guilt can crush you and waiting for that knock at the door when one of the others has taken all the glory and dropped you in it must be hell...

Soda said...

How very strange when I press refresh the last two posts vanish then when I press it again they come back???

Wizard said...

Hi Soda,

I would have thought it would be a living hell to keep anticipating a knock on the door as possible fresh evidence comes to light or the expectancy of someone spilling the beans.

It would be a relief to have the truth come out, face the music, then after a sentence of some kind start to rebuild their lives.

But….and it’s a big but if paedophilia is involved telling the truth would not be a relief, and of course by telling the truth, whatever that might be, would mean their professional lives are over for good. Would they also be able to hang onto the twins after the truth came out?

I think the McCanns will not come clean unless someone cracks as they have too much to lose.

Soda said...

Hi Wizard

It is me hope dont ask where soda came from google blogger has gone dyslexic I think...

You are right about them not wanting to come clean if it is peadophillia but how can a mother sit back and allow this to happen and are all of them involved (if any)???

Someone will crack one day or like the reaction from the public over the expenses claims people who have never blogged will start to learn of all the spin and demand answers... Of course it MPs are clever enough may even use this to overshaddow what they have done...

Wizard said...

Hi Hope,

You are right - but paedophilia is only one possibility, there are a number of other reasons why they might wish to stay quiet about what really happened.

mandarinn said...

Hi Soda and Wizard
Soda, are you the lady who enjoy to visit Farden Center?
I also think there are something sinister behind Maddie's case.It can be paedophiluia or something we can't ever imagine.I also believe there other people more influent than the tapas 9.
I wish a nice week end to VIV and all boggers

Soda said...

Hi Mandarinn

Yes I love the Farden Centres LOL

I am hope4truth but for some reason blogger has changed my name and hidden my bin LOL

Have a nice weekend xxx

Di said...

Hi all


Enjoy your hols.


I agree with you. I have always felt someone's identity is being protected. Who or why I have no idea.

I have always thought one of the tapas would spill the beans but now I am not so sure. They have all stayed quiet for two years which as you say Hope, is a terrible burden to have to live with, but they have. What I cannot understand is why Kate, or any mother for that matter, could protect someone who could be responsible for harming their child.

We saw in their interviews several of the tapas distancing themselves from Gerry, but not Kate, there has to be a good reason for this, yet still they do not talk. How there have been no leaks from family, friends or even neighbours is beyond me.

Wizard said...

The BBC are reporting the McCanns are going to sue Amaral for deformation.

If this proves to be true – bring it on!

bath theory said...

You beat me to it, Wizard. Mentioned on Sky. Now it will heat up and Amaral will either be sticthed up or they will fall on their sword.

bath theory said...



Defences to a Claim of Defamation
Justification (Truth)

It is a complete defence to an action for defamation to prove that the defamatory statement is substantially true. It is not necessary for a defendant to show that there was a public interest in publication and it does not matter whether he or she acted maliciously.

If relying on the defence of justification the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that the allegations made are true. The defendant must prove it on the balance of probabilities, that is, the allegation is more likely than not to be true.

A defendant is not required to prove that every allegation is true. The Defamation Act 1952 provides that where the words complained of contain two or more distinct allegations a defence of justification can still succeed if the words not proved to be true do not materially injure the claimant’s reputation having regard to the imputations which are proved true.

A defendant cannot rely on the defence of justification in relation to the publication of the details of spent convictions, as defined by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, if the claimant can show that the publisher acted ‘maliciously’.

An allegation published by repeating a rumour cannot be justified by proving that there was such a rumour. A defendant is required to prove the substance of the allegation.

Since the burden of proving the truth of an allegation is on the defendant, claimants enjoy a distinct advantage in defamation claims. Justification has to be used with great care. It can often be difficult to obtain sufficient admissible evidence to persuade a jury that the statement is true. This will sometimes result in the media being unable to publish allegations which are generally believed to be true, but which they may not be able to prove to the standard required in court. Further, an unsuccessful defence of justification is likely to increase the level of any damages awarded.

Fair Comment

If a defendant can prove that the defamatory statement is an expression of opinion on a matter of public interest and not a statement of fact, he or she can rely on the defence of fair comment.

The courts have said that whenever a matter is such as to affect people at large, so that they may be legitimately interested in, or concerned at, what is going on or what may happen to them or to others, then it is a matter of public interest on which everyone is entitled to make fair comment.

The comment must be based on true facts which are either contained in the publication or are sufficiently referred to. It is for the defendant to prove that the underlying facts are true. If he or she is unable to do so, then the defence will fail. As with justification, the defendant does not to have to prove the truth of every fact provided the comment was fair in relation to those facts which are proved.

Fair does not mean reasonable, but signifies the absence of malice. The views expressed can be exaggerated, obstinate or prejudiced, provided they are honestly held. If the claimant can show that the publication was made maliciously, the defence of fair comment will not succeed.


If untrue defamatory allegations are published on an occasion of privilege, they will be protected from a claim for defamation. Although the law of defamation exists to protect reputations, it is recognised that in particular situations it is to the benefit of society generally for people to be able to communicate without the fear of being sued for defamation. This is so despite the risk that a person’s reputation will be damaged and they will not be able to restore it by bringing a claim for defamation.

Absolute Privilege

Absolute privilege provides a complete defence regardless of how malicious or untrue the allegation is. It applies to proceedings in Parliament or courts in England and Wales. The Defamation Act 1996 provides a statutory absolute privilege for contemporary or court-postponed fair and accurate reports of court proceedings in England and Wales, the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights and any international criminal tribunal established by the United Nations Security Council, or by an international agreement to which the United Kingdom is a party.

bath theory said...

Here is the Sky link to the article


bath theory said...

Will Amaral sue Clarence Mitchell and will the country of Portugal sue the McCanns for comments?

viv said...

Hello guys

Just had a break from OMG my house must be immaculate all the towels clean, no dust, and the right foods in etc because Luke's mate who also keeps two parrots with his parents is coming to stay and look after Nanday for us because he seemed very unhappy at the pet shop when we picked him up last November. And he is our precious xx

Just going to read all the comments but already I see the Mc
Canns are going to sue Amaral, how very exciting! Let us hope it is not the same bluff we have been hearing for such a long time now!


viv said...

Bi again all,

BT I think it is this bit in the law on defamation you have quoted that is going to prove very difficult for Goncalo:

It can often be difficult to obtain sufficient admissible evidence to persuade a jury that the statement is true. This will sometimes result in the media being unable to publish allegations which are generally believed to be true, but which they may not be able to prove to the standard required in court.

It is of course the case, that most people believe it is true that Madeleine is dead and they also believe the findings of the dogs proves this. But I do not think that it would to the required standard of beyond reasonable doubt. Goncalo has not stated it is his opinion that Madeleine is dead, he has stated it as a fact and given that I do not think he could prove that, I fear the McCanns may be successful in court in the same way they were against the Daily Express.

They would not have made these announcements, I do not think, without extensive and very high level legal advice and must believe they can win this case. If Carter Ruck are to act again they generally do so on a conditional fee basis, which means they have already assessed the case and decided they are almost certain they will win and therefore do not charge Kate and Gerry any costs. Of course we do not know if the case is being funded in this way or even if it will definitely go ahead but it sure does look that way!

I think Goncalo may have been on much safer ground if he had stuck to saying that in his opinion there is a host of evidence, and specified it, that indicates the McCanns were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine, but not stated whether she is dead or alive. This is really my own position, as you know and that cannot be libel.

I know this may come as a blow, but that is just what I think.


viv said...

hiya again Hope, Mandarin, Wiz, BT, Di, and thanks for kind wishes for my hols. I just checked it is my favourite temperature that I can just stand without the prickly heat, 30 degrees and so I am very excited, lots of lolling on the beach with my lovely mum, step father and Luke. We are all in the same hotel this time but I know I will not be persuading mom to join me in the sea. She gave that up years ago, unfortunately, but I will try!

I regret to say that I think Goncalo only questioned the McCanns on the issue of death in the apt and disposal of the body and that was probably wrong. I am pretty convinced this case is actually to do with paedophilia as most of you also now believe and Goncalo has made a pretty major mistake in trying to defend the way he dealt with matters whilst still in charge of the operation.

As such, I believe it is entirely possible that Madeleine as merely got rid of alive to cover up what they had done to her and to wickedly cash in on her supposed stranger abduction. Sadly this is not what Goncalo has said and so he will not be able to argue this in court. He will have to try and prove his death theory and I can tell you most sincerely there is no evidence to prove that.

But having said all that I do hope I am wrong! But the McCanns have not lost a legal action, so far, have they?


bath theory said...

Agree they have had 2 yrs to assess this but what none of us know is what evidence Amaral does have with regards to the files not shared and things like text messages etc.

Totally agree that this could be a done deal in British court as it often knows what it will say before it evens start.

Wizard said...

Have just read BT’s post re defemation in this country. In Amarals book which has not been published in this country he does state it was the view of the police at that time. So he is covered.
I’m not so sure with the documentary, so perhaps that could be defamation. But again this documentary was made by a Portuguese TV company and not Amaral so how could they sue him? It was also not broadcaste in this country and I would have thought subject to Portugues law and not British.
I think the McCanns are running scared. It is possible that Amaral’s book might be published in this country or in English anyway for distribution in English speaking countries (not Britain).

Could the McCann’s be just flexing their muscles and trying to put the frighteners on him to shut him up.

If that is the case they are desperate.

Wizard said...

Does anyone else think the McCanns’ timing for announcing the intention to sue strange – 7.00pm on a Saturday night!

Well it’s in time for the Sunday’s deadline and I suppose Amaral might have difficulty getting hold of his solicitor on a Saturday night.

I can’t help thinking there’s something else afoot.

bath theory said...

Agreed Wiz

Wizard said...

Is it right to say the McCanns’ are suing Amaral on behalf on themselves and their 3 children.

They are suing him because he says that Madeleine is dead and they say she is not.

How is that defamation?

bath theory said...

Hi All
One of the reasons why we believe they know a lot more than they are saying is that they started ringing people in the UK straight away rather than crawling through the streets of PDL.

So, they cared about image right from the off.

They employed communication advisors !! They wash their child's favourite toy !! They play tennis and jog with muscles that can move only a few days after Madeleine vanishes!! The father writes a blog and barely mentions the vanished girl's name?

The missing girl's mother Kate does not answer police questions and in criminal investigations history shows us that those who don't speak do that because they do not want to incriminate themselves. They want the police to find the evidence which they know is hard to do in a missing child case where parental involvement is the first obvious option to look for!!

Yes, they clearly want to stop the book and they want to stop his film. Both have been seen by internet users and they desperately want that stopped here in the UK. Suprisingly they have managed the media to go along with that to date and they want this status quo where they can effectively manage the media to continue.

Amaral has been pigeoned holed over here. If he had nothing worthy in what he said they would allow him to publish and fight the points he makes rather than get the media to put him down personally by stating he is 'disgraced' and not allowing his facts to air in the mainstream media. Their image is to be protected at all costs alas Madeleine wasn't was she. They don't fool me.

Di said...

Hi all

Well GA wanted to get them into the ring and he has, and I am sure he will come out fighting.

I really feel this law suit is purely to stop the UK seeing the documentary and reading GA's book. Kate & Gerry know once seen and read many more people will change their minds about their innocence.

Yes, I do think their timing is odd. I wonder, have they heard the investigation is about to be reopened.

Di said...

This is an interesting article. GA says there are things he has kept back which he can prove in Court. He also is convinced the process will be reopened, maybe I was right and they know this and have been pushed into a corner.

Gonçalo Amaral: “There are things that I haven’t said yet”

Allegations made by the former PJ inspector are considered to be defamatory

by Cláudia Lima da Costa /HB

The parents of Madeleine McCann, the little English girl that disappeared in the Algarve on the 3rd of May 2007, have announced that they are going to sue former Polícia Judiciária (PJ) inspector Gonçalo Amaral for defamation. The former police inspector, who was responsible for the investigation into the child’s disappearance, has already reacted to the news and says that there are “things that he hasn’t said yet and that he can prove in court”.

The information was advanced by BBC, citing the couple’s spokesperson, who said that this legal action was prompted by “entirely unfounded and grossly defamatory claims”.

“We - together with our three children Madeleine, Sean and Amelie - are taking this legal action against Gonçalo Amaral over his entirely unfounded and grossly defamatory claims”.

Gonçalo Amaral reacted to the couple’s spokesperson’s statements and told TVI that he is a “tranquil man” and that he receives the news “calmly”. The former PJ inspector says that the “situation was awaited”, especially after the broadcast of the documentary, that was produced by the couple, and the interview to Oprah didn’t achieve “the desired effect”.

“There are things that I haven’t said yet”

Gonçalo Amaral further stated that he trusts the Portuguese Justice and that he has “no doubts” that the process will be reopened. “Let’s go to court! That is a way to reopen the process”, he said in a statement to tvi24.pt, alleging that there are still diligences to be made and that he has “the right” to defend himself.

The former inspector has not been officially notified of the decision, but he reacts indignantly: “This is an intimidation attempt that could backfire for them, because there are things that I haven’t said yet, things that I can prove in court”, he said.

As far as tvi24.pt was able to establish, the McCann couple already has a lawyer in the city of Lisbon who wants to pursue the process that targets not only Gonçalo Amaral, but also editor Guerra e Paz, that was responsible for the book launch, and against Valentim de Carvalho [producers of the ‘Truth of the Lie’ documentary].

The statements that are at issue are, according to the British couple, allegations that “Madeleine is not only dead”, but also that they, the child’s parents, “were somehow involved in concealing her body”, BBC cites.

It’s further explained that this process was filed in order to prevent the publication of Gonçalo Amaral’s book “The Truth of the Lie” and a television documentary by the former PJ inspector, about the case.

“We can no longer stand back and watch as Mr Amaral tries to convince the entire world that Madeleine is dead”, reads the press release that is cited by the British media chain.

source: tvi24, 16.05.2009



by astro

mandarinn said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mandarinn said...

sorry my post was cut :O

Di said...

Announced on TV1today

Goncalo Amaral to sue the McCanns.

This is getting very interesting.

Wizard said...

Hi Di,

Just read your post about Amaral suing the Mc’s.

Good for Amaral he has surely been libelled, slandered and defamed by the McCanns and their cronies especially by the Pink One.

Wizard said...

I was just reading a post on JM.

The poster suggested the twin were in danger. He said that suing Amaral showed a sign of sheer desperation.

It has been reported that KM attempted suicide before Christmas and he speculated that the Mc’s rather than be imprisoned, and vilified further might well enter into a pact and take their own lives. May be taking the children with them.

Well speculation – but not altogether without a basis. The Mc’s have really gone over the top trying to convince everyone of their innocence. They have failed.

The Oprah show and the C4 documentary didn’t have the desired effect - do they think their number is up. Well …perhaps.

Any views on this?

Di said...

Hi Wizard

It is a pity GA doesn't add British newspapers to his law suit as well.

Interesting post off JM.

I think Kate is definitely unstable and would possibly take her own life. Would Gerry no, he thinks he is above the law and quite possibly thinks they are home and dry imo. Would they take the children with them if they did have a pact, I hope not it would be an extremely selfish thing to do.

However, if the tabloids and the public turn against them in this country, i would not want to be in their shoes, there's no hiding place for them. I would be very worried for what they might do next. Cornered people are desperate people and they do not act rationally.

bath theory said...

Hi Di

Re:Cornered people -desperate etc

I believe they are cornered NOW and this is a desperate action for them. IF all the public had access to what we have then they would be hounded/sent to Coventry completely which I feel is a suitable punishment for not taking responsibility right away for leaving 3 kids alone in a strange room in a foreign country. The fact they did not admit that at the start shows they were hiding something right from the off.

Di said...


Totally agree with you.

Am I right Edward Smethurst is now the McCanns lawyer dealing with this law suit and not Carter Ruck?

If this is so, perhaps Carter Ruck did not want to be involved.

Di said...


You picked the wrong time to go on holiday lol.

Di said...

BBC News have updated their release to include that GA is to counter sue.

Wizard said...

Carter Ruck not on the case?

Perhaps they were a on a no win no fee arrangement and suing Amaral isn’t a cert.

bath theory said...


This shows us Edward Smethurst is a small town lawyer who is basically in the pay of Brian Kennedy. Enough said hey.

Di said...

Hi Wizard/BT

I thought Brian Kennedy had distanced himself is that not true?

Wizard said...

