23 Apr 2010

Gerry's "emotional" return to build bridges and look for Madeleine/PARENTS SUE

Gerry McCann returns to Portugal to relaunch investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

By Matthew Drake
Last updated at 9:22 AM on 14th January 2009
Gerry McCann has made an emotional return to Portugal in an bid to build bridges with authorities and rekindle the search for his missing daughter Madeleine.
It was his first time back in the country since he and his wife, Kate, flew home from the Algarve on September 9 2007, four months after their daughter disappeared.
Mr McCann, 40, met with lawyers in Lisbon acting on his family's behalf in a bid to determine what can still be done to trace his child.
McCanns
Gerry McCann, pictured with wife Kate, has returned to Portugal to resume the search for his missing daughter Madeleine
Speaking to a Portuguese news agency, the doctor from Rothley, Leicestershire, told how he wished to 'work with the (Portuguese) authorities as much as possible in the ongoing search.'
Madeleine
Madeleine was almost four when she was taken from her parent's holiday apartment in May 2007
'We think there is still a very good chance Madeleine could be found alive and well, and that's why we want the search to continue,' he said.
'We want to stress our desire to continue to work with the authorities as much as possible.'
Mr McCann confirmed he had no plans mount legal action against the Portuguese media or the police who named the distraught couple as 'arguidos' or formal suspects in the investigation in September 2007 before clearing them last July.
He said: 'I want to make it clear that what happened in the past stays there, and we really want to focus on what can be done to continue the search.
'That is our priority and always has been.'
Madeleine was just three when she vanished from her parents holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on May 3 2007.
Still hopeful of a positive outcome, her father said he still hopes to find her alive and was determined to 'focus on what can still be done for the search.'
Mr McCann was met in the Algarve by officials from the British Embassy then flew to the capital Lisbon for a meeting with the Portuguese authorities.
He said it was important 'not to duplicate steps that have already been taken and not to waste resources.'
McCanns
One of the last pictures taken of Madeleine before she disappeared
In an interview with Portuguese press agency Lusa he added:  'It is the first visit to Portugal, but I hope it's the first of many over the coming months.
'The aim is to see what can still be done in the search for Madeleine.'
British and Portuguese police continue to receive 'information' and 'possible sightings' from different sources he said.
He added:'Like all parents of missing children, we want all the information to be investigated.'
Mr McCann said he was unaware of how mush money remained in the Find Madeleine Fund but admitted his family had 'scarce resources and did not want to waste them.'
Last night a close friend of the McCann's said Madeleine's father, who will return to the UK today felt the visit had been 'very positive'
The friend said: 'Gerry is very pleased with his trip and in future, when the time is right he may well return with Kate, as a couple together.'
The case was shelved by police in Portugal last July as detectives suspended any search for the youngster.
Mr and Mrs McCann have since trawled thousands of pages from the police files that were painstakingly translated into English.
They continue to analysis them and it is understood they are being assisted by a small team of retired senior British police officers.
Mr McCann said he expected his visit to Portugal would be 'the first of several' over the next few months.
He also indicated a desire to improve relations with the Portuguese authorities.
In an interview with Portuguese news agency Lusa, Mr McCann pledged to work 'as much as possible'  with officials in Portugal to look for Madeleine.
He went on: 'We want to make it absolutely clear what's gone on in the past is, by and large, done and we very, very much want to focus on what can still be done for the search.
'That's what our priority is and it always has been, really. So any of these things are just not really relevant at the moment.'

Madeleine McCann's parents sue Portuguese detective over book claim that their daughter died in tragic accident

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:22 PM on 18th May 2009

McCann
Defiant: Detective Goncalo Amaral is looking forward to his day in court when he will face layers acting for Kate and Gerry McCann
Kate and Gerry McCann are to sue the detective who led the Portuguese investigation into the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.
The couple say Goncalo Amaral has defamed them with his 'absurd and deeply hurtful' claims that Madeleine died in an accident and that they concealed her death.
Mr Amaral has repeated the claims about Madeleine, who vanished aged three while the family were on holiday in Praia da Luz in 2007, in newspapers, documentaries and in his book about the case, titled The Truth About The Lie.
The McCanns say the former detective, who was forced off the case after criticising British police, has caused 'indescribable devastation and suffering' to their family and his claims have 'obstructed' the search for their daughter.
But a source said the McCanns could be forced to give evidence in court in their action against Mr Amaral – presenting him with a stage from which to attack the couple.
His publisher, Mario Sena Lopes, said he was ‘looking forward’ to his day in court.
He is seeking a British publisher for his book after selling 250,000 copies on the Continent, including 175,000 in Portugal.
An English version has already been produced for America.
The McCanns also want to make sure a documentary produced by Mr Amaral for Portuguese TV does not win a wider audience.
Their defamation case, lodged yesterday in Lisbon, alleges that Mr Amaral has damaged their reputation ‘causing indescribable devastation and suffering’ and put in danger the well-being of their children, twins Sean and Amelie, four, and particularly Madeleine.
Mr Amaral was forced off the inquiry in October 2007 for criticising British police.
He was partly responsible for making the McCanns arguidos, formal suspects, in the case.
His book claims Madeleine, then aged three, died in a ‘tragic accident’ in the holiday flat on the night she disappeared.
Mr Amaral has never claimed that heart surgeon Gerry and GP Kate, of Rothley, Leicestershire, killed her.
Maddie
Mystery: Madeleine disappeared two years ago aged just three
He has reportedly said his only regret was failing to carry out a reconstruction of events soon after Madeleine vanished, but says he was put under ‘serious pressure’ not to.
The McCanns said they were taking action over Mr Amaral’s claims ‘that Madeleine is not only dead but that we, her parents, were somehow involved in concealing her body’.
They said it was ‘a disgraceful thesis that we are somehow involved in the disappearance of our much loved daughter Madeleine’.
They added: ‘We can no longer stand back and watch Mr Amaral try to convince the entire world that Madeleine is dead.’
They included their children as complainants in the action as ‘Sean and Amelie require protection as they prepare to start school this autumn. Madeleine requires protection from those who are obstructing the possibility of her being found’.
Mr and Mrs McCann have hired one of Portugal’s top libel lawyers, Isabel Duarte, 54.
They can force the book off Portuguese shelves and bar the country’s TV stations from repeating his claims if they can prove that he has accused them ‘even in the form of a suspicion...of something which is offensive to their honour or esteem’.
Enlarge   Kate and Gerry McCann
Still searching: Kate and Gerry McCann in Channel 4's documentary about the search for their missing daughter
Mr Amaral must show he had good reason to believe his allegations were true and he made them in good faith.
Unlike in the UK, the McCanns would be eligible for only nominal compensation. But a source said their motivation in suing Mr Amaral was simply to ‘censure him’.
‘He has been publicising his book across Europe and they just think enough is enough.’
Last month Mr Amaral announced plans to start his own ‘international’ private investigation to solve the mystery.
He intends to send his findings to judicial chiefs in Portugal with a request to reopen the case.
His publisher, Ms Lopes, said: ‘The conclusions of the book are also the conclusions of many Portuguese and British police involved in the inquiry.
‘We are looking for a publisher in the UK, but the McCanns have a very powerful influence in British society and a lot of pressure is being made to prevent the book being published. We have had a lot of letters from UK people who want it published there.’

77 comments:

viv said...

It surely does not get any more dishonest, cold and money grabbing than this, does it??

viv said...

and every time we get that picture of little Maddie in her red dress, adult pout and tinted red hair...eye liner too I think..and she must be at least two.

viv said...

I see my resident stalker A.Dubliner dropped by again, even giving detail of its favourite page on Jo Morais blog, where it likes to write to me, not that it gets much of an answer, lol!

The visitor arrived on your site on Fri Apr 23 at 12:25:10 AM from server IP #86.131.168.32 (host86-131-168-32.range86-131.btcentralplus.com).