Hi All,

I was just reading a news update by Big L. I thought I would share this with you. LOL

[quote]sky news,s lorna dunkley reporting outside gerry and kate mccann rothley home.
"we have just arrived outside kate and gerrys rothley home as an ambulance has sped off to the local hospital . when asked their family spokesman clarence mitchell stated " no no, it is not kate being taken to hospital after the news that she may have to face a libel court under oath and had a nervous break down its actually gerry who,s being taken to a&e for a gunshot wound to the foot."[unquote]

Wizard said...

Brian Kennedy - it is believed he jumped ship some months ago.

Di said...


You can always count on BigL LOL

So, if BK did jump ship why is his solictor backing the McCanns, am i right to assume Smethurst is still employed by BK?

Wizard said...

Di - isn’t Smethurst a county solicitor – not high powered.

I can’t help thinking the Mc’s are bluffing. Unfortunately for them Amaral has called their bluff.

Well…the next few days will be very interesting.

Are the McCanns becoming the architects of their own destruction?

Di said...


Good point.

Oh how I wish GA would sue pinky, that would make my day.

bath theory said...

The thing that is really really interesting is why a government advisor is seconded to this group and then becomes employed to act for them. Why would a prime minister's advisor get involved?

Seeing as labour's rating is the lowest it has EVER been since records began he is not really in a position to assist at a political level is he. Could get very very interesting !!

bath theory said...

Di & Wizard
What is your belief with regards to Madeleine ? It is my understanding based on what I know that I feel she died that night as Amaral does. What do you think?

Di said...


My heart would love to believe that Madeleine is alive.

If as K&G say, she is with paedophiles, then no I would not want to believe what I said above.

If it was the scam of the century, then yes I hope she is alive and well.

Sadly in truth, I do not believe Madeleine is alive, I think she met her demise in Portugal. Whether it was an accident or not, I cannot be sure.

The problem I have is, did she die earlier than the 3rd? If that is what happened.

Di said...

Sorry I meant to say, I believe if Madeleine died it was before the
3rd, or early on the 3rd as I just can't understand how they could have planned all the covering up and cleaning that would have had to take place, let alone getting everyone to agree to timelines etc.,imo.

Di said...

Off now see you tomorrow.

bath theory said...


talks about the D-notice . Can't think why the government would have this in place but it seems it must be in place due to the obvious one sided media operation on this story.

bath theory said...

night Di

bath theory said...

My mind still goes back to the next day when the press reported a private plane leaving that night. I remember it clearly. They were obviously giving us info as to what they knew but could say no more.

bath theory said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wizard said...

Hi BT,

I think very much like Amaral and believe in the dogs findings as evidence of Madeleine’s death in apartment 5A.

I originally thought that she could have died earlier than 3rd May but now that we have the pj files etc I think it unlikely.

The whole thing, although staged by the parents, was poorly executed which makes me believe they had very little time to go though what they were to say or how they should react.

I think they panicked and may well of been quite drunk as well,

This would account for their strange behaviour early on. Gerry throwing himself on the floor at the feet of the pj and the even stranger scene on them in a praying position on the bed in unison.

bath theory said...

I agree with you entirely Wizard. Such a shame or did I mean sham.

I think there is a D notice on this and if so then it could well have been put there to protect 'someone' as surely when a 3yr old vanishes the public are perfectly entitled to know what happened and why however unpleasant.

Brown's character, personality and style has been shown up this last year. An odious man who leaks all over the place but attacks those who leak against him. A wet fish is what people used to call such a sullen lacklustre fellow. He reminds me of the unwanted kid in the class at school. Why would he get so involved and why would he want to continue such a charade?

Maybe there is a darkness in his past that affects his character make up. I can't get past his weird facial movements and neck jerks. How can he have got to the top ? I have to keep reminding my foreign cousins (including the Ambassador) that we did not vote him in. Thankfully, Labour has its lowest rating EVER. It reflects totally on him as an individual in my opinion.

Maybe the political climate is right to get the truth out in the open with regards to this story.

bath theory said...

Link to current D notice bloke Andrew Vallance


bath theory said...

Link to speech he gave 2 months ago on press freedoms etc


bath theory said...

Here is a link to what this D notice chap looks like


bath theory said...

Another link


Wizard said...

RTP Portuguese TV station report today Amaral saying. “There are new diligences to be followed up”.

When interviewed he was on his way to a meeting with further discussions with British police. Hmm…..

Di said...

Hi Wizard

D Payne springs to my mind.

Di said...


I don't know whether you have seen this comment regarding a D notice, if not I thought you might be interested.

Posted by beachy 3A's

But there's no penalty for ignoring a D notice. And how in HELL could they claim that anything related to the McCanns had to do with national security?

The purpose of a D notice is supposed to be to prevent inadvertent public disclosure of information that would compromise UK military and intelligence operations and methods, or put at risk the safety of those involved in such operations, or lead to attacks that would damage the critical national infrastructure and/or endanger lives. I know, I know, in the past they've been used to prevent publication of embarrassing information about the royals, but a former locum GP and a doctor at an out-of-the-way Midlands hospital?

If it ever comes to light that the government has put out a D notice on this, Gordon Brown will become the first PM in UK history to learn the meaning of the term "less than zero" when it comes to approval ratings

bath theory said...

That is why I questioned GB's involvement, very very strange to allow a public relations employee who worked with him to get involved with this couple.

A D- notice would be extremely weird given the issue but it would account for the fact that we never get replies to very well worded balanced letters we send these media operators AND the constant one sidedness for two years. All very strange to back the abduction 100 per cent when some very highly qualifiesd professionals have handled this story. They have no reason to be so blinkered unless their employers have told them to be. Time will tell if it was used to protect in a personal way I guess or just another completely cruddy misjudgement by GB and his cronies.

Wizard said...

Hi All,

The article I've copied below is really one of the best I have read and sets things out very well.

Its a bit of a long read but well worth the effort.

A “Disgusting” Episode of Distorted Evidence

PJ Reis and Associates

The sightings by two of the “new witnesses” recently announced by the McCanns had been investigated by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ), the suspects identified and eliminated. In May 2007, the third “new witness” who demanded anonymity, possibly because of her husband’s connection with the top secret Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down – named by Channel 4 TV as “JW”, - reported her suspicions to the UK police who failed to investigate them or relay them to Portugal.

In May 2007, the Ocean Club was awash with holiday-making “medics.”

The supposed corroboration of the sighting by Jane Tanner of a “Bundle Man abductor” by an “Irish family” was badly misrepresented by Channel 4.

The sequences, in the Channel 4 programme “Madeleine Was Here”, involving the American actress Lisa Donovan, who was highly paid to play the part of Kate McCann in the “reconstruction” are believed to have been cut because the producers could not replicate Mrs McCann’ s explanation of how she had discovered Madeleine missing: the open window but undisturbed curtains

The proposition that “Pimple Man”, was identified by three independent witnesses is an illusion that can be supported only by twisting evidence in a manner reminiscent of the worst of old-time British policing when suspects were “fitted up” with false testimony or “verballed” by having words they did not say put into their mouths. Is it a case of spin being taken too far in a serious criminal case?
The McFlurry of Frantic Activity

The recent Mcflurry of mainly McCann inspired propaganda, ranging from their appearance on the Oprah Winfrey Show, the Channel 4 programme called “Madeleine Was Here” as well as numerous UK media reports appears designed to mislead the unsuspecting public into believing that:


The “30,000 files” released on a CD by the PJ had been translated by or on behalf of the McCanns at a cost of £100,000

Kate McCann (but nothing of Gerald doing so) had diligently worked through every page of the files for the past 6 months

The McCann team of detectives, led by David Edgar and Arthur Cowley, dug into the files released by the PJ and “buried deep” or “hidden” and discovered critical new evidence from three witnesses who independently identified the same spotty, very ugly or “disgusting” man who had been watching the McCanns’ apartment at the Ocean Club in the days immediately before Madeleine’s disappearance.

The Mcflurry implies that the three new witnesses, as well as Jane Tanner and the Smith family, from Ireland, had agreed this sketch of the “Pimple Man”, thus making him a prime suspect in Madeleine’s “abduction”

David Edgar, described as the McCanns’ “Chief Investigating Officer”, announced that he believes Madeleine was seized by a lone abductor

The Unknown Artist’s Impression of Pimple Man


Evidence from an Irish family who, at around 9.50pm on 3rd May 2007 (the day Madeleine was reported missing) saw a man carrying a child, corroborated the sighting of “Bundle Man” by Jane Tanner, a member of the “Tapas 9”

The Smith family had identified Gerald McCann as the man they had seen carrying a child but according to Channel 4 this suspicion had been resolved

The PJ had done nothing to trace “Pimple Man” and were “bumbling cops”

No law enforcement agency –anywhere in the world- was proactively investigating Madeleine’s disappearance, thus leaving the McCanns to their own devices

The truth is vastly different:


The PJ did not release 30,000 files: but between 17,000 and 30,000 individual pages of evidence and intelligence. Many sections are duplicated and most are irrelevant. It is possible that the version of the CD issued to the press is less complete than that given to the McCanns

The statements were not “buried deep” in the files but were open, fully indexed and cross-referenced

With one exception the “new sightings” had been fully investigated by the PJ and Leicestershire Police in May 2007, accurate efits prepared, the suspects identified and eliminated. The results were referred to in the Portuguese final report (Volume 17 folios 4520 et seq)

The one exception was the statement of the witness referred to by Channel 4 as “JW” whose report in May 2007 was referred by the Wiltshire Police to the Leicestershire Police who did nothing with it. It is hard to blame the PJ for taking no action when its officers knew nothing about the witness but the role of the Leicestershire Police in this case is disturbing

Channel 4’s evidence, distorted as it was, shows that Mr Edgar’s theory of a “lone abductor” is flawed. Moreover, his views conflict with those of the McCanns’ PR guru- Clarence Mitchell – who told Jerry Lawton, reporting in the Daily Star on 9th May 2009, that a team of at least two people were involved in a “carefully planned operation”. The McCanns’ team, while belittling the PJ for incompetence and lack of coordination, seem to be even worse

Channel 4 was unable to replicate Kate McCann’s story of how she discovered Madeleine was missing – the open window but static curtains - and cut all of the sequences involving the American actress – Lisa Donovan – from the final version

If the “Tapas 9” explanations are true, on seven occasions, three members of the “Tapas 9” must have walked within feet of the “wide open” shutters and windows of Apartment 5A but failed to notice this critical fact

The sighting by the Smith family does not corroborate Jane Tanner’s evidence, although by twisting visual images and lighting, the Channel 4 program, implied it does. Significantly, the sighting is not even on Mr Edgar’s whiteboard, suggesting Channel 4 slipped it in as a cosmetic. After the dismissal (allegedly on the insistence of senior British politicians) of Dr Goncalo Amaral, the PJ officer in charge of the case, the Irish family’s evidence was not pursued and thus Gerald McCann was not eliminated

The five witnesses have not agreed the “Pimple Man” sketch: in fact their descriptions of the “lurker” or “abductor” are contradictory

Finally, the only reason why no law enforcement agency is currently involved in this case is because the McCanns failed to ask the PJ to reopen the case, as they were entitled to do.
The Nature of Lurking

The whole Mcflurry seems to deftly avoid the question of what the lurking abductor hoped to gain by watching the rear of the apartment at the times he supposedly did, when the kids were not there, and from where he did, making himself obvious in the process. It just does not make sense and would have done nothing to enable him to plan a snatch at night while the “Tapas 9” were, to use Kate McCann’s words “so into each other”, and by jemmying the front window.

And non-smokers may not have noticed that over the past few years the world has changed with the nicotine inflicted being forced to lurk on pavements, up trees and behind bushes to get a fix. Also, the ratio of private cars to people in Portugal is relatively low and if you go any village or town you will see people standing around waiting for transport. For such reasons, lurking is usually entirely innocent.
More on the Truth
The Top Cops?

Mr Edgar is a 52 year old ex-Detective Inspector from Ireland and more recently from Cheshire Constabulary. Arthur Cowley, aged 57, is an ex- Detective Sergeant from Liverpool. With the greatest of respect, their actual qualifications do not support the McCanns’ PR prompted description, advanced by Antonella Lazzeri in the Sun on 14th January 2009, “as an elite team of ex-cops and secret agents” or “12 crack former Scotland Yard detectives and MI5 and MI6 agents”. In fact, throughout the Channel 4 program, Mr Edgar appeared to be completely lost, radiating body language that could be interpreted as “I’m a decent man get me out of here”.

Nothing has been disclosed to say by whom they were selected although they are supposedly being paid from the “Find Madeleine Fund” on a project named “ALPHA”.

Arthur Cowley and David Edgar

Note Mr Edgar’s body language: “Get me out of here?”

The Interesting Whiteboard & “New Witnesses”

Messrs Edgar and Cowley have not named the supposedly new witnesses but screenshots from the Channel 4 programme shows that they are:

The Sightings White Board

The whiteboard lists three supposedly independent sightings on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 implying that “Pimple Man” was lurking for a period of almost 4 hours on that critical day but making himself obvious. This “evidence” is misleading because Mr Flack was not sure whether the date was 2nd or 3rd May 2007. Mr Edgar and Mr Cowley seem to have dramatically improved Mr Flack’s statement by arbitrarily removing his uncertainty and thereby making the suspicions much more dramatic.

It should also be noted that the whiteboard does not refer to the sighting by the Irish family. This is strange when it featured so strongly in the Channel 4 program.

Mr Edgar (frame 16.36 of 47.57 of the Channel 4 program) states that sighting 3 (by Tasmin Sillence) is the most important (besides Jane Tanner’s) “because it links them”. Mr Edgar implies that all of the witnesses saw the same person (ie “Pimple Man”) watching the McCanns’ apartment and states at frame 11.24 that the abduction was “done by an individual on his own: most likely by an individual who has links to Praia da Luz which is why we have focused all of our efforts really on – most of our efforts certainly -on Praia da Luz”. Perhaps Mr Edgar changed his phrasing from “all” to “most” to conceal the restricted scope of his mandate and the fact that he is focused exclusively on an “abduction”. In any event, he confirmed his lone abductor theory in an interview reported by Dominic Herbert in the News of the World published on Sunday 10th May 2009.
Basics of the Sighting by Jane Tanner

Miss Tanner’s initial description of the abductor she supposedly saw carrying a child on the night of 3rd May 2007 was given to the PJ as follows:

“Brown male between 35 and 40, slim, around 1.70m. Very dark hair, thick, long at the neck. (Noticed when the person was seen from the back). He was wearing golden beige cloth trousers (linen type) with a "Duffy" type coat (but not very thick). He was wearing black shoes, of a conventional style and was walking quickly. He was carrying a sleeping child in his arms across his chest. By his manner, the man gave her the impression that he wasn't a tourist.”

Her description has changed significantly over time, to the “Egg Man”, “Monster Man”, “Bundle Man”, “Cooperman” and “Nose Man”. She also picked out Robert Murat as the villain and maintained this allegation until withdrawing it in April 2008 in an interview with the Leicestershire Police. Miss Tanner’s abductor had long hair, short hair, wore glasses, didn’t wear glasses, had a nose or didn’t have a nose, had a moustache or was clean shaven. He strode “purposefully out” or “ambled along”. So it is not at all clear what Miss Tanner’s final position is but she obviously supported the “reconstruction” on the Channel 4 program and the image of the “purposefully striding Bundle Man”:

Jane Tanner’s Sighting from “Madeleine Was Here”

Note the clothing of “Bundle Man” and the way he is carrying the child

Whoever Jane Tanner saw (if anybody) on the night of 3rd May 2007, he is nothing like “Pimple Man” and thus for her evidence to have any credibility there must have been at least two people involved in Madeleine’s abduction. This conflicts with Mr Edgar’s theory of a lone abductor but supports everyone’s hero – Clarence Mitchell.

Attention to Detail

The Channel 4 program implies that Mr Edgar is not overly distracted by detail. One of the big problems with Jane Tanner’s sighting, and thus her credibility, is that she states that on 3rd May 2007, immediately prior to seeing the “person carrying a child”, she had walked past Gerald McCann and Jez Wilkins, another Ocean Club guest, who were talking on the very narrow pavement immediately adjoining Apartment 5A. She told the Leicestershire Police that, as she walked past them, Gerald McCann must have had his back to her as otherwise she would have caught his eye and would have said something to him. She said the same on the Channel 4 program, adding that she would have chided him, by relaying Kate McCann’s complaint that he had prolonged his check (he left the Tapas Bar at 9.05 and returned at just before 9.20) to watch the “footie”.

Gerald McCann strongly disagreed with Miss Tanner’s evidence and says he was standing, talking to Jez Wilkins on the opposite side of the road and that he did not see Miss Tanner walking by. Jez Wilkins told the PJ that as he was walking home, with his child in a pushchair, he spoke to Gerald McCann and he agreed with Miss Tanner they were on the narrow pavement on the apartment side of the road, but added that he did not see her. The northerly direction that Mr Wilkins was believed to have been headed suggests that during their conversation Gerald McCann would have been facing south and could not have missed seeing Miss Tanner.