Geo-location :Lisburn, United Kingdom
Repeat : He or she had visited your site previously

Referrer : no referrer for this particular visit but the first time this visitor came to your site he had been referred by joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/04/notw-brits-launch-maddie-probe.html?commentPage=2


Visitor Click Path
Click # Timestamp Page visited Length of stay
1 Fri Apr 23 at 12:25:10 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com 00:02
2 Fri Apr 23 at 12:25:12 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com The visitor left

erm tut!

viv said...

After the repeated and serious abuse you have posted to this blog you were told you are not welcome here, that message still stands!

viv said...

willo


Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 6:19 am
Posts: 73
Why would they write up two time lines that don't completely match each other then leave them for the police to find?

For about the millionth time I'm thinking something don't make sense.

Locked or unlocked, 50 yards or 130 yards, sick or not sick, 14 bottles or 4 bottles, signed out, not signed in, Tuesday or Wednesday, quiz or no quiz, no mobiles no texts but 10's of text's, no watches but timeline sorted, Murat, no Murat, push chair no push chair, blue bag etc..........it goes on ad infinitum.

Talk about muddy the waters these guys are pros.


Exactly!

It is a bit like Tanner saw the abductor and Gerry was looking in that direction but did not see him, indeed he never even saw Tanner.

45 minutes later Martin Smith sees the same abductor carrying Madeleine but does not realise he has till he has a flashback 3 weeks later. And then 4 months later, he has another flashback and realises it was Gerry McCann.

If this isn't enough to get people talking about what never happened, how about setting up some "PRO" AND "ANTI" bloggers to have an endless row about it. Meanwhile Gerry can start suing everyone for claiming they killed Maddie and giving Martin Smith a great big pat on the back for giving the bloggers something to get stuck into.

Of course there are those who believe that giving the dogs something to sniff or some bent witness telling the police four months later he thinks it was Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine, not that he thinks she was dead is enough to convict Gerry of murder, he is just a bit smarter than these bloggers, he knows full well it isn't!

viv said...

It is enough to get him some nice fat libel awards though and enough to stop people realising he had already got rid of Madeleine before he even went to the TAPAS. Create a diversion, master of spin...bury some bad news. Early press was all about earlier in the evening, he has done a great job to turn that around, but not here he hasn't!

Wizard said...

Hi Viv,

Tried to post yesterday but although being successful here it did not transfer over to the main thread.

Just testing to day to see if things are working.

viv said...

Hi Wiz

It would seem that there are those who are very determined either by threats/abuse or other interference to shut us up on here, but they have not been successful. I think I have resolved the problems and will continue to name and shame those who I particularly feel have sought to interfere with this blog.

xx

viv said...

Detail of visitor # 410

The visitor arrived on your site on Fri Apr 23 at 09:33:54 AM from server IP #89.145.220.153 (89-145-220-153.xdsl.murphx.net).

United Kingdom flagspacer Geo-location : United Kingdom - Charlton (Warwickshire)
Repeat : He or she had visited your site previously

Referrer : www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&q=justice+for+maddie+and+the+twins


Visitor Click Path
Click # Timestamp Page visited Length of stay
1 Fri Apr 23 at 09:33:54 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com 00:03
2 Fri Apr 23 at 09:33:57 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com 01:49
3 Fri Apr 23 at 09:35:46 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com 00:01
4 Fri Apr 23 at 09:35:47 AM justiceformaddie.blogspot.com The visitor left


The visitor was using the following equipment:
User Agent : Mozilla/4.0(MSIE7.0;WindowsNT6.0;Trident/4.0;FBSMTWB;GTB6.4;SLCC1;.NETCLR2.0.50727;InfoPath.2;.NETCLR3.5.30729;.NETCLR3.0.30729;OfficeLiveConnector.1.4;OfficeLivePatch.1.3)
browser : MSIE 8.0
operating system : Win Vista
Screen size : 1280x800
Screen colors : 32-bit 16 million

viv said...

Some interesting comments in The Times on the McCanns erm choice of first some "fraud investigators", Metodo 3, then when the public became aware just how incredibly erm defective they were, we got erm Mr Halligen, billed as American FBI, actually an Irish conman, money laundering, it has always looked that way!

The title of the Times article, Madeleine Fund hired secret agent conman, I am sure they are not taking the proverbial are they:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6927008.ece

Johanna Renstein wrote:
Why was the money paid to Halligen transfered from the "Fund Ltd." via Housing Agent Holdings, a company belonging to Brian Kennedy? And how much money was it exactly? 500.000 or 300.000 pounds? Good that the McCanns themselves are on the board of Directors. No questions asked.
November 25, 2009 12:25 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (12) Report Abuse
Permalink


Martin Brumm wrote:
What if the true story is simple. Halligen laundered the Fund money to mccanns privat account in USA/Canada?
For money, of course. 10%?
November 23, 2009 11:56 AM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (27) Report Abuse
Permalink


sean schofield wrote:
Dont worry too much about Mr.Halligen he does not exist , he is a figment of the imagination so to speak, also there are people out there who are aware of the likes of so called companies like Trafigua who are considerably further up the food chain in the united states,
November 23, 2009 10:35 AM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (8) Report Abuse
Permalink


Martin Brumm wrote:
"Ray Noble wrote:
I hesitate to comment on this story, but it does seem to me that the trustees of the funds that commissioned this man have a lot to answer for. It is insufficient to say that this man took advantage of a vulnerable couple. The fund presumably has trustees. What have they been doing? "

You haven't read the previous posts. Kate and Gerry are the Fund managers.
And their other family members. There you have yours "trustees".
November 23, 2009 7:44 AM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (22) Report Abuse
Permalink


Ambrose Ambrose wrote:
Trafigura are going to do something really horrible to Halligen. He'll end up glowing in the dark somewhere.
November 23, 2009 1:12 AM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (6) Report Abuse
Permalink


Ray Noble wrote:
I hesitate to comment on this story, but it does seem to me that the trustees of the funds that commissioned this man have a lot to answer for. It is insufficient to say that this man took advantage of a vulnerable couple. The fund presumably has trustees. What have they been doing? Surely there were many other agencies with sufficient reputation that the Fund could have commissioned. There were stories about long ago that the private agency investigation was getting nowhere. This whole sorry saga needs a proper investigation. The only thing we know is that a crime has been committed, although we know not precisely the nature of that crime, and nothing appears to be done to solve it. It makes one wonder if there is any real intent to do so.
March 7, 2010 8:40 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (17) Report Abuse
Permalink


Carsten Ringsing wrote:
Easy come money - easy go money....
November 22, 2009 9:57 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (16) Report Abuse
Permalink


Ian Smith wrote:
Halligen defrauded Trafigura? He better keep running!
November 22, 2009 9:37 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (4)

viv said...

When the going gets tough the rough get going, Paul Burrell cleared off to the States in search of happier times with his ill gotten gains from selling out his former employer, Princess Di. But of course he escaped criminal charges by virtue of the intervention of her Majesty the Queen, to save her some embarassment.

The thing is Kate and Gerry have no connections to royalty, just pretensions and I very much doubt if Canada or the US would allow them to go there. An option I am sure they have thought of but not a realistic one whilst UK authorities continue to investigate them and know they are implicated in the disappearance of their little girl.

Given the rest of their road have sold up and moved out they must be aware they are not welcome in Rothley, or the least bit of use to property prices!

viv said...

Memory sticks, obviously a great innovation for vile perverts, at best this guy will serve three months..a reasonable sentence to protect the public and act as a deterrent or something to do with prisons overcrowded with people like him?


Porthcawl teacher jailed for child abuse video
Robin Taylor
IT skills teacher Robin Taylor kept child abuse videos on a memory stick

A teacher who put a "shocking" child sex abuse video on a memory stick was caught after it was found by his pupils at a £1,200-a-term private school.

Robin Taylor, 41, of Swansea, had images ranging up to the most serious "level five" stored on the device.

Tayor, who taught computer skills at St John's School in Porthcawl, was jailed for six months for making and possessing indecent child images.