Mr Edgar lightly dismissed these significant discrepancies by saying:

“The most important thing, Jane, is not where Jez and Gerry were actually stood because there are inconsistencies in every major investigation. The only thing that matters is that they did not obstruct your view of the man you saw”.

This is sloppy work because the inconsistency undermines Miss Tanner’s credibility and raises the question of how she could walk within 18 inches of Gerald McCann, who was most probably facing her, and not even acknowledge him. If she cannot get this simple matter right, why is her sighting of the “abductor” to be believed? Also, the fact that on three occasions she walked within feet of the open shutters and window and did not notice them throws Miss Tanner’s powers of observation into further doubt.
Why Gerald McCann Disagrees

The obvious conflict of evidence raises the question of why Gerald McCann should disagree with Miss Tanner and Mr Wilkins and be so dogmatic that he was on the side of road opposite to Apartment 5A. To throw light on this, we have to examine the corner into which –slowly but surely - the McCanns and their friends have painted themselves:

The Window of Opportunity

Red cells indicate doubts about the sequence and inconsistencies

For this sequence to be even marginally credible, the abductor must have kept observation to make sure Gerald had gone from the apartment. Would he risk making a forced entry if Gerald McCann was inside or standing within 30 feet of the rear patio doors? It is more likely he would wait until he knew the coast was clear. This probability would further limit the “abductor’s” window of opportunity.

At one point Gerald McCann, probably realising the improbability of his timetable, suggested the abductor had been hiding in the apartment as he was making his check. He does not appear to have maintained this hypothesis which, given the size of the apartment and the fact he was in it for at least 10 minutes, is incredbible.

At best the “abductor” had less than 5 minutes to break into the apartment, snatch Madeleine and make his escape. And if the bedroom door had slammed shut when he opened the shutters and windows (as the laws of physics suggest it would) wouldn’t the sound have been heard by Gerald McCann if he had been standing talking to Jez Wilkins right outside the apartment? And wouldn’t the banging have wakened the twins?

Our forensic advisers believe a proper reconstruction would prove that the bang of the closing bedroom door is unlikely to be missed by anyone in the position Jez Wilkins says (and Jane Tanner corroborates) that he and Gerald McCann were standing. It would have been less audible from the opposite side of the road. Is this the reason Gerald McCann is sticking to his story? Is it because he knows Jane Tanner’s evidence (of passing him within inches and saying nothing) is incredible? Does he wish to leave open the possibility that the abductor entered through the patio doors, while his back was turned talking to Mr Wilkins on the opposite side of the road? Does he want to distance himself from Miss Tanner’s evidence, perhaps suspecting her alleged check at 9.15pm could be disproved by a cctv camera or other evidence? Or is he is being truthful? For the moment we do not know.
Defects and Spin in the Investigation

Interestingly the white board now describes Jane Tanner’s suspect as a “UK Male”. How the investigation team arrives at this conclusion is a mystery. She has never said this.

The Whiteboard with lots of “UK Males”

Also, the whiteboard shows Matthew Oldfield’s check as “MO says he checked 5A”. The use of word “says” suggests that even the McCann investigators have their doubts about him. But the main bone of contention with Mr Edgar’s investigation is his obvious dedication to the “abductor” theory and his failure to critically test the McCann’s story. This should have been his starting point. He told Channel 4 that there was no evidence of the McCann’s involvement: oh no? But where is there a shred of evidence that Madeleine was abducted? There is no evidence of the shutters and windows being forced, no marks on the bedding, or tiles, no fingerprints or DNA, no scrapes on the window sill, no footprints: nothing. The only fact is that Kate McCann’s fingerprints were found on the window in a position that showed she had opened it.
The New Witness “JW”

There is nothing in the CD released by the PJ to identify the witness “JW” who allegedly saw “Pimple Man” standing lurking (not “ambling along”) around Apartment 5A on Sunday 29th April 2007 at 08.00 and on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at approximately 15.00. She stated on the Channel 4 program that she would describe the lurker as “very ugly”. This is not the most discrete description as it fails to exclude 90% of the world’s population.

Channel 4 (probably inadvertently because many names and details had been redacted) revealed that “JW”, who has two daughters, was staying at the Ocean Club. The reference to “apartment 1”, on the following screenshot, is not believed to be the actual designation but an indication that earlier in the document two apartments had been referred to (Possibly one occupied by JW and another by her friends)

Screenshot Relating to “JW”

It appears that in two statements (presumably made to Mr Cowley) JW was not sure whether she had seen “a suspect male ambling along” from a position in her apartment, from another apartment , tennis courts, pool or from the road. The information is further confused in the Channel 4 program because it implies that on two occasions, while she was walking in the street, JW saw “Pimple Man” standing watching Apartment 5A and not “ambling along”. Also the screenshot suggests a sighting by “JW” on 30th April 2007. This did not feature in the Channel 4 program.

Light was thrown on the identity of “JW” in an article in the Sun on 12th May 2009 by Antonella Lazzeri (another McCann close confidante) who stated:


She is a 36 year old mother of two: one a 3 year old girl

She rented an apartment 3 doors away from Apartment 5A

She reported her suspicions to her local police – in Wiltshire – in May 2007

Analysis of the Ocean Club Booking records indicates that “JW” may be Mrs J Weinburger, who travelled to Faro from Belfast on 28th April 2007, and stayed in Apartment “G4” (ie 3 doors away from the McCanns) in Waterside Gardens for seven days with her husband “P Weinburger”, a 3 year old daughter and an 11 month old infant. There is no trace of this family on the UK’s Electoral Roll, and no recorded directorships: this is fairly unusual for a British citizen unless there are security or other reasons for redaction.

However, a “Paul M Weinberger”, who works for Enigma Diagnostics Limited is now based in Porton Down, Wiltshire. This is a private company, founded in 2004 as a joint venture between the UK Government - through the top secret Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down -and the private venture capitalists Porton Capital Technology Fund. Mr Weinberger was previously employed as Director of Business Development for Roche Diagnostics, the world’s largest diagnostic company. Mr Weinberger specialises in “in vitro diagnostics” and is a member of the Executive Committee of the “British In Vitro Diagnostics Association”.

Porton Down is an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Defence and the site is said to be one of the UK’s most sensitive secret government facilities for military research especially related to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (Here we go again!) weapons.

It is not certain that Mr Weinberger, of Enigma Diagnostics, is the man who stayed at the Ocean Club in May 2007, but it looks that way. Another link between the Weinbur or Weinbergers and Wiltshire is the fact that they made dinner bookings at the Tapas Bar with Dr Julian Totman who is also from Salisbury in Wiltshire.

Miss Lazzeri reported that JW, on returning from Portugal, in May 2007, informed her local police – based in Wiltshire (and thus a link to Paul M Weinberger in Wiltshire) who advised the Leicestershire police who

“failed to follow up her lead. It was only when she received an emotional phone call from Maddie’s mum Kate nearly two years later (thus in April or May 2009 possibly to get a bit more spice for the Channel 4 program) that a photofit based on her description was put together…. When Kate asked me to help, I agreed immediately. But the police should have asked 2 years ago. It was only after Kate got in touch that the woman learnt two other witnesses saw an identical man… I can’t believe our three sightings weren’t linked earlier”

The problem is, which “JW” was not told, that the descriptions given to the PJ by the “two other witnesses” were nothing like “Pimple Man” and that their reports had been fully investigated, the suspects identified and eliminated. But failure to act on “JW’s” evidence adds to the Leicestershire Police’s record of tardiness in its delayed handing of the statements of Kate and Arul, photographs of potential suspects: not to mention a recent detailed report on the crèche records. Can any police force be that bad? Or was Leicestershire’s job simply to kill the investigation, possibly on Home Office instructions, whose political intervention – in such cases as Damian Green – are so worrying? And if “JW” attached any importance to her sighting why did she do nothing further about it for 2 years, especially when it might have qualified her for a large reward? And why did Kate McCann leave it until the last moment to call her? The bottom line is that “JW’s” “evidence” justifies very close scrutiny.
The 12 Year Old Schoolgirl: Tasmin Sillence

The next sighting, which Mr Edgar states is the most significant, was made by a 12 year old schoolgirl named Tasmin Sillence. Her evidence is in the CD (Volume III Pages 800 -804) where she describes the person she saw on:


30th April 2007 at 08.00am leaning on the wall at the back of Apartment 5A (Point A)

2nd May 2007 at 12.25pm standing on the pavement opposite the apartment (Point B)


Caucasian race, light skin so he wasn't Portuguese but could be British according to criteria. Approximately 180cm tall, pale complexion, 30 to 35 years of age. Short hair, light shaved with a 1 cm length and fair but she isn't sure if it was blonde because the sun was reflecting and made perception more difficult. She didn't see the eyes because he wore dark glasses of black colour with the structure of a thick frame. He had a large forehead. Nose of normal size, a bit pointy and sharp. Large ears close to the head. Mouth with thin lips, she didn't see his teeth. Chin pointing up, which stood out on the face that she describes as sharp. No beard, no mustache: a clean shave. No other special signs except from some small pimples on the face as a result on shaving. He looked ugly, even “disgusting”

Miss Sillence said that the first time she had seen the man he had been wearing a sports style jacket of thin black leather, with a zipper and several pockets with similar zippers in silver. The jacket was open and she saw a white t-shirt with a dark blue label near the waist. She thinks he was wearing worn out blue jeans and black and grey sports shoes.

The second time she saw him he wore the same jacket zipped up. He had a pen with a string attached to one of the pockets.

In May 2007, the PJ prepared an efit based on Miss Sillence’s description as follows:

The First efit.

Doesn’t look much like Pimple Man: does he?

On 5th August 2008, Sara Nuwar, reporting in the News of the Word, stated that Gail Cooper had come face to face with Madeleine’s suspected kidnapper and, at the request of the McCann’s backer – Brian Kennedy – had produced an efit called “Cooper Man”.


Doesn’t look much like “Pimple Man”; does he?

Miss Nuwar continues:

“Two of her sightings were also witnessed by her husband. And we can also reveal that a NEW witness, a 12-year-old girl, has come forward to back up her story.”

For sure there are a lot of 12 year old girls in Praia da Luz, but was this Miss Sillence just trying to be helpful by agreeing to almost anything or is another 12 year old involved in this tragic case?

The PJ followed up Miss Sillence’s sightings which led to the identification of Michael Anthony Green (see Volume III pages 632 to 726. The PJ and Leicestershire Police cleared Mr Green of any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. However, all information relating to Mr Green was withdrawn from the CD at the request of the British police, who were concerned, among many other things, that information on British paedophiles should be protected. Don’t you just admire the way the British police protect the vulnerable?
Derek Flack and Christine Dale

The fourth sighting of the lurking “Pimple Man”, who appeared to be the owner of a white van, was supposedly made by a “couple from Cheshire” who can be tracked in the PJ files as Derek Flack, aged 64, and his partner – Christine Margaret Dale, who at the time lived in Ilford in Essex. (Volume 1 folio 145 and Volume 4 folio 833 et seq). Mr Flack described the man he saw at around 11.30 on 2nd or 3rd May 2007 to the PJ as follows:

1.7m tall, dark skinned appearing to be Portuguese, with a one day stubble, with short thick hair that stretched down to collar level at the back and wearing a solid yellow t-shirt. He appeared to be the driver of a white van.

Interestingly Mr Edgar’s whiteboards describe Mr Flack’s suspect as a “UK male” (not, as he said Portuguese) and the sighting he made as being on “2nd May 2007” rather than on “2nd or 3rd May 2007”. The McCann investigators say nothing of the fact that Mr Flack told the PJ he did not believe he could identify the “lurker” if he were to see him again. Again the evidence has been seriously misrepresented.

In an article in the “Daily Mail” on 7th May 2009, Vanessa Allen and Peter Allen, devoted supporters of Mr and Mrs McCann, stated:

“A couple from Cheshire then saw the man on either May 2 or 3 staring at Apartment 5A, and standing near a parked white van. An artist’s impression of the man, commissioned by the “Find Madeleine Fund” shows a dark haired, heavily scarred man (ie “Pimple Man”)

So it appears that the “Pimple Man” sketch was based on the description given by Mr Flack and Ms Dale.

The Channel 4 program also confirmed, probably unintentionally, that the Cheshire couple were in fact Mr Flack and Ms Dale because when referring to sighting 4 they produced the plan attached to Mr Flack’s statement:

The Plan Attached to Mr Flack’s Statement

The descriptions Mr Flack gave to the PJ in May 2007 resulted in the PJ preparing the following efit:

Original efit Based on Mr Flack’s Sighting.

Doesn’t look much like Pimple Man: does he?

This led to the tracing of Barrington Godfrey Norton (Volume 3 folio 704 and 709) a musician living in Praia da Luz. The PJ and Leicestershire Police cleared him of involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance (Volume IV pages 833 and 834)
The Sighting by the Irish Smith Family

Although there is no mention of it on Mr Edgar’s whiteboard, the Channel 4 program referred to a sighting by the Smith family of a man carrying a small child on the night of 3rd May 2007. The CD issued by the PJ shows that at around 21.50 on the night Madeleine was reported missing, a large family from Drogheda, Ireland -including the father Martin Smith – was walking back to their apartment when they passed a man carrying a child

Location of the Smith Sighting

On 6th May 2007 the Smiths gave the following descriptions:

The man was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had a normal complexion, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache.

He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes and cannot describe the colour or form of the same.

The child was female, about four years of age as she was similar to his granddaughter of the same age. It was a child of normal complexion, about a meter in height. The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not look at her eyes. As she was asleep and her eyelids were closed. She was wearing light-coloured pajamas. He cannot state with certainty the colour. She was not covered by any other cover or sheet. He cannot confirm whether she was barefoot but in his group, they spoke about the child having no cover on her feet. The individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing. He states that the individual carried the child in his arms, with her head laying on the individual’s shoulders to the right of the deponent (ie over the man’s left shoulder). He adds that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position.

Mrs Smith confirmed the above and stated

She did not see the child's face because she was lying against the individual's left shoulder in a vertical position against the individual. She appeared to be sleeping. Her arms were suspended along her body and were not around the individual's neck. She did not look at the child's hands and cannot state the colour of her skin. She believes she was white.

Members of the family returned to Portimao on 26th May 2007 and clarified their evidence – which Dr Gonçalo Amaral, who was then leading the PJ’s investigation, considered very important.

On 9th September 2007, the McCanns returned to the UK and BBC News showed them getting off an Easyjet flight. The Smith family saw the program and, from the way Gerald McCann carried his son with the child’s head over his left shoulder with hands hanging down, recognised him as the person they had seen on the night of 3rd May 2007. On 30th January 2008, Mr Smith made a further statement confirming -with 60-80% certainty – that the man he had seen carrying a child on 3rd May 2007 was Gerald McCann. Mr Smith’s wife corroborated his evidence.

How Mr McCann carried Sean Jane Tanner’s “Bundle Man”

The McCanns seem to have totally ignored the Smith family’s evidence for the past 18 months, and have never issued a photo fit of the man they saw. However, Metodo 3, the discredited investigation firm previously retained by the McCanns, spoke to the Smiths and did little but worry them.

When making the supposed “reconstruction”, Channel 4, if it was to maintain even the slightest veil of credibility, had no option but to refer to the Smith sighting. But the way they spun the evidence by suggesting it supported Miss Tanner and cleared Gerald McCann was disgraceful.

The Smith’s Evidence as Portrayed on Channel 4

It is thus no wonder that the two sightings appear to corroborate each other when Channel 4 used the same child and actor for both, dimmed the Smith scene into almost total darkness with strong back lighting -while improving that for Jane Tanner - and failed to accurately represent the way the family stated the child had been carried or what the man had been wearing. Another example of twisted evidence?

At the time Dr Amaral was dismissed, he was planning to return the Smith family to Portugal to obtain further evidence from them. His successor, Mr Rebelo, failed to do this and to this day the sighting is unresolved. There is nothing in the CD to indicate that Gerald McCann was eliminated as the man the Smith family had seen.