His barrister told Newport Crown Court it was a "spectacular fall from grace".

The court heard the computer memory stick was picked up by pupils doing homework in an IT classroom.

They plugged the memory stick into a computer to see who owned it.

Meiron Davies, prosecuting, said the youngsters found a folder named "mine" containing three videos and an image of a naked girl.

It goes without saying that to deliberately store such images is quite depraved behaviour
Judge Richard Rowlands

He said: "Mercifully, the children didn't open these videos on the stick."

One 17-minute video showed a girl aged about 13 in what Judge Richard Rowlands described as "dire distress" during a sex ordeal.

One pupil, who gave evidence via video, said teaching files were found next to the child abuse videos on the memory stick.

He said: "We didn't want to leave it lying around for younger ones to pick up.

Sex offender

"I was very confused and thought why is this in school and who would do something like that?"

The school's headmistress Carol Ann Clint called in the police, the court heard.

Police found a second memory stick with an identical pornographic image at Taylor's home.

Eugene Egan, defending, said his client had "suffered a spectacular fall from grace".

He said: "He has lost his career, his good name and will forever be a convicted sex offender."

Judge Richard Rowlands ordered Taylor to register as a sex offender for seven years after his conviction on three charges, saying he was "shocked" by what Taylor had downloaded.

He said: "It showed a young girl aged about 13 in dire distress. We don't know where she is, what's become of her but that video lasted 17 minutes.

Wept

"You must have been prepared to download that and watch it. It goes without saying that to deliberately store such images is quite depraved behaviour.

"This is far from being a victimless crime. Their suffering which is so apparent is directly attributable to people like you perhaps many thousands of miles away who watch it."

Taylor, who is married, wept as he was taken down. His wife, who was in court, shouted that she would stand by him.

viv said...

His wife, who was in court, shouted that she would stand by him.

Don't talk rubbish said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
hope4truth said...

Why do people constantly put childrens rights to the back of decency...

What kind of sick and twisted bitch declares she will stand by a man in court after he has been sentanced for viewing such unnatural and discuting vile peadophile filth/....

If she is ok with what he does lets hope she will soon be standing by hime in a prison cell...

I know anouncing your intention to stand by a peadophile is not against the law but anyone who is twisted enough to declare such a thing should be locked up for promoting it is aceptable...

viv said...

Hiya Hope

It is amazing what some women will support in the name of "love", in my own case I am confident that would affect how I felt about that person..and my wish to spend another moment in their company.

Rubbish Speaker, thank you for referring to me to Lord Woolf's civil procedure rules, IMO the stimulation one can get from reading them is akin to watching paint dry and so I hope you had a happy time on your legal research. A tip, you will probably learn more from case law:-)) "Procedural" should give you the big clue, lol

Now stop trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

viv said...

Isn't it weird how people have these flashbacks, give statements to the Portuguese Police and then instead of talking to British Police, talk to Mr Brian Kennedy who helps them with memory recall and embroidery?

As the investigation by both Pt and Brit cops was still totally behind closed doors for the frantic McCanns in Jan 08, how nice to have the helpful and incredibly wealthy Mr Brian Kennedy rushing round with his cheque book personally chatting to people. They must have felt so honoured to meet such a rich big shot guy like him and not just one of his little minions..

Processos Vol XV
Page 4024

Fax (in English)

From: Ricardo Paiva

Sent: 16th January 2008, 17.52

To: Prior Stuart

Subject: Madeleine McCann’s Investigation

Hello, Stuart,

After a meeting with the Director, Mr Paolo Rebelo where this matter was discussed, we kindly request to your police, the following procedures:

- re-interview PAUL GORDON and show him GAIL COOPER’s sketch;

- re-interview GAIL COOPER, regarding the following points:

- if she formally confirms her statement given to Brian Kennedy?
- If she still confirms her previous statement given to the police back in the 21st of May, she hasn’t referred that she has seen the same man two days later at the beach near the RESTAURANT PARAISO, standing near the Mark Warner’s children?