The Smith sighting, which was some 35 minutes later than Jane Tanner’s, was around a mile away from the Ocean Club, to the South and West. It is difficult to imagine that Miss Tanner’s abductor would have turned back, passing the Ocean Club, to be in a position where he was seen by the Smiths. At best, the two sightings, if either took place, are unrelated but the fact that the McCanns now link them, to support Jane Tanner’s evidence is disingenuous.
Total Spin and Total Blindness

Anyone would be forgiven for concluding that the Channel 4 program was a cynical and misleading attempt to sway public opinion in favour of the McCanns, against an incompetent Portuguese investigation and to applaud Mr Edgar’s great work and “new witnesses”. The program was pure spin with research conducted in Portugal by none other than my old pal Brendan de Beer and directed, in fact, by Clarence Mitchell! Its object was to promote the story of the McCanns’ innocence and their determination to find Madeleine and, of course, to collect further contributions to the “Find Madeleine Fund”. It was not the “reconstruction” promised.

In fact, the critical sequences involving the American comedy actress – Lisa Donovan – who, at considerable expense, played the part of Kate McCann was cut from the final version of the Channel 4 program because “the representation of what Kate had done on the night that Maddie disappeared was not convincing and raised some doubts”. This is hardly surprising given that Mrs McCann’s story, which is analysed later, is not credible.

Also for the explanation given by the “Tapas 9” to be true:


At around 9.15pm, just after seeing the “abductor”, Jane Tanner must have walked within feet of the open windows and shutters of Apartment 5A. She did the same when she returned to the Tapas Bar at around 9.20pm

At around 9.25pm Russell O’Brien and Matthew Oldfield walked within feet of the windows and shutters of Apartment 5A but did not detect that they were open. Mr Oldfield did precisely the same when he returned to the Tapas Bar

At around 9.55pm, Jane Tanner failed to notice the open windows when she went to “relieve” Russell O’Brien, who was looking after their sick daughter, and he did the same when he returned to the Tapas Bar

Thus on seven occasions, involving three different people, we are supposed to believe that no-one detected that the windows and shutters of Apartment 5A had been forced “wide open” by the “abductor”.

The Shutters of Apartment 5A

On seven occasions members of the “Tapas 9” walked within feet of these shutters and did not notice that they were open

In none of the interviews with the Leicestershire Police was any of the “Tapas 9” confronted with this glaring oversight and it does not appear to have caused Mr Edgar to fret: strange, don’t you think?

The proposition that “Pimple Man”, was identified by five independent witnesses is an illusion that can only be supported by twisting evidence in a manner reminiscent of the worst of old-time British policing when suspects were “fitted up” with false testimony or “winged” by having words they did not say put into their mouths. Is it a case of spin being taken too far?
Kate Says Far Too Much

The most interesting facts to emerge from “Madeleine Was Here” are the opening shots of Kate McCann describing how she discovered that Madeleine was missing and how she knew “straightaway” that she had been “abducted”. This, and the Oprah Winfrey show, were the first occasions that Mrs McCann provided any detail and reliable sources suggest that Kate McCann’s cameo was a last minute alternative when the sequences filmed of Miss Donovan had to be cut.

Kate McCann

I did my check at about 10 o’clock, went in through the sliding patio doors, and I just stood actually and I thought all quiet and to be honest I might have been tempted to turn round and I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we'd left it and


The tone of her voice is spookily rhetorical: permission seeking rather than being confident and assertive. Forensic Linguistic analysis shows that words such as “just”, “actually”, and “to be honest” in historical narratives are usually associated with deception.

What appears to be superfluous information about entering through the patio doors is very important because it pre-empts questions about Kate McCann not seeing the open bedroom windows as she walked past them to enter the apartment through the front door. In his original statement to the PJ, Gerald McCann said that his wife had entered the apartment through the front door.

Forensic Linguists also recognise the importance of thought processes. Liars frequently introduce these, unnecessarily, to give themselves time to think and to avoid commitment. Kate McCann refers to a lot of thought processes, mainly when addressing to topics directly related to the critical events on 3rd May 2007. Under stress, Gerald McCann pulls his right ear lobe

Mrs McCann’s observation that “the door…. was open much further than we’d left it” was supposedly the reason she decided to check further. Yet at the time she had every reason to suppose that Matt Oldfield or Gerald had opened it when they carried out their checks. Thus her thought process is not consistent with the circumstances and are possibly drawn from imagination (usually untruthful), rather than from memory (usually truthful)

Further if the abductor had “jemmied” the shutters, as she, her husband and relatives originally stated, it is most likely that the door would have been blown closed before Kate McCann’s arrival at 10.00pm. Further, how could the curtains be static if the window was open and a wind blowing? Mrs McCann’s story does not stand scrutiny

In his Channel 4 interview, Matthew Oldfield implied that when he did his check at 9.25 (which if Jane Tanner’s evidence is correct was after the shutters had been jemmied, the window opened and Madeleine taken) the bedroom door was wide open (he told the Leicestershire Police it was 45 degrees open) and he could see the twin’s cots from the lounge-hallway area. He says nothing of seeing the curtains flapping wildly, as they must have been if the window was open.

The dynamics of Madeleine’s bedroom are such that if the door was at less than a 90 degree angle the strong draught (from a 17mph north by north-west wind blowing that night) would have blown it closed or caused it to oscillate: if the angle was greater than 90 degrees the door would have been blown open against the wall. But in all cases, it is inconceivable that the curtains would not have been seen flapping wildly during the whole time the window was open.

The bottom line is that if the draught was sufficient to blow the curtains – “whoosh” -when Kate McCann opened the door, they could not have been still when Mr Oldfield made his check or when she first looked into the room.

Kate McCann

I went to close it to about here and as I got to here it suddenly slammed and as I opened it … it was as I suddenly thought I would look at the children and I saw Sean and Amelie in the cot and then I was looking at Madeleine's bed, which was here, and it was dark and I was looking and I was thinking is that Madeleine or was that the bedding


“I went to close it” is what is known in forensic linguistics as a “non-action” and is therefore questionable. The change of tense (from past to present) within the same sentence is not consistent with a truthful recall of a past event from memory.

Is it likely that the twins would not have been woken by the slamming door or that Gerald would have heard nothing if he had been standing on the pavement right outside the apartment?

Kate McCann

I couldn't quite make her out and it sounds really stupid now but at the time I was thinking…. I didn't want to put the light on as I didn't want to wake them and literally as I went back in the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn


Self deprecating phrases such as “it sounds really stupid” or “I know you won’t believe this” are frequently associated with deception. Again note the switch to the present tense and the superfluous word “literally”. But more important is the phrase “went back in”. According to her statement she had not previously entered the room. Again imagination seems to be playing its part

Kate McCann

Were closed….. Whoosh…. A gust of wind just blew them open… Cuddle cat was still there and her blanket was still there and I knew straight away…. She'd been taken…. You know


When she reconstructs the “whoosh” of the curtains, Mrs McCann is standing outside the room, yet her previous words imply that she was inside the room when this happened. Such discrepancies – between oral communications, body language and proximetrics- are usually a classic sign of deception
Kate on Oprah Winfrey

Kate McCanns’ account of the sequence of events was somewhat different: the important differences are underlined:

Kate: I went at ten and I went into the apartment and there was no crying. I stopped and there was no crying. And then I just noticed that the door was quite open

Oprah: Which door?

Kate: Their bedroom door sorry, and we usually have the door as Gerry said sort of not closed but ajar just so that a little bit of light gets in and it's not too dark in the room so I thought oh Matt must have gone in and left the door open

Oprah: Same thing he thought

Kate: Yeah, so I thought well I'll just close it over again, and as I went to close it over it slammed shut and I thought and it was like sort of you know a draught had caused it to shut so I turned behind me and I thought are the patio doors open and they were closed and I thought well that's strange so then I opened the door thinking I'll open it ajar a bit again and that was when I kind of looked into the room and when I just looked and it was quite dark and I was just looking and looking at Madeleine's bed and I was thinking is that her that I was looking for why isn't Madeleine there?

And then in the end I walked over and thought oh, she's not in bed and then I thought maybe she's wandered through to our bed and that's why the door's open so I went through to our bedroom and she wasn't there and then I kind of see then I'm starting to panic a bit and I ran back into their room

and literally as I went back into their room the curtains that were drawn over just "foooosh" flew open and that's when I saw that the shutter was right up and the window was pushed right open. And that was when I just knew that erm someone had taken her.

So I, I mean I ran to the window and I didn't know what I thought was going to see but I ran to the window and then I quickly hmm quickly looked through the wardrobes I had I suppose this temporary thought she was cowering in a wardrobe or something anyway she wasn't there and I just ran out and soon as...

Oprah: was she in a closet, in a closet?

Kate: Yeah just in case, just in case she's hiding or something I don't know and then I just went flying out the backdoor and erm ran to Gerry and just as soon as I saw the table where they were sitting I just started shouting "someone's taken her, Madeleine's gone" you know and erm that's how it all started really but erm

Oprah: Why did you feel immediately, I'd heard that you'd said "They've taken her, they've taken her"

Kate:....I didn't say that I said, said "somebody's taken her Madeleine's gone". Well from the way I found the room it was obvious because a child could not open those shutters and the window

Mrs McCann was not invited to explain why Madeleine’s bed gave the appearance to the PJ that it had not been slept in or why only her fingerprints had been found on the windows.
A Bit More on the Door and Windows

Forensic linguistics prove nothing but Mrs Mc Canns' story is incredible and defies the laws of physics:


If the window was open how come the door had not slammed before Matthew Oldfield checked and why were the curtains not flapping wildly when they looked into the room?

How come there is absolutely no evidence of an abductor entering or leaving the room?

Why are the only fingerprints on the window those of Kate McCann and in a position that indicates she opened it?

Why did Gerald McCann interfere with the shutters and window immediately he entered the room after Madeleine had been supposedly discovered missing?

Our technical advisers believe it would be impossible to simulate the sequence that Kate McCann and Matthew Oldfield gave of the window being open, the door half open and the curtains still. This is possibly the real reason that the sequences involving Lisa Donovan were cut from the Channel 4 programme and why the the McCanns refused to return to Praia Da Luz to take part in a proper reconstruction.

And if Mr Edgar is such a great cop how come he did not test Mrs McCann’s explanation because it is critical to everything else. It should have been his starting point, followed by an analysis of all of the documentary evidence, including the crèche records.
No One Prepared to Help

In another interesting sequence in the Channel 4 program, Gerald McCann acknowledged that his presence in Praia Da Luz had created hostility among the local population but he questioned how anyone (unless they had a “heart of stone”) could refuse to assist when a little girl’s life is at stake.

He conveniently overlooked the 48 questions, asked by the PJ, that his wife refused to answer including the last one which was

“Are you aware in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter”.

Her response was

“Yes, if that is what the investigation thinks”

And amazingly no where in the Channel 4 program was there any mention of the reward for Madeleine’s return. Now isn’t that a strange oversight by parents who are desperate, and will leave “no stone unturned”, to get their daughter back?
Posted by Paulo Reis at 07:59:00

Di said...

Hi all


Thanks for posting that excellent report from Paulo Reis.

A long read but well worth it.

I have e-mailed it to everyone in my address book, i hope everyone else will as well. Let's get the truth out there.

So now we definitely know why Kate was cut from the documentary, just what we have always said, her story just does not ring true.

The Weinbergers hmmm very interesting.

I also did not know Gerry had interfered with the window and shutters immediately when he entered the room after Madeleine was missing. Does this mean his prints were wiped?

bath theory said...

Has anyone else noticed how desperate Gerry seems to be to try and rid his face of its natural smug arrogance ? I wonder if the alleged media coaching has tried to make him more humble in front of an audience. If it has I don't think the money was well spent. 10 out of 10 for effort but alas 1 out of 10 for attainment !

Wizard said...

The Daily Star reports……..

“A detective hired to find Madeleine McCann flew out of Britain yesterday on the trail of the spotty suspect he believes masterminded her abduction.

Former RUC officer Dave Edgar is travelling across Europe tracking an 'ugly' man seen casing out the McCann's apartment in Portugal the four days before she vanished.

He is convinced Maddie is still alive and was snatched by someone who 'wanted a child to love'.

Mr Edgar is acting on information from the public.

Clarence Mitchell said Mr Edgar was following a potentially vital new lead.

He said 'for operational purposes I cannot say where Mr Edgar and his team are exactly, but they are following up a very encouraging lead'.

Mr Edgar, 52, believes Maddie could be hidden in peasant villages close to Praia da Luz, where she was snatched.”

Well we’ve heard of the MP expenses/second home scandal – like ravenous pigs feeding at a trough.

Now we have detectives paid out of public donations flying round the world on a wild goose chase. More pigs unable to keep the snouts out of the trough!! They just can’t help themselves.

Di said...

Hi BT/Wizard

Yes BT it is quite obvious he has had some coaching but agree it has not worked. In fact he looks so awkward, he does not know what to do with his hands anymore, perhaps that is why Kate hangs onto his left hand for dear life, as that was the hand that ear tugged etc.,

I don't think he will ever be able to stop smirking though, as it is a natural trait of a very arrogant person.


Thanks for the article

They must think we are all fools. New lead.. We know this suspect was found and eliminated by the PJ.

Why are these detectives travelling across europe if Clarence says Madeleine in in PDL
living with an UGLY man?

This whole article is just a joke.

bath theory said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
bath theory said...

If you follow Viv's idea that Madeleine is alive. They could be dropping Mr.Spotty idea to frame such a guy (pay him off) and then miraculously find Madeleine saving her from the arms of this monster and completing/closing the circle on a possible elaborate hoax/fraud scam.

If you follow my and yours then they are in the big brown stuff and heading deeper into it as the noose gets tighter.

Sue Mitchell as well as the McCanns

Wizard said...

Hi Di and BT,

Do you think the Sunday Express and the Star are taking the p*ss at the McCanns expense.

On Sunday the Express had a reporter in PdL for several days and according to him the abductor was seen by both Tanner and the Smith’s. LOL

To account for the change in direction of the abductor and the time factor he suggested the abductor was taking the long route round to avoid being seen. LOL

The same Express reporter suggested a high rise block a little distance away from the Ocean Club apartment’s was the head quarters for the abductor who watch the McCann’s comings and going through binoculars. LOL

Today the Star reports on the European hunt for spotty man.

The likelihood of either of these scenarios being true is so laughable - but at least Clarence wants us to believe one of them if not both.

Express Newspapers do have to be taking the p*ss surely. If so it is quite funny as they highlight how unbelievable the McCann’s story is.

Di said...


Or miraculously a body will be found and ugly man framed.

These two excuses for cops are a carbon copy of Met3.

When will everyone wakeup and look in the right direction.

Di said...

Hi Wizard

You do have a point there, and Clarence has raised his head again so things must be worrying the McCanns.

I managed to get a post accepted on Sky News which has never happened before. In fact virtually all the posts are anti which for Sky is amazing.

Maybe the press are turning, but I have got my hopes up before and been let down. Fingers crossed this time though.

bath theory said...

Do you think the spots could really be freckles and the hair could be red ?

Wizard said...

Hi BT,

Anything is possible….but the existence of this man, let alone whether he had anything to do with Madeleine vanishing into thin air.

Di said...

Hi all

Well we now have a paedophile named and pictured in our press and featured on Sky News, BBC etc., who could be linked to Madeleine.

What a pity they did not first check the PJ files to see Hewlett was ruled out two years ago by the investigating officers.

The McCanns are making a mockery of our Police, the PJ and the British people, when is this going to stop.

I was pleased to notice BBC gave it no radio airtime this lunchtime.

Di said...

At least Martin has not been fooled.

Madeleine and a "new" suspect Martin Brunt
May 22, 2009 12:27 PM

Did Raymond Hewlett abduct Madeleine? He insists not.

But take a look at his photo and an early photofit of a suspect.

West Yorkshire police are likely to get to quiz Raymond Hewlett before the McCanns' detectives.

He's wanted for an alleged indecent assault in the UK from 1975 and the cops are trying to get German permission to go and speak to him at the clinic where he's being treated for cancer. They haven't left yet.

Hewlett fits the profile of potential suspects: he is a paedophile and he was living in Portugal at the time.

Quite a few like him were traced and elminated at the time, but there appears to be some confusion over what the Portuguese authorities did about him. They were aware of him at some stage.

The McCann detectives don't appear in a hurry to see him, though I'm not sure they know exactly where he is.

And he would be under no obligation to speak to them, anyway. Why would he, except to show he had nothing to hide?

And is suspicion about him enough to persuade the Portuguese police to reopen the case?

I doubt it, because they've said only a major development would warrant that.

The Daily Mirror is desperately trying to keep Hewlett's whereabouts a secret to protect its scoop, but others will doubtless catch up soon.

By the way, the couple who exposed him appear to have previous. They once claimed to have found Osama bin Laden.

Now, he definitely didn't do it.

Soda said...

How stupid do they think we are???

"Did Raymond Hewlett abduct Madeleine? He insists not.

But take a look at his photo and an early photofit of a suspect"

The early photofit "Cooperman" was found and ruled out ages ago the press tried to get into his village but were chased away....

Now we are supposed to believe they have identified him as soemone else...

If this Peadophile gets a penny of compensation for being identified as the man who took Maddie I will scream...

Where are the forensic body language experts in relation to Kate and Gerry McCann the couple who were so full of joy and excitment on what would have been Madeleines 4th Birthday???

Enough is enough stop the spin answer the questions and I may belive you are innocent Kate because if you are you have laughed in your daughters face and made sure she will never be found...

No spin required in the case of a missing child she is too important to play games with...

Oh and the general view from the public is "they have found another one how many more"...

Di said...

I am very sorry to see GA has been given a suspended sentence. How can this be when the accused pj have been found not guilty, but glad he will appeal.

Something is very wrong here, but I am sure GA will not give up without a fight.

Di said...

Posted by Jenny 3A's


On September 8, we wrote a story : “The circus has came to town" - explaining the strategy to be followed in order to convince British public opinion that Gerry and Kate McCann were framed by Portuguese police. In the same story, we alerted for the interference of other kind of “organizations", already in action, in Portugal: “Most of these activities have been conducted by retired British citizens, some of the long time residents in Portugal. Other group was 'recruited' among the already large locally born British community. These collaborators have an important skill, which is the capacity of speaking the local language, but their lack of experience means a higher risk and they have been used just in low-level operations."

This part of a wider strategy - the so-called “field operations" - was latter confirmed when the McCann revealed they hired Control Risk Group in May. Details of that strategy were given to us by sources in London that, due to their position, know what is going on and ; most important of all ; why. But they don't agree with what they consider a Government “sponsored" interference on a police case, with no other purpose than protect the interests of a specific group.

Other sources, in the British Media, also gave us details about how that strategy would develop: undermining the credibility of Portuguese Police, attacking one of the leading detectives using the Joana Cipriano's case and, as a final blow, the Casa Pia case: “The lethal weapon, to be used when conditions are proper, is a 'secret': a large, well organized and professionally manipulated amount of information about the Casa Pia case. Organizers believe this data will be very efficient in the difficult task of convincing British public opinion that incompetence, corruption and complicity, also on high levels of the Portuguese society, are the explanation for what happened to Gerry and Kate McCann."

Di said...

Sorry should have said the article was by Duarte Levy.

bath theory said...

The McCann machine doesn't fool me. Good job they are not my neighbours

Di said...


They don't fool be either, but just when we think something is going to happen to push this case forward, they end up having the upper hand it is so maddening. Are they being tipped off by the mole in the PJ and someone from LP, it would not surprise me. Clarry knows many people who would have inside information.

I ask again, what is so special about these child neglecters?

bath theory said...

Reflecting for a moment ...

I don't know Amaral and I don't know the McCanns but I have observed and evaluated from minute one in this case and it has always smelt fishy.

What I do know is it would be virtually impossible for any loving caring parent to behalf like that (joyful smiling) coming out of the church a week after your child vanishes on her birthday !!. I also know that washing your missing child's teddy toy is distancing yourself from them. Plus not even looking for them but attempting to control the message and images from the off smacks of a desperate need to cover up.

Given my instinct, working with parents daily and being a parent of children myself I feel very very uncomfortable about this couple and I do feel it is a charade.

Possible scenarios in my opinion

1) High ranking individual was there or extremely close sibling of one was there indulging in dubious human acts.
2) Politicians/media jumped in and immediately accepted the abduction and now feel that the truth would make them look idiots thus they claim national interest needs to protect the truth. Really they want to protect their image and standing etc.
3) An abduction took place.
4) Accident happened panic ensued and a skilled cover up took place utilising their happy couple image and the fear that parents dread losing a child. Risky but worthwhile from their point of view as they didn't want to lose their status, freedom etc

Out of these four the only one I personally discount is 3)

bath theory said...

I personally dont think it was planned beforehand as Viv does

bath theory said...

What do you feel Di, Wizard and Panda Pop et al ?

lizzy said...

HI Bath Theory,
I think the 4th option, there was an accident and the parents and friends have sought to cover it up with the help of the British Government...from the outset, giving them Clarrie as a spokesman was the start to control the media and information available to the public. I don't hold with the theory she was abducted or Gerry planned it, I believe in the dogs, their findings are indicative of the death of Madeleine sadly. McCanns subsequent behaviour and actions confirm this to me...Lizzy

bath theory said...

I agree Lizzy. The dogs never get mentioned by the McCanns. They have no answer to that evidence. It is there in black and white.

I still don't understand why Viv decided to suddenly ignore it too unless he has info we don't.

If it was an accident even more reason to dislike this couple as the first instinct was too run and not take responsibility when a child was involved. Image and status seems deeply ingrained with these two, perhaps that is why certain politicians, media personel and celebrities have been drawn to them !!

PS Interesting to note isnt it that MP's are losing their jobs now over using monies to pay their mortgage and that fact about the McCanns using the fund for mortgage payments gets conveniently forgotten in interviews. The money is at the root of this. Some people in life will do anything for cash. People will kill for a few thousand pounds so it is not a big jump to think that a dying paedophile may well be saying what they want to hear on his death bed in order to gain funds for his wife and six children.

lizzy said...

Bath Theory
I agree with you I reckon they will attempt to bribe him, see sense Clarrie has said, unbelievable how transparent he is... I also think that Viv is a clever woman but she doesn't believe Gordon Brown has been actively involved in a coverup, my relative is a senior civil servant and has told me they are all dodgy and cover up things all the time. I have no illusions as to the honesty of mp's om this country, whichever party hey support they are all there for the power and perks...I think that as the Government are behind a massive cever up the truth will not be allowed to come out in this case. The McCanns are home and dry and they know it. Sad state of affairs, only wish the Portuguese Government had not bowed down to ours bu they clearly did which is why Amaral was removed from the case and Rebelo put on the case who was more biddable, and would do what he was told. I just hope that more people read Amarals book and believe in it and you never know one day justice may be served...

Soda said...

Morning all just having a quick look then I saw Lizzy was here....

So Hello Lizzy I hope you are well xxx

Oh BTW it is Hope my google blogger suddenly does not like my user name and has changed it to Soda which is part of my e mail addy???? xxx

lizzy said...

Hi Hope,
Nice to speak to you how are you? I'm fine but disgusted by the latest attempts from the McCanns to try to set up the guy in Germany, they will blame anybody for this and they with the help fo the media appear to be convincing people this guy could be the phantom abductor. Sad that our journalists are so spineless and are towing the line.

Soda said...

Hi Lizzy

I think they are dropping themselves in it futher and futher this man has an alibi, will take a lie detector test in fact the only thing they have on their side is he may die soon and the case can never be solved...

Journalists should all hang their heads in shame as for Clarence well he has a book deal whatever happends...

Someone will crack one day and no longer be able to live with themselves for allowing Madeleine to be disrespected in such an apaling way...

The 8 parents on that holiday let their children down by leaving them alone and each of those children will grow up to ask how their parents could have been so bloody selfish....

I am fine BTW nice to see you...

I am off now to buy my youngest something to wear to the theatre tonight (wish me luck) xxx

lizzy said...

HI Hope,
Good luck with your shopping today and don't spend too much money, I know what daughters can be like when they get you out with them, I have 4 so have spent a fortune over the years.
The weather is lovely here, so am going to take my little dog for a walk to the park then will come back and do some housework unfortunately. I hope that this guy in Germany manages to clear his name as would be awful for his family if he died and this accusation was unresolved, these people the McCanns have no shame or consience in my opinion, anything to deflect from themselves, they will blame anyone.

Wizard said...

Good Afternoon all,

I have to hand it to the McCanns’ they have pulled a blinder.

A known British paedophile was in Portugal when Madeleine went missing.

The same British paedophile is now in a German hospital on his death bed with terminal cancer.

When this man dies no doubt undisputable evidence will come to light (via the Mc’s detectives) that puts him at the scene and he will no longer be able to defend himself.

This will be the end of the case - he posthumously will be found guilty by Team McCann.

bath theory said...

and she will be found. But who led the 'detectives' to Madeleine ?

Joe said...

I have not posted in ages but I note little has changed and the McCann machine is still trying to pin the whole thing on some new shady character, this time Hewlitt.The irony here is that the McCanns sued the press for such wild speculation, but this guy has no reputation to defend so he could not even sue. No doubt they will succeed in pinning the blame on him or some other guy that they dredge up in the future and the guy will die and that is that. How very convenient it will be and of course they will be in the clear and he will/may have sold Madeline so they can continue to search blah blah? How does Mitchell sleep at night?

Amaral is now mortally wounded after his conviction and has little hope of winning his lawsuit IMO. I was wondering why after 2 years the McCanns decided to sue him. It became clear after his conviction. No doubt they had an inkling that he was going to be found guilty hence the action. He will have no credibility now and they know it. The intelligent amongst us are not fooled by the setting up of this guy as a fall guy, but the public at large will believe them. Will it change anything or make the McCanns happier? No.

Wizard said...

Hi Joe,

You make an excellent point and one I hadn’t considered before.

Why the McCanns chose to sue Amaral now.

Back in January Gerry was visiting his Portuguese lawyers no doubt not trusting to letter, phone or email details on the possible results of the Amaral trial and what action should be taken if he was found guilty.

I think the defamation action by the McCanns on Amaral was hatched back in January and was to be put into action if he was found guilty.

Now Amaral has been discredited in one aspect does that mean he is wrong or lying in the McCann case?

I do not think so but things do not always work out fairly – so it will be interesting to see how this progresses.

Wizard said...

Morning BT,

You say: “She will be found. But who led the 'detectives' to Madeleine?”

Well....the McCanns’ detectives will eventually get an opportunity to visit with Hewlitt. They will infer, as soon as he dies, he confessed to them.

It will also be suggested he indicated an area where Madeleine could be found.

Some people will do anything for money - ex-police officers included.

Those who are not open to bribery could well be suggestible.

Di said...

Hi all

Interesting to see Sky News reporting that the pretendy cops have not been allowed to interview Hewlett. I just don't understand why they thought they would be able to. It is a pity Sky are not making it clear that it is not the police though.

Also interesting to read that the PJ have re-interviewed several witnesses since the McCanns documentary. Gerry has been very keen to let it be known that the PJ and LP are not looking for Madeleine. I think he just might be wrong there, it looks like the PJ are still very interested in this case.

Di said...

Post from santacoloma on 3A's

To those who doubt, I would say "try another mindset". What if......................DP is untouchable? Didn't G Amaral say that in one sense the McCanns, too, were victims in this? To continue with this mindset for a moment, consider this. The McCs are not without their supporters.
They have been the ones who until now have made all the running with backing their heroes, to the extent that the media have jumped to support the McC bandwagon. An ordinary middle-class couple, deserving of our sympathy etc etc. We here have been struggling valiantly to make our voices heard.
In such circumstances, wouldn't you have expected the friends who went on that holiday to have shown solidarity? To have been the first to launch a balloon, or to speak up on their behalf in an interview? To have travelled with them to the European Parliament, or to Oprah? But, apart from appearing with sour faces outside the High Court when they each collected their share of the booty - nothing. The McCs have ploughed their own wealth-creating, tear-jerking furrow alone.
They've been ditched. Left to get on with it. So who is the ventriloquist and who are the dummies amongst DP, FP, O'B, JT, RO, and MO? Given what we suspect about his extraordinary untouchability (remember the Gaspars, and all those independent rumours), and given this evidence of his refusal to cooperate in the witness declarations, I don't think we need look any further than David Payne.
Who was the organiser of these holidays? Who taunted GM, and wielded the camera, in the airport shuttle? Who stayed behind to "help" when the others had returned to work? Who was still holding long telephone conversations with GM on 10 June? Why, Gerry's staunchest friend, of course. Or not.


"Gerry went out again at 4am with his friend David Payne"



This is becoming more interesting by the day.

Wizard said...

Much has been made over the past few days in the British press about the paedophile Hewlett.

Hewlett currently terminally ill with cancer in a German hospital denies involvement and the German police say there is no connection between him and the Madeleine McCann case.

However, as usual speculation promoting red herrings flourishes in the British media.

It must be infuriating for the media who like us know the score. The media in Britain can’t speculate or for that matter say a word against the saintly pair for fear of legal action.

The media choose to report the McCanns antics hoping what? - I think it must be a belief that their hubris will cause their ultimate downfall.

I copy below from JM a report on the Aachen police’s take on the matter. No evidence, no connection with Madeleine McCann case.

Says it all - a desperate ‘red herring’ to divert the onus of responsibility away from the parents.

British media Speculate on Connection

Maddie Case: Is there a link to Aachen?

A DNA test could be taken from a British citizen living near Aachen. British mainstream media speculate on a connection with the Maddie case; however the public prosecutor's office of Aachen says there is no connection.

In May 2007, three-year-old Madeleine McCann disappeared from a holiday's resort in the south of Portugal. Till this day the inquiries of the police have produced no tangible results. The parents of the British girl have begun an unprecedented media campaign launched after the disappearance to get information on the whereabouts of their daughter.

Now British mainstream media speculate on a new link - which could lead to Aachen.

The Background: In a request for judicial assistance the British police sent on Friday (22.05.09) to the public prosecutor's office of Aachen a rogatory letter where they asked to hear the British citizen who lives with his family near Aachen, and to take from him a DNA sample.

Speculations in English newspapers

According to the British media reports, this is a 64-year-old man who would have lived near the resort at the time of Maddie’s disappearance. He would have been condemned several times because of sexual offences to young women.

The public prosecutor's office of Aachen confirms there is no connection with the Maddie case in the British official aid request. "It is a request about two cases, one regarding a rape and one attempted rape, in 1975", says Robert Deller of the public prosecutor's office of Aachen.

As British Private detectives [the McCann’s rent-a-cops] want to be present during the hearing, now, a date must be found first in which the man can be heard and if necessary a DNA swab could be taken. Regarding the DNA test that must be decided in England, according to the senior prosecutor of Aachen, Robert Deller.

Wizard said...

Hi Di,

Was just reading you last post. David Payne’s involvement in all this.

There has to be a connection somewhere with him but is he directly involved in Madeleine’s disappearance?

I suspect he is not but may well be aware of what happened but he needs the McCanns to stay quiet about him as he has something to hide. They in turn need his support and the continuing unity of all of the T9.

Hence the pact between them, all in their way have something to hide.

Joe said...

So British Police want to take a DNA swab from this Hewlett? This man has previous so his DNA is already on file I will bet, checking that to any DNA that was recovered at the apartment in Praia da Luz then the police would already have linked this man to the scene, 2 years ago at the time of the disappearance. No, its purely to copperfasten (excuse the pun) the abduction scenario. Even the rent a cops use the word abducted all the time.

It is laughable that the whole 9 Tapas never co-operated fully, the McCanns running out of PT, the sniffer dogs, etc. Robert Murat framed up. The British Police would know full well Hewlett is most likely not the guy in this case. Talk about trial by media, another complaint the McCann group had. The breathtaking hypocrisy. I am truly amazed that the authorities allow them to conduct such tactics. 2 years on it appears IMO like desperate tactics to pin the whole thing on someone and if not at least cement "the abduction scenario" as fact, leaving the Tapas lot above suspicion for the rest of their lives.

Di said...

Hi all

Interesting to see that even Sky are now reporting this whole Hewlett episode as a farce.

Clarence issues an ultimatum to Hewlett to speak to pretendy cops, he wheels himself out of the hospital ready to speak but the so called cops refused to get off plane and interview him, you could not make it up.

Clarence says we will talk to him but the place and time will not be diclosed. Let's hope Hewlett is wired, because I dread to think what Clarence will do to save his reputation. People who are cornered are very dangerous IMO.

Di said...

Hi Joe

Good to see you again.

I agree the T9 are desperate to pin something on anyone who could fit the frame.

I really do wonder just what they are privy to. We know there is a mole in the PJ and I don't trust LP either. T9 are no doubt as usual, being kept one step ahead. I wonder if they could have heard the case is still being investigated, we know that witnesses have been re-interviewed in Portugal, and maybe the case is going to be reopened which we also know the McCanns would not want.

Many times I have thought about giving up on this case, but then I remember that is exactly what T9 want us all to do so that they can quietly slip into the background, along with the fund money. Then I come to my senses and realise, if it was not for all the bloggers on the internet, poor little Madeleine would be totally forgotten.

There are many people out there who believe everything that is written in the papers by Clarence, i have come across many. However, when i point them in the direction of all the sites and Youtube videos available, i am pleased to say they start to ask questions.