- interview JOHN COOPER (GAIL’s husband) in order to confirm her statement, specially regarding the fact that they had seen the same man two days later at the beach near the RESTAURANT PARAISO standing near the Mark Warner’s children.

- Interview LINDA SIMMS and show him GAIL COOPER’s sketch;

- Interview ALFRED SCHUURMANS and ask him if his friend, who’s (sic) 12 years old daughter had spotted on several occasions “a strange man lurking around the apartments” is GORDON SILLENCE and the daughter TASMIN MILBURN SILLENCE:

Best regards

Ricardo Paiva

viv said...

Your very keen tonight Hopey, lol!

viv said...

This sounds like a serious statement to me and I am wondering why there is just a "snippet" on J Morais forum "Maddie Case Files" and no date?

Post subject: Rex Morgan Statement
PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:10 pm
Offline
Forum Admin
Forum Admin

Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:50 pm
Posts: 3110
Processos

Volume XV

Pages 4013 - 14


Statement in English by Rex Morgan

No date


Snippet:

At 1600hrs on Thursday, 3rd May, 2007, both myself and (my wife) were sat in the rear garden of the villa. I saw a male’s face appear around the corner of the building. This was the corner of the building that led to the driveway.

This person, along with another male then walked towards us.

Due to the time between then and now, I can only remember the descriptions of the persons as follows:

1( 25 – 30 year old male. About 5”10 in height and slightly tanned. In my opinion he looked Portuguese. I do not recall what clothing he wore but I do recall him being tidy in appearance and spoke good English but with a Portuguese accent.

2) 18 – 20 years. Slightly shorter than the first male. He was also reasonably dressed.

The first person walked towards me and introduced himself. I do not recall his name however he did show me an identification card on which was a picture of him. I did notice that the picture showed with a moustache, but that he did not have one. He did in fact point this out to me as well.

He then went on to explain his purpose for being there. He said that he was collecting money so that he could help to get young boys of the street and keep young girls away from prostitution. He showed me a (Page 2) portfolio with pictures of a hospice where these young people are housed. I do not recall where this hospice is located.

He asked for a contribution and I gave him 10 Euros. He did provide me with a receipt.

I did not take much notice of their appearance as I did not feel threatened by them. I thought them to be genuine. I only became concerned when i heard that little Madeleine McCann had gone missing later that day.

Prior to recording this statement, I was asked by the police to complete a “E FIT” identification procedure. I do not recall that I could satisfactorily recall both of the persons features to complete an E FIT so I declined to do so.

I was the shown by DC 1756 Marshall, an artist’s impression of a male completed by Gail Cooper. I can say that he is similar, but the man I saw was a bit smarter. This guy looks a bit like a hippy. He certainly did not look like that. His features are similar, his hair is not like that. It was (page 3) shorter and smarter. He did not have a moustache.

I was the shown a second picture. I do not recognise him by this picture. His hair might have been a bit the same but I do not think that looks like him. I do not remember his face at all so I do not recognise him by this picture.

I would further like to say that in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine, I saw a manhole with a cover removed.

This manhole is situated on a junction of a road that runs parallel to the supermarket near to the Tapas Bar and the McCanns apartment. The cover along with the surround that been removed and placed to the side of the road.

The road is lit by street lighting but I believe you would not have seen the hole and anyone could have fallen in.

I returned the next day and noticed that the cover had been replaced. I am concerned that she may have fallen down the manhole and was not seen.

hope4truth said...

Keen tonight Viv???

viv said...

Yes, I have always been keen on learning the truth, lol!

hope4truth said...

Well the truth is all that matters if a child is at risk.

Wizard said...

Rex Morgan’s statement and the mention of a ‘manhole cover lid’ which he said was dangerous as the lid was off on the 3rd May then it was replaced when he looked the following day. I can only assume this manhole was checked within a few days of M’s disappearance. Lets hope so!

Wizard said...