That is why i am still here, i still have questions and i would like answers, but above all i want the truth to be known and if Madeleine has met her demise, which most of us think, i want her to have peace.

Wizard said...

Hi All,

Just a thought but isn't it time the Madeleine Fund accounts were published again?

Joe said...

Hello Wizard and Di nice to talk to you.

If the pretendy cops refused to talk to Hewlett then it has caught the odious Mitchell off guard. It was probably all posture for the likes of the gutter press and Sky and Mitchell sure that Hewlett would refuse to talk thereby giving the press reason to believe that he had something to hide re the disappearance so keeping the farce going. What next? How about the truth?

Di said...

Hi Joe

Good point Clarence caught off guard, i had not thought of that one.

Hi Wizard

The accounts mmmm, iffy or what, I bet they are.

Di said...

Good article today by Duarte Levy.

Clarence says they have passed on new information to the PJ, funny how the PJ denied this. I know who I would believe.


The two former English policemen that were hired by the McCann couple, returned to England yesterday without having questioned the alleged “suspect” in the disappearance of Madeleine, after the German authorities classified their presence in Aachen as “a clown act”, accusing them of “trying to pressure the local judicial authorities”, using contacts among the British diplomatic representatives in Germany.
The private investigators – who have no police authority whatsoever in England or abroad – wanted to question Raymond Hewlett, a British citizen aged 64 who lived in Tavira when Maddie disappeared in Praia da Luz, and who has served prison sentences in three paedophilia cases that involved teenagers.
The prosecutor in Aachen, in statements to 24horas, confirmed that the English authorities manifested interest in questioning Hewlett about two old cases but that “the official request doesn’t even mention the Maddie case and does not request the individual’s detention”.
For the German authorities, everything that has been published in the English tabloids, “has been nothing but pure speculation” about a sad disappearance case.
“We can’t prevent the British citizen from leaving the hospital, as soon as that is possible in clinical terms, and especially if he wishes to do so”, said Robert Deller, in an interview to German television before he spoke to 24horas.
“We are willing to cooperate with the Portuguese and English authorities but these gentlemen (the detectives) have no authority whatsoever and we’ll be glad when they leave the hospital door. Them, and the journalists that they brought along”, a spokesman for the police in Aachen confessed to 24horas.
Hewlett, who had been admitted to the University Clinic in Aachen for cancer treatment, refused to answer to the McCanns’ investigators but told 24horas that on the day that Maddie disappeared, he was camped in Fuzeta, the place where he took part in the monthly market and antiques sale. The English citizen, who was never involved in paedophilia cases in our country, was denounced to the McCanns’ investigators by an equally British couple, Alan and Cindy Thompson – who are known to authorities for equally having pretended that they knew where Bin Laden’s hideout was located.
24horas tried to contact Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley, the two former policemen that form “Alpha Investigations Group”, but they refused to comment on why they consider the English man a suspect, after stating that Maddie “was not abducted by a paedophile” or transported on board of any boat.
In Portugal, a source at the PJ in Portimão confirmed that the information that has been published about the case is being “followed attentively” but that neither the McCann couple nor their investigators “delivered or communicated any new data” to the PJ.

Duarte Levy also in 24horas

Wizard said...

LOL,LOL, LOL - front page of today Express - words fail me.


Madeline McCann
Wednesday May 27,2009
By Nick Fagge & Martin Evans
THE key to solving Madeleine McCann’s disappearance may lie within 500 yards of her family’s ¬holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, investigators believe.
The hunt for the missing youngster has dramatically switched back to Portugal, where investigators last night said they were focusing their probe on a predatory paedophile still living in the area.

Investigators who have carried out a major case review have said all the clues to solving the mystery of Madeleine’s disappearance more than two years ago centre on the popular family holiday resort in the Algarve.

A source close to the investigation said: “All the evidence points to Praia da Luz, not Morocco or Spain or elsewhere.

“We think the answer to Madeleine’s disappearance lies within 500 yards of the holiday apartment. They say there is no evidence that a vehicle was used in the abduction, shortly before her fourth birthday, or that she was spirited away out to sea."

The breakthrough comes after a series of new leads received by private detectives working for Kate and Gerry McCann.

Madeleine McCann as she was aged three, and how she might look now, aged six

The source said: “Of the four new leads, there is one we are particularly interested in.”



The detectives identified a suspicious man who was in Praia da Luz at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance and is still living there. The source said: “He is one of a handful of men we are looking at. There are a couple in Praia da Luz and two elsewhere on the Algarve. All but one are British.”

The latest suspect has been deemed especially “significant” after a witness came forward to say they had seen him lurking near the McCanns’ apartment around the time of Madeleine’s disappearance.

The source said: “We are looking at a man. He is of significant interest.” Former British police detectives David Edgar and Arthur Cowley recently returned from the Algarve and Germany after interviewing a series of witnesses.

Last night the pair welcomed convicted paedophile Raymond Hewlett’s offer to answer their questions. They hope to interview him about Madeleine’s disappearance in the “near future”, a close source said.

Hewlett, 64, is said to have been staying around an hour’s drive from the McCanns’ holiday flat in Praia da Luz in Portugal when Madeleine vanished in May 2007. He is now being treated in hospital in Aachen, Germany for throat cancer.

He has denied any involvement and the investigators continue to believe that the Praia da Luz area provides the key to finding Madeleine.

They have discovered that the area has a number of paedophiles and that tourists have been targets of sex offenders.

Holidaymakers have also ¬frequently been the target of burglaries. Edgar and Cowley were hired by the McCanns to pick up the pieces of the investigation after Spanish agency Metodo 3 failed to find the missing youngster, now aged six.

Ex-Detective Inspector Dave Edgar said: “The only people capable of running an investigation like this are those trained as an SIO – Senior Investigating Officer.” Edgar and his colleague, ex-Detective Sergeant Arthur Cowley, receive up to 200 inquiries every day from people claiming to have new evidence.

A source close to the investigation said: “There are 38 known sex offenders in the Algarve. There have been seven sexual assaults involving the children of tourists in the Praia da Luz area in the past four years. They all have the same modus operandi as Madeleine’s abduction.

“There were attacks on children involving burgling a property and indecent assaults on the kids. Five happened before Madeleine’s abduction, two happened afterwards. One took place a month before Madeleine vanished.”

viv said...

hello guys

I am back and had a fab time but very tired, even so could not resist checking in for a quick peep.

Docmac has emailed me and I think he will be joining us again so really look forward to that as I know you all will.

The two McCann stooges hanging around wanting to interview Hewlett another sex offender they have been trawling for to try and hang the blame on. A "clown act" say they German authorities! Oh well quite, lol, lol, lol, (I like that Wiz).

Do the British Or Port Police want to interiew this old perv who has or had a penchant for young teenage girls, well no, of course not. They know who the real culprits are.

Well that is enough tonight other than to say, I can see the McCann comedy circus continues and I wonder when they are either going to produce Maddie by some perverse miracle, dead or alive. Within 500 yards, what utter guff. If they are going to eventually move back to Murat, then yes Gerry of course you know him you blank blank blank expletive!

Missed you all a lot and look forward to catching up properly and also hearing from Doc

Loads of Luv Viv xxxx

viv said...

HO Hum Di I wonder how much these two cost the Find Maddie Fiddle, whoops I mean Fund. this farce just beggars belief! Two years later to come up with this utter carp!

"was denounced to the McCanns’ investigators by an equally British couple, Alan and Cindy Thompson – who are known to authorities for equally having pretended that they knew where Bin Laden’s hideout was located."

Di said...

Hi Viv

Glad you had a good holiday.

Good news about Doc.

Off out for the day, i will look in later.


viv said...

Hiya Di and thanks!

Hope you have a lovely day.

Weather here almost as good as Tunisia!!

So will continue to top up me tan xx

Wizard said...

Hi Viv,

Hope you had a great holiday.

I was just reading on 3A a response by one of its journalists Anna Smith the usual one sided comments saying everyone knows the McCanns are innocent.

The News of the World, Sun etc are all Rupert Murdoch publications.

I wouldn’t say Ms Smith’s comments are editorially prescribed but probably proprietor’s orders.

This week's Private Eye gives a sly little ‘nudge wink, say no more’ at the Sun editor Rebekah Wade, who is tarred with the same brush as Ms Smith.

I copy below from Private Eye:-


“After a long gap there have been further sightings of Maddie stories in the British tabloids.

These are believed to have been the work of a notorious paedophile hunter.

We can now reveal her as Rebekah Wade, who has been taking an unhealthy interest in the story all along.”

Wade and Smith are just minions of their leader Murdock and are just following orders. Their jobs of course being more important than integrity and the TRUTH.

Di said...

Hi Wizard

That is a very interesting article.

I read Rebekah's reply on 3A's to Albalass which was unbelievable. Has Rebekah had access to the PJ files, i would have thought so. Perhaps her friends that live in Portugal that are complaining, are people that we already know of. To say she wonders where Albalass received her information from is a joke, i repeat PJ files.

I am glad someone sent Rebekah the link to the thread, not that i am expecting Rebekah to respond pleasantly. Some people are permanently blinkered.

Di said...


Sorry, i meant Anna Smith with regards to Albalass. Mind you I don't think it makes much difference two peas in a pod.

TRUTH, i don't think either of them know the meaning of the word. If they are able to explain and show me how an abduction occured, and why Kate immediately knew Madeleine had been taken and not wandered off, i am all ears.

viv said...

hiya both

Rebekah a notorious paedophile hunter. That is a very dry piece of humour which really hits the spot.

When are the McCanns going to stop chasing every paedophile they can find who happened to be in Portugal at that time and start to look very much closer to home, I wonder?

Di, I am not clear Kate immediately knew what had happened to Madeleine if those witnesses are correct, the couple who claim they heard someone calling Madeleine around 9.30 that night. But one thing I am clear on, she is no longer in any doubt whatsoever about who "abducted" Madeleine from her bed that night.

I still think it is likely that Kate failed to bond properly with Madeleine due to all the stressors we know about and Gerry took advantage of that situation with Kate only realising that she really did want Madeleine when it was all too late. But for that, she hardly deserves sympathy. I think when he got her to make that speech please don't hurt her, she was just completely numb. It is about time that woman did something right for a change..and that does not involve sitting there like some devoted mom with the twins instilling into them that their sister Maddie is still alive and coming back to them. It is a disgraceful fantasy world and totally damaging for the twins. Kate knows that. Why must she fail all three of her children?

viv said...

Don't know whether this has already been posted but it looks like Geetisha is a former colleague of Kate's at Latham House Surgery:

Dr Geetisha Hirani
Personal Information


Job Title:
o General Practitioner

GMC Number:
o 4437633

Associated premises:
o Dr B Kirkup & Partners - Latham House, Latham House
o Dr B Kirkup & Partners - Regency Road, Regency Road

Looks like hubby works there too, Kate is of course no longer listed as working there!


* Dr Jessie Louise Harris
* Dr Igone Pena Ugarte
* Dr Geetisha Hirani
* Dr Dean Perry Bennison
* Dr Brian Kirkup
* Dr Elizabeth Ann Loughridge
* Dr Thomas Andrew Wyatt
* Dr Timothy D W Smith
* Dr Sacheen Hirani
* Dr David Maurice Briggs
* Dr Diane Margaret Lovett
* Dr Peter Riley
* Dr Darach Joseph Corvin
* Dr Mary Fiona Ming Chi Wong
* Dr John Michael Harvey

Use your own thoughts and feelings to consider the truth, then you may avoid the lie. Sometimes we may not know the whole truth, there is no dishonour in admitting that.

Report this post
Profile Send private message
Edit post Reply with quote
Post subject: Re: Mobile Telephone Calls + 14 Text Messages
PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:53 am

Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:13 am
Posts: 599
Good find viv and a big BUMP for the best thread ever!!!!! =D>

Post subject: Re: Mobile Telephone Calls + 14 Text Messages
PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:13 am
Mafia Boss

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:58 pm
Posts: 2368
Hiya and thanks. It clearly is a very important thread, Gerry did receive 14 texts the day before but has chosen to blatantly deny this via Clarence Mitchell. To me this demonstrates this was a premeditated crime against little Maddie. Gerry also seeks to deny the four texts he received the following day, job done I would say! The Instructional Judge Frias denied the prosecutors access to these texts and when the prosecutor appealed to a higher court this request was again denied. This information was clearly very important to any potential prosecution. I believe the judges refused to allow the prosecutors access because they were stressing the McCanns needed tobe dealt with in UK by British Officers, i.e. they were stopping the case from proceeding any further in Portugal. To me this is evidence of a tacit agreement between the two countries that whilst it is clearly necessary for Pt authorities to carry out investigations there, which they did, at the end of the day, they could not carry out further extensive investigations and a prosecution of British subjects all back in the UK. Goncalo also confirmed that in relation to the offence of fraud, which the McCanns would be guilty of whether they took part in Madeleine's homicide or abduction, Portugal does not have jurisdiction because the fraud originated in the UK. I think Gerry was clever in seeking to create jurisdictional problems to make the investigation and potential prosecution of him even more difficult. As he said at the very outset to Jane Hill when she asked what use he was putting the Fund to, " well it has enabled us to get a very good team of lawyers together". Now that is just not what you would expect the father of a missing child to say, really, is it! I am sure we all thought it was very odd that he needed lawyers specialising in criminal law in both UK and Portugal, if you recall UK lawyers even flew out, no doubt at massive expense to the Fund to meet with their Portuguese counterparts, no doubt to mastermind at an early stage the defence of Kate and Gerry. Aside from also making a lot of money for themselves this has always been Gerry's only priority. Finding Maddie is just pure codswallop, he knows where she is, because he sent her there.
Seems to be on facebook and if you click on friends Rachel et al there are some NHS and University friends listed (including Liverpool)

but this Geteesha no pic/secretive
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?sid ... ref=search

Di said...

Hi Viv

I have just read your post wow, so much to take in. What is going on?

If this whole saga was premeditated by T9 then it is a massive scam for money, or the micro-chipping saga.

I see Rosie also has her/his feathers flustered which means T9 are very worried.

Off now see you tomorrow.

Di said...

Posted on 3A's by Astro

The former inspector is going to advance a criminal complaint against the McCann couple. To this process, he intends to annex the investigation into the child’s disappearance. “It’s necessary to discuss what was done and what remains to be done”, he told DN.

by Carlos Rodrigues Lima

Gonçalo Amaral, the former Polícia Judiciária (PJ) coordinator who investigated the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, is going to advance a criminal complaint against the child’s parents, Gerry and Kate. In this process, JN was able to establish, the author of the book “The Truth about the Lie” intends to analyse the investigation that was done in 2007 and to bring new witnesses to Portugal in order to reopen the process of the disappearance that was archived in July 2008. “It is necessary to discuss what has been done and what remains to be done”, Gonçalo Amaral stated to DN.

The former PJ coordinator has already built a team of three lawyers – António Cabrita, Henrique Pires Teixeira and Francisco Almeida Garrett – who will accompany him over the coming times, both in the attack against the McCann couple and in the defence, given the fact that Gerry and Kate have publicly announced their intention to file a civil lawsuit against Gonçalo Amaral.

In statements to DN, lawyer António Cabrita, who has already represented Gonçalo Amaral in the case of alleged aggressions against Leonor Cipriano, Joana’s mother, confirmed that there is an “intention from Gonçalo Amaral to file a complaint over defamation and offences against the good name, against the McCann couple and their spokesperson, Clarence Mitchell”. For now, the lawyers are still studying which court is competent for the filing of the complaint. This is due to the fact that the statements that are at stake, were all of them reproduced in the media, which makes it necessary, as António Cabrita explained, “to define the location where the target gained knowledge about them”, to then determine which court is competent.

When filing the criminal complaint, Gonçalo Amaral will have to justify why he felt offended and defamed by the McCanns. To do that, the former Polícia Judiciária investigator will use the process of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, on one hand, and on the other hand, witness statements of persons who, in some manner, may involve Gerry and Kate in their daughter’s disappearance. “I’m going to bring people from England and Ireland to testify”, Gonçalo Amaral told DN, without advancing any further details about the criminal complaint. “What Gonçalo Amaral has been saying concerns an investigation that I, personally, think has stopped half way down”, António Cabrita concluded. Concerning the reopening of the Maddie case, António Cabrita said: “That is a decision under the competence of the Public Ministry”.

Apart from the McCanns, the lawyers for Gonçalo Amaral are also studying the possibility to advance with lawsuits against some English newspapers. For that, the representatives of the former Judiciária coordinator are trying to find a connection with English lawyers that may take care of the matter in England.

In a more advanced stage, concerning lawsuits, stands the McCann couple, Gerry and Kate, “together with their three children, Madeleine, Sean and Amelie”, who have already advanced to court, as they announced.

In May, the McCann couple announced, through a press release, that they would move into Portuguese courts, taking into account the “ongoing and gross statements” by Gonçalo Amaral, in Portugal and abroad, about the child’s disappearance in May 2007.

For this lawsuit, Gerry and Kate McCann hired lawyer Isabel Duarte, an expert in communication law, who has been defending the Expresso newspaper for many years, in cases of abuse of press freedom and defamation.

source: Diário de Notícias, 03.06.2009

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/0 ... ng-of.html

viv said...

Hiya Di

I am convinced this was a premeditated crime with perhaps Gerry and Payne as the main instigators. But Payne has certainly distanced himself from Gerry, no doubt, fearing the consequences. I recall the Paynes failed to attend a church ceremony I think in the latter half of 2007 and of course Payne moved away from working directly on research projects with Gerry in conjunction with the Leicester Hospitals and the University.

I thought it was really pertinent that one of the first questions to Payne last year at the rogs was about his work problems and his recent move, where he had to admit this took place just one week prior to the rogatories. I get the distinct impression Gerry controls people with the adverse information he has on them, I believe of child sexual abuse, or being complicit in covering it up (in relation to the women and perhaps Mat Oldfield) and causes great fear in the rest of the Tapas 9, including his own wife. Diane Webster is in no doubt about the strange tastes of her son in law.

It is interesting you posted the article from DN because I was going to ask you what was happening about Kate and Gerry's apparent legal action against Goncalo. I really do think the McCanns have made a massive mistake by doing this and will suffer even further public disapproval for frittering the rest of the Funds away on a legal action that will clearly do nothing at all to bring Madeleine back. But lawyers have been all they are concerned about from Day 1!

As for Amaral, the criminal conviction against him is clearly not going to help when he tries to defend his reputation but perhaps he is prepared to put that on one side in order to continue to pile the pressure on Kate and Gerry and for that you just have to applaud him!

It sounds like there are very complex jurisdictional issues on both sides of what promises to be a very bitter and incredibly expensive legal battle between Amaral and the McCanns. The only clear winners, the lawyers, perhaps!

Soda said...

Hi Viv

Glad you had a nice holiday and brought some of the weather home with you...


viv said...

Hiya Hopey and thanks, I have been topping up me tan in the farden and making endless trips to the Farden Centre just to make sure everything is looking great!

I see taxi man is getting a mention on 3 As again and I just cannot help but feel there is something in this. From reading this account it looks to me like another aspect of the PJ file that we did not get to see and again would tie in with the McCanns being involved in the abduction of Madeleine. I think it is the bits we have not been allowed to see that are the really important ones that are being kept under wraps at the insistence of Stu Prior so as not to prejudice any future trial.


Enfants Kidnappés 28/02/08
"Ten months after the fact, a taxi driver from Vila Real de Santo Antonio, went public with his witness statement to the PJ. According to reports in the Portuguese press, the taxi driver made his statement to the PJ two days after Maddie's disappearance. "I don't have a lot to say, but what I have to say, I can state with certainty. On the 3rd of May at 8.10pm, the evening of Madeleine's disappearance, three men, a woman and a little girl entered my taxi. Sitting beside me was seated a man who resembled Robert Murat and whom I recognised later in the press. There was also a little girl in pink pyjamas with that distinctive mark in her eye and her mother, of that there is no doubt."
I noticed her because there was a nervous tic to her chin and my son had the same tic when he was small. I asked myself why they had not dressed the little girl instead of leaving her in pyjamas. She was awake but she was not talking. The other men were aged between 40 and 50 years. The mother, who looked amazingly like Kate McCann, was dressed in a yellow coat and had her hair in a pony tail. She asked me to drive them to the Apolo Hotel five kilometres from there in a village close to Faro. They asked me in English how much the fare would be and I told them just over three Euros. The man next to me, the one who resembled Robert Murat, gave me a 5 Euro note. They did not take themselves towards the hotel, but to a 4x4, a big dark coloured car, which looked to me like a BMW, with a foreign registration."

Mr Castela, the taxi driver, is used to remembering people's faces. He is 67 years old and has been doing his job for 17 years. Fixing faces in one's mind allows better identification of people. And if he is sure about the time in his story it is, he says, because, "I know they got into my taxi at that time because I usually watch the television news. I was thinking at that moment to return home. I took that fare and I returned home for 8.30pm where I could carry on watching the television news.

"He did not place any importance on his clients until two days later when the media took up the case, "Then I spoke to my son who is an officer with the GNR and he decided to put me in contact with the PJ. I told them exactly what I have just said and the inspector asked me if I knew if the hotel had surveillance cameras. I told him that in theory, yes. Out of curiosity, two days later, I returned to the hotel and asked them if the PJ had contacted them. They told me no. I tried to find out if they had surveillance cameras but they told me that they had been out of order for two years."

The PJ confirmed having been contacted by the taxi driver and his witness statement taken at the time. But these claims had been rejected after verification."


Joe said...

This is interesting, it looks like Hewlett may be playing team McCann at their own game, ie money, money, only, that is one thing they will not let go of. Since Hewlett has been all over the media now re his past he has no reputation to save so he will look for money, and is it appears, prepared to say whatever for money. It looks like Hewlett has teeth, one shark to another. Looks like desperation to pin the disappearance is back on Hewlett. Money from the fund. Not a hope in hell.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne ... eared.html

Paedophile Raymond Hewlett 'admits he saw Madeleine McCann twice' before she disappeared
By Sam Greenhill
Last updated at 3:05 PM on 05th June 2009
Comments (0) Add to My Stories
British paedophile Raymond Hewlett has allegedly admitted he saw Madeleine McCann twice - and even remembers her distinctive right eye.
The 62-year-old child molester, who has a lifelong history of sexually abusing little girls, was in the Algarve when the three-year-old went missing in Praia da Luz in May 2007.
He has previously insisted he was miles away from the family resort - but yesterday he reportedly changed his tune and implied he had been close enough to see Madeleine's eye, where the pupil runs into the blue-green iris.
Missing: Paedophile Raymond Hewlett is alleged to have admitted seeing Madeleine McCann twice and reportedly remembers her distinctive right eye

Kate and Gerry McCann's spokesman announced it was now 'imperative' that cancer-stricken Hewlett was interviewed before he dies.
Friends of the McCanns say they are deeply suspicious of his motives after it was revealed that Hewlett has been trying to cash in on the tragedy by demanding money for answers.
He has spent the past few days telling private detectives employed by the couple that he will only reveal where he was the night Madeleine vanished if they pay him thousands from the Madeleine Fund.
They have flatly refused, but now wonder if Hewlett could be tormenting the McCanns by claiming he saw their daughter during their family holiday on the Algarve.
A source close to the couple said: 'He is playing a very dangerous game.

viv said...

Hiya Joe

Well I may be wrong but it looks to me like it is the McCanns who are playing a very dangerous game having been lucky enough to not only find another paedophile to seek to pin the blame on but one who is very conveniently about to die. That would very neatly get them out of trouble, or so they think!

We do not know what Hewlett is genuinely saying do we, or even if he is speaking to them. Clarence had to admit that M3 bribed whoops I mean paid witnesses to make statements saying they had a sighting of Madeleine/saw a creepy man etc. Who knows what the McCanns detectives are offering this poor excuse for a human being to take the rap before he dies and leave a nice little nest egg for his wife and 6 kids.

If this sounds as though I am very contemptuous about anything emanating from Team McCann, that would be true!


Wizard said...

Good Morning Viv and All,

Hewlett – The fact that this man is dying – is a known paedophile – was in Portugal at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance – McCann’s pretendy police interested in him - the McCann’s have money available.

The above five facts allow me to speculate.

If Hewlett’s prognosis is death will occurred within the next six months then what better opportunity to close the case and put an end to the ridiculous pseudo searches for the McCanns daughter.

Hewlett could be paid to give a signed confession to the pretendy police with the understanding it can only be released on his death.

End of case and a big sigh of relief that can be heard coming from Rothley.

Wizard said...

Has anyone else seen the video on Joana Morais’ blog, dated 4th June?

‘Goncalo Amaral and Paulo Sargento on the McCann case.’

Well worth looking at – the video has English sub-titles.

I wonder why after watching it the lyrics and tune of Evita keep running through my mind. “Oh what a circus, oh what a show.”

Wizard said...

Latest news from Germany on Hewlett

Madeleine case
Briton suspect wants to testify
There is movement in the case of Madeleine: An Englishman living in Germany has announced that he wants to talk about the disappearance of the girl. The man is already known to the police because of child abuse.


According to media reports, the man who is well-known to the police because of child abuse, was present in May 2007 in a Portuguese holiday complex in Praia da Luz in the Algarve, when the then three-year-old vanished without trace. The lawyer of the 64-year-old Raymond H. said on Friday that his client lived in the Algarve for several years, and knows it very well. Whether he also knew the resort from which Madeleine disappeared, the lawyer did not wanted to say at present.

Statement after chemotherapy

In the coming week the Briton wants to talk about the case at a press conference in Aachen. When this date occurs depends on the health condition of the man, who must undergo chemotherapy after a serious cancer surgery.

Raymond H. was questioned in Aachen on Thursday by British officials about two long past abuse cases. Here a saliva sample was also taken. Madeleine was not an issue at the interrogation. Rather, the British Crime officials stressed that the case both in Britain and in Portugal is currently shelved. After analyzing the DNA sample, the lawyer believes that his client will be "significantly relieved" in the other two abuse cases.

Wizard said...

Sorry I forgot to say the news from Germany is dated today.

Wizard said...

Today’s Daily Express give us very nicely the McCanns’ end game in play. LOL


Raymond Hewlett
Saturday June 6,2009
By Martyn Brown and Paul Jeeves
Paedophile Raymond Hewlett has confessed that he saw Madeleine McCann twice weeks before she disappeared, it was claimed last night.
The child molester, who is undergoing cancer treatment in Germany, said he spotted the youngster before she ¬vanished from a Portuguese holiday resort two years ago.
In an extraordinary deathbed confession, he was reported to have told police: “Yes – I have seen Maddie.”
He even remembered the ¬distinctive flaw in her right eye, despite previously insisting that he was nowhere near the family resort at the time.
Kate and Gerry McCann’s spokesman said it was now “imperative” that Hewlett is interviewed before he dies.
Madeleine was just three-years-old when she went missing from her family’s apartment as they holidayed at the ¬Algarve beach resort of Praia da Luz.
Hewlett, 64, who has a lifelong history of sexually abusing little girls, was living less than an hour away from the scene of the abduction at the time.
The paedophile, originally from Yorkshire, was quizzed by Portuguese police investigating Madeleine’s disappearance but he was given an alibi by a 15-year-old girl.
But he came under renewed suspicion after making bizarre comments about the case to his friends and family.
Yesterday’s claims were made in Germany’s biggest news¬paper Bild, which were understood to be based on “police sources”.
The McCanns’ team want to speak to Hewlett but the paedophile – who has been given weeks to live – has said he will only talk about the case if he ¬receives tens of thousands of pounds from the Find Maddie fund.
Spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “In the light of the Bild piece, this makes it even more imperative that Mr Hewlett gives any credible information that he may have about Madeleine to the investigators as a matter of priority. It is only right that he and his legal representatives ensure this happens. However, there will be no payment made to him.”

Wizard said...

Oh what a circus, oh what a show!

I saw Maddie twice, admits paedo suspect
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... wlett.html

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/105 ... aedophile-

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/83 ... ols-twice/

Soda said...

Hi Wizard

Well I guess this can be spun another way...

he admits he saw her twice gets fitted up for killing her dies and his wife get 2 million quid reward money???

He noticed the flaw in her eye??? He would have had to been pretty close to her to see that and if some strange man was looking at my child that closely (and we know he was not a waiter or shop keeper etc) I think he would have been the first person who shot to mind if she went missing...

Clarence your spinning is so flawed and basic a child could tell better lies and half truths than you could... Although I am guessing however this goes for you the book is written even if your boss is found out I bet you have written a version that tells the world you knew he was lying but needed to trip him up and you will try and take all the credit...

Face it any one who has been paid out of the fund should feel guilty for taking money from a neglected child apart from the investigatiors who thought they were looking for a live child but the rest of you I dont know how you sleep at night....

You have to wonder what Amaral has up his sleeve he knew early on no one was allowed help if it was not to make the McCann's look good he must have covered his back well just in case he was kicked off and evidence was lost...

Actually I wonder if any of them sleep at night when will that knock on the door come looks like Labour have had it if there was any help there oh dear...

Joe said...

Hi Viv and all,

After 2 years now the McCanns have to tidy up this mess and put themselves in the clear and Hewlett may be their patsy, willingly for money or otherwise, one would have to believe such a man was altruistic, which I doubt.

If they guy had any real evidence or was a real suspect, the British Police or the PJ would be questioning him now round the clock. No, its the press fed by the odious how do you sleep at night Mitchell that is putting this whole thing as fact, fact so that the gullible public will believe what the gutter press says. No proper investigation is conducted in public via the press where absolute proof is necessary not lie after lie. The gutter press love it, but the stink will always be there no matter who is eventually fitted up.

viv said...

Hiya Jo, Wiz and all

There is just one critical issue here for me, the distinction between the serious police investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine and on the other, the comedy detectives the McCanns employ and then immediately train them to be media patsies on their behalf. There is one simple fact that no one can ignore, serious detectives do not talk to the media when trying to locate a missing child, but M3 and the latest poodles do.

Reuters are of course a serious news agency who do not bother with spin and this is what they say in the above report that is really crucial to me:

Madeleine was not an issue at the interrogation. Rather, the British Crime officials stressed that the case both in Britain and in Portugal is currently shelved.

This, IMO, is positively terminal for Kate and Gerry McCann and anyone who dwells upon those words, rather than the games they play. The Police are categorically stating they are not looking for anyone else and the investigation is shelved pending further evidence against the McCanns.

If the Police were in any doubt about that at all, then quite clearly they would be interesting in investigating Hewlett, but they are not!

When the rogatories were conducted in UK, the serious police were concentrating on the people who they know for a fact are responsible for the demise of Madeleine. Currently, I am pretty sure that Stu Prior and others will be watching the McCanns every move.

I thought Hewlett may be about to die, but actually given he has just had surgery and also chemotherapy this does not sound terminal although of course nothing is certain when someone is clearly very ill with cancer.

I am afraid Hewlett wanting to do a press bulletin does sound very Team McCann but let us hope he has not been bought by them to continue to provide ridiculous progaganda about who is supposedly responsible. This will not affect the police view in any event!

Let us hope he just wants to say, yes I did attack teenage girls in the seventies but I did not touch Madeleine. The other possibility is that Gerry did get rid of her alive, as I believe may be the case and Hewlett actually has knowledge of what happened to her, but I think that is very unlikely. Either way, it just shows how desperate the McCanns are to "try and get back to normal". This is something they do not deserve, there is no getting away from disposing of your own child and getting your life back. They just continue to live in a fantasy world. But this is the new millenium and police officers do catch sophisticated criminals who have a "pact of silence".


viv said...

forgive me but what FKN absurd rubbish:

Paedophile Raymond Hewlett has confessed that he saw Madeleine McCann twice weeks before she disappeared

How the hell did he see her WEEKS before she disappeared, she was not even there!

I would like the McCanns to tell me how he ever saw her in their company which must have been for all of three minutes a day on trip back and forth to the creche. If he saw Maddie was he in the creche then? or playing on the little kiddy boats on the beach. I have some seen some crap in the rubbish rags about the McCann case, but this just takes the flippin biscuit!

Wizard said...

Well just back from the cinema after an afternoon of horror with “Drag me to Hell”. It was very funny (not that it was supose to be) but these types of films fail to frighten as their too implausible.

The plot for the film is - the female lead character haunted by an evil spirit and misunderstood by her sceptical boyfriend, she seeks the aid of psychic to save her soul from eternal damnation. As evil forces close in, she must now face the unthinkable in order to break free of the curse...

As you see it’s difficult to believe but well acted.

I have to say although this was an unbelievable plot it was easier to accept than the McCann show and as already mentioned far, far better acted with not a um or er to be heard. LOL

Wizard said...

So it’s official - Brian Kennedy has withdrawn his patronage of the McCanns.

The Mail article below gives us his spin on why he has done this. His fortune has dropped from £350M to £300M – my heart bleeds for him.

“The multi-millionaire tycoon backing Kate and Gerry McCann in their search for their daughter has cut back his financial support after losing an estimated £50million from his fortune.
Brian Kennedy, who pledged to support the McCanns until Madeleine was found, has stopped paying for the couple’s media campaign after the credit crunch hit his business interests.
The Madeleine Fund – which is down to £500,000 and expected to be empty by the end of the year – is now paying for the media relations work of former BBC reporter Clarence Mitchell, although at a reduced rate.
The McCanns continue to regard a high-profile campaign as a crucial part of their efforts to find Madeleine, who went missing two years ago from her parents’ holiday apartment at Praia da Luz in Portugal.
But a source said Mr Kennedy, 49, who made his fortune in home improvements, had stopped paying the team promoting the McCanns’ investigation as part of a ‘costs-cutting exercise’.
Mr Kennedy saw his fortune dwindle from £350million to £300million over the past year, according to a newspaper Rich List.
However, he is still reportedly the joint 178th richest man in the UK through his company Latium, which owns Sale Rugby Club and Everest Double Glazing.
Losses: Brian Kennedy has stopped paying for the Madeleine McCann media campaign

The source said: ‘Mr Kennedy was paying for reputation protection for Mr and Mrs McCann. So when their arguido, or official suspect status, was removed by the Portuguese police, he believed there was no further need to pay Mitchell’s costs.
‘Of course, it was also a way to cut costs given the state of the economy. The fund are paying a reduced rate for Mitchell to deal with the continuing Press attention.’
But the source added: ‘Kennedy continues to talk to Kate and Gerry and his lawyer is involved in the latest legal action against the former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral. His wallet is there if needs be.
'This does not represent a scaling down. For example, his company funds the offices from which the investigators are working.’
The Madeleine Fund amassed over £1million in the first few months of the then three-year-old’s disappearance after an unprecedented public reaction.
However, it was immersed in controversy after it was revealed that money from the fund had covered two mortgage payments on the McCanns’ home.
The fund was also drawn upon heavily by private detective agencies hired by the McCanns and Mr Kennedy, including an American firm, which charged £500,000 for six months work.
It was replenished by defamation action against British media organisations. And this newspaper can reveal that the defamation case against Mr Amaral is expected to reap the McCanns a six-figure compensation fee.
But the couple and Mr Mitchell face the possibility that Mr Amaral, who was removed from the Portuguese police investigation for criticising the British police involved, will launch a legal action against them for defamation.

Campaign: The media force behind Kate and Gerry McCann to find Madeleine has even seen them interviewed on the Oprah Winfrey show

He claims to have launched his own private inquiry into Madeleine’s disappearance and warned he intended to call a string of witnesses to court to show his reputation had been stained.
Detectives working for the McCanns are still hoping to interview convicted paedophile Raymond Hewlett, who lives in Germany.
On Thursday he was interviewed in Aachen police station by two detectives from West Yorkshire over two offences in the Seventies.
Last night Brian Kennedy’s lawyer, Ed Smethurst, confirmed Mr Kennedy and Latium were no longer paying Mr Mitchell’s salary directly, but added: ‘They remain fully supportive of Kate and Gerry McCann and the search for their daughter.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rents.html

viv said...

hiya Wiz

It is very sad for the McCanns that cash strapped Kennedy is no longer prepared to pay for reputation protection for Kate and Gerry or promoting their silly private investigation. For me the more I hear about Edgar the more I laugh!

Still, the McCanns always have another little legal action up their sleeve to make sure they do not hit rock bottom by going below half a million in the Madeleine cash cow Kitty. As we see, they are now planning to extract yet another six figure sum from Goncalo Amaral, have waited, I am sure, until he had that sort of money. I do not think I am being unfair to suggest that Gerry is a manipulative and cynical little money grabber who just cannot resist another legal action if he thinks it may work. But was he so certain it would given they just wanted to get an injunction and then settle with Goncalo? I do not think that is what Goncalo has ever had in mind!

Di said...

Hi all


Raymond Hewlett saw Madeleine weeks before she disappeared, this is such a farce and the press are happy to play along as it sells papers, shame on them.

This article smacks of pinkness, are we to believe Raymond has such a brilliant memory. Perhaps Clarence should be reminded that T7can't even remember when they last saw Madeleine, and they were holidaying with her, incredible.

Di said...

I don't know whether you have seen this attack on 3A's by Anna Smith of NOTW.

How it was allowed to be printed I will never know. "Thicko Portuguese Cops" what a disgrace she should hang her had in shame.

McCann internet attacks are so sick

I HAD the misfortune to encounter some of the lowest forms of human life last week.

Thankfully it was only on the internet. My comments about the bungling, thicko Portuguese cops who mishandled the Madeline McCann case upset a bunch of lowlifes who are so sick and twisted that they have set up a website forum dedicated to attacking the McCanns.

It's appallingly cruel and filled with horrendous attacks on a tragic couple, who for the rest of their lives, will count the cost of their mistake.

What kind of people would devote so much of their energy to that level of vitriol?

What kind of morons would be on web forums in the middle of the night spitting hatred to total strangers, when the only real issue here is that a little girl is still missing?

I hope to God the McCanns don't read it. The internet has a lot to answer for. It has given spineless cowards a place to hide while they drip poison, masquerading as people who want to get to the truth.

There has to be some way we can legislate to shut these people down.

viv said...

Hiya Di

Well that will be the day when the NoW become responsible for enacting new legislation:-)))

Is this woman so stupid that she does not understand laws go on to the Statute Book to be applicable to all people. You can just see it now, An Act of Parliament to prevent and oppress any person who dares to criticise Saint Kate and Sir Gerry McCann of Rothley. All equipment used will be destroyed and these people will be silenced by solitary confinement in a special unit to be built the Save the Kate and Gerry Centre.

I just extracted this from the latest reports on the Foxy Knoxy trial in the Independent. The parents hired reputation management people, hum, now where did we hear all this before, including the use of private detectives who also must have a certain expertise in being manipulative liars and painting the official police as useless!

Ms Knox, however, is likely to focus on taking back something she lost control of early in this case: her image. In the days immediately after her arrest, she was portrayed by the prosecutors and the press, particularly in Britain and Italy, as a twisted and diabolical sexual huntress. Her family responded by hiring a Seattle public relations firm, which waged an international campaign using private investigators, lawyers and TV personalities to argue that she was innocent and being railroaded. A Friends of Amanda group was founded to help "turn around the supertanker of character assassination and negative stereotypes".

Di said...

Hi Viv & Wizard

That is interesting yes, where did we hear all this before, and why do Kate and Gerry still need Clarence, now paid for out of the fund, as Brian Kennedy is no longer paying his salary yet he obviously has still more than enough money to do so, remember he also pledged his money for the rest of his life ehich we all found very odd at the time.

I wonder, is Brian quietly distancing himself? However, then I read his wallet is there if needs be for legal action against GA. None of this makes sense.

Just out of interest, does anyone know is Clarence a freemason?

bath theory said...

I don't know if he is Di but it seems like he has read the books they are given to read.

From a poster on morais' site is where I found this


The only evidenc required is from 1min14 sec to 2 minutes on this video.

Wizard said...

With regard to that NOTW journalist – well one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.

It all depends on the angle you view the need for action.

So Anna Smith thinks she is a journalist - but this can’t be true as a journalist’s role is to present an unbiased picture of both sides of the coin. One obviously Ms Smith is totally oblivious to.

Her ranting tatrum is to unhold her opinion not the facts.

What a tosser! To think she gets paid for this.

Soda said...


I have read a few times today that Hewllet saw Madeleine a few weeks before she went missing??? Was he in Rotherley then??? She was not even in PDl a whole week before she vanished???

As for Anna whatsherface does she never stop and ask herself why the McCann's keep spending the funds money and any other cash they can get their hands on trying to save their reputations??? What good is a reputation when your child is missing I can think of many things I would worry about if one of my girls was missing my reputation and in fact ME in genral would not be one of them...

Every penny I had would be used to look for my child not wasted to make me look good...

viv said...

Hiya Di

The only sense I can make of Kennedy's actions are that when he was £50M better off, paying for reputation management for Kate and Gerry and the useless private dicks which are part of that package was not such a problem.

But last year we started to see a revolt from Kennedy with him sacking Mr Hallogen who it would seem creamed off half a million from the Find Maddie Fund.

I think he is finally seeing that supporting Kate and Gerry is just a big waste of money. People who have a lot of money are often very thrifty people who watch the pennies very carefully and want to see value for money. Increasingly what we were seeing from Kennedy was the likes of M3 and Mr Hallogen's outfit, Clarence Mitchell etc, were just a criminal waste of money that was never going to do anything at all to find Madeleine. It just serves the McCanns right.

I noted Alan Sugar last night state that his friends are Bill Gates, Sir Philip Green and Richard Branson. I would honestly like to know what these people think of the McCanns and whether they believe they would be a good investment and improve their businesses by buying into brand McCann. But I am sure I already know the answer to that question!

Still Sugar would tell me the answer in that no holds bar sort of way that he has:-)) He is currently advising Gordon Brown, who knows where the topics may stray to. If I was as canny a businessman as Sugar I would tell him that what would really revive Brown's political fortunes would be to preside over a prosecution of Team McCann!


viv said...


I do not think that any "journalist" who works for the NOW does so because they want to do a responsible job and honestly inform the public. It is more a question of producing salacious headlines whether they are fact or fiction.

I can always remember the NOW breaking the story about 6 weeks into the disappearance of Madeleine: Kate knew straight away that Madeleine had been abducted because cuddlecat was placed on a high shelf. Do they think we are so stupid that we forget all the other lines they have spun us? It has also been reported that this is Gerry's favourite paper. Is he so happy now that they have just made him look utter ridiculous with all the discrepancies in Team McCanns stories they have done such a good job of highlighting, including the massive spread on Gran Cooper's ridiculous sighting of a goofy man in the rain before the McCanns even arrived.

Hope - which kind of brings me on to your comments Hope, the McCanns have obviously found it very difficult to part with the theme that this lurking predator was there before Madeleine even arrived. But in the case of Hewlett is becomes even more bizarre, he was looking at Maddie weeks before she even arrived. If Gerry is still masterminding this I would say his mental health is deteriorating also because he is making the most absurd gaffs. Is Clarence just planning to walk away at the end of the day and write his memoirs:

I knew Kate and Gerry were telling a pack of lies but the police instructed me to continue in my role and not make any adverse comments against them so that they could ultimately be put on trial without them being able to say they could not get a fair trial because even their spinner turned agains them, and so the public had already pronounced them guilty?

Does make you wonder!

Joe said...

So if reports are correct then Mitchell is being paid from the fund as well as the 2 keystone cops, a comedy act if there ever was one. I wonder how long they will continue to be paid if Mr.Everest has jumped ship? Not long I will wager, unless they generate revenue making headlines. Its all going badly now for team McCann IMO as they are locked in a lawsuit with Amaral that may prove costly, with no Kennedy to pay up if they lose or have pay their own costs.

No hard nosed business man or woman would back them without having some doubt about the whole affair. There have been so many twists and turns that it is like the TV series "Lost", only that is more believable. The ridiculous headlines and rubbish that has been printed in the papers recently is even more absurd than previous times. It suggests that there is no control at the helm. I just cannot understand if they were genuine they would be looking for Madeline discretely without forewarning, but no every move is printed in advance with lurid headlines which suggests that they are not genuine IMO.

viv said...

Hiya Joe

Well it does seem that their next fund raising scheme is to relieve Goncalo of the cash he has earned from interviews and booksales. Their strategy has always been clear, only they can use Madeleine as a cash cow.

But the funding of this litigation being conducted in Portugal would be massive and if they only have half a million left it is going to once again seriously annoy the public that they are prepared to risk what is left of the money on yet another costly legal action. One thing they should know for sure, Goncalo is not ready for just rolling over and paying them. I believe that is what they hoped for, to gain an injunction to just shut him up!

They surely must by now see the futility of spending so much money on their own reputations when Goncalo is just not going to shut up, it becomes a serious waste of money. I may not necessarily agree with Goncalo on all points but I have no objection to him countering their not inconsiderable efforts to try and say they are innocent parents.

As you say, if they were, they would only spend money on the very best detectives who would quietly work trying to find Maddie. But the whole notion of trying to fnd her is just a complete farce. They know exactly what they have done with her!

The simple fact that any reasonable person can see is no innocent parents would spend money on measures to try and place themselves in a better light. They would just be spending money on trying to recover their daughter. The world is not fooled by them, even if British Press are no longer able to accuse them.

Di said...

Exactly Joe, these two pretendy cops are advertising in advance who they class as a suspect, what better way to send them all underground. The funny thing is, Clarence made a statement a short while ago saying there was no new evidence in the files, they can't have it both ways.

What I would like to know is how these two PI's got hold of the list of paedophiles in Portugal in the first place, and then have been allowed to name and shame in the media?

viv said...

Hiya Di

Well done Clarence! Of course there would be no new evidence in the PJ files because that details what has already been thoroughly investigated.

I would also like to know if their claim that a list of 18 British paedophiles has been made available to them, because it clearly should not have been. But it may just be they have got some names from the files and these they are focussing on, and let's face it was only about a month ago they were talking about pock faced man!

The PJ have issued a statement confirming these two pretendy cops did nothing at all to earn their keep, well I suppose as far as Kate and Gerry are concerned they did. They put some more farcical rubbish about what supposedly happened to Madeleine into the public domain. Given these two are trained police officers, they must have forgotten everything they learned!

Page last updated at 10:21 GMT, Wednesday, 27 May 2009 11:21 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Police not reopening McCann case

Private investigators are looking into Madeleine McCann's disappearance
Portuguese authorities say nothing that has emerged in recent days justifies reopening their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

This comes after it was revealed that a British paedophile had been identified as a "person of interest" by the McCann family's private investigators.

The Portuguese authorities said there had been no "concrete and credible facts" to justify reopening the case.

Madeleine, then three, vanished from an Algarve holiday apartment in May 2007.

The Portuguese police are no longer actively investigating the case, but the McCanns, of Rothley, Leicestershire, are conducting a private investigation.

In a brief written statement to the BBC, the office of Portugal's attorney general said that "the case will be reopened if and when concrete and credible facts exist that justify it, which until now has not yet happened".

Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for parents Gerry and Kate McCann, has said the interest in Briton Raymond Hewlett is just "one line of inquiry" in the private investigation.

Mr Mitchell said he understood Hewlett had been living about an hour from Praia de Luz, where Madeleine disappeared on 3 May 2007.

West Yorkshire Police have confirmed they are seeking Hewlett in connection with an indecent assault in 1975.

Reports say the 64-year-old is being treated for throat cancer in Germany.

Joe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

Hi Viv and Di,

I was reading over on the 3A site that the Mirror is getting an exclusive from Hewlett if I understand the posts correctly. How far lower can the gutter press go? This guy will say whatever the journos want and even if he does not they will make it up. The printed tabloids are in terminal decline and now will print any rubbish to try and keep afloat. One can almost sense the desperation from certain parties to pin this whole disappearance on this Hewlett. He is probably on morphine, high and disorientated but the press will still print whatever he says. The fact of the matter is neither the PJ,German police or the British police are connecting him to the disappearance. It seems to matter not a jot to the press or Mitchell. Since none of the above police are interested, any revelations will be pointless for team McCann as it would all have to be officially recognized and not the keystone cops and will still be unsolved as far as the PJ are concerned.

viv said...

hiya Joe

You do make a sound point, Hewlett will be high on morphine, very ill and in pain, but this does not seem to stop the Daily Mirror, who have, by and large just been desperate to get any old McCann story regardless of its veracity.

I fear just like you and many others do, this man's death is imminent and Team McCann are so despicable they intend to lay the blame at his door but nothing can come from it because he is going to die. So far as I am concerned there are no depths that Gerry McCann will not seek to plumb. Neither this site or 3 As are going to be satisfied with that as an explanation as to why the McCanns should now be able to just cash in and live happily ever after!

Instead, we believe the Police, and as you rightly point out, the Police are simply not interested in this man as a suspect. They very clearly named the suspects and there are no new ones.


Di said...

Hi Viv & Joe

I agree, this does not look good with Hewlett prepared to give an exclusive to The Mirror. Hopefully his lawyer will be taking a full transcript of said interview so that it cannot be altered in anyway by our press, i do not trust our press one bit. G A has stated in a recent interview that Hewlett had been investigated and dismissed from their enquiries.Why are the PJ not coming forward with a statement saying this is so? What game are they playing?

Sadly, i have no faith in our journalists whatsoever to print the truth, therefore i can't help feeling Hewlett is going to be Kate & Gerry's lifeline. I think the problem is there are soooooo many people out there that do not believe K & G are telling the truth. These people, like myself, will not give up and will not be silenced, we want the truth to be known no matter what it may be or who is responsible.

Kate & Gerry should perhaps remember, money does not buy happiness.