“It is the belief of the family that their child was kidnapped with the intention of either being sold for adoption or taken by child traffickers. However, there is no evidence to support this theory and some observers consider an accident to be a legitimate alternative scenario.” Source - Wikipedia

The above snippet is referring to Ben Needham who was holidaying with his parents on the Island of Kos in 1991 when he disappeared apparently into thin air never to be seen again. A body has never been found and no one has been charged with crimes relating to his disappearance.

Di said...

Hi All

I also cannot understand why Brian Kennedy took it upon himself to interview witnesses, or why these witnesses would give him the time of day.

Hi Viv

That is an interesting statement by Rex Morgan which I have not seen before. Wasn't there another witness that mentioned someone collecting for a charity, although I am not sure it was on the same day. We also have Mrs Fenn who came across an intruder and several witnesses who saw strange men lurking on street corners.

The picture being painted of PDL would seem to say this is not a safe place to be, which I am sure is not the case.

hope4truth said...

Morning DI

I guess the problem when something goes wrong is what information is relevent...

If I had been burgled last night I could have told the police about the light shinning in my bedroom window at about midnight (burgalers checking the place out) the 3 guys running away up the street (quick getaway) and the dodgey man who knocked on my door earlier in the day (casing the joing)....

When in fact my neighbour reversed his car off his drive only for it to stall and he could not restart it for a minute or so. The 3 guys running away were actually chasing a dog that had got off the lead and they led it back down the road about 10 minutes later and the dodgey man was in fact trying to sell me the local newspaper at a bargain price if I had it delivered.

This is why there should have been a clear reconstruction so they could have seen who was where and for what reason.....

I still cant belive she was taken because their own actions have not gone along with this. If she is still alive and they know where she is it would actualy answer most of the doubts I have in my mind if however she died I am still at a bit of a loss to their behaviour but can see the relief they may feel that they still have the twins maybe that is enough to raise a smile?????

viv said...

Hiya guys

I think the truth is that when you come to really look at the files, there are several reports by witnesses of various characters hanging around the resort around the time Madeleine disappeared. Some literally right by the McCanns apartment.

It is also true to say that Brian Kennedy has sought to interview every single one of those and gain e-fits of those people.

In the case of Pamela Fenn's niece, a character from Reading (apparently) came and saw her, posing as the police. When the real police confronted her with the e-fit this character had prepared she said that it had been changed! The real police were not only very grateful to her for her very clear memory of faces, the person she saw stealthily exiting a gate near the McCanns apartment but also this character from (apparently) Reading.

I had already noticed from photographs on Pamalam's site that there is a manhole cover in the street alongside the McCanns apartment, whether that witness was saying what Brian Kennedy wanted to hear or the truth of course I do not know. But surely the truth is if a body had been placed down there, even that of a small child, it would have blocked the drains and caused the most foul smell.

I am afraid my opinion of Goncalo and his supporters is not high, they have sought to obfuscate and confuse the real facts, just as much as the McCanns. There is absolutely no evidence that Madeleine died in that apartment.

They have also sought to make huge amounts of money out of a missing little girl, just the same as the McCanns and engage in "litigation".

viv said...

I do accept that some parents consider it reasonable to leave their children and go back and make regular checks.

But as is clearly recorded on the police file the McCanns were not making regular checks, on one occasion they know for a fact it must have been well over an hour due to the length of time that Madeleine was crying on 1 May, heard by Mrs Fenn.

When you look at the photographs of 5a The McCanns patio area is high up, over a service void, so if some child were to be out there on their own could suffer a catastrophic fall to the garden below. It is because the apartment is not built at ground level that you have to go up those steps to enter it. So I am afraid what I simply do not accept is that any reasonable parents would go out and leave a four year old, known to have sleep problems with the patio door open. And I most certainly do not accept that any normal parent, when confronted with that child apparently telling them she had been crying, they would just go and do it again.

Neither do I accept any normal parent would completely ignore police advice and create a media circus.

Neither do I accept that any normal parent would be immediately spending public money to find Madeleine on an outfit called "Control Risks Group" or enabling them to "get a really good team of lawyers together".

All of this clearly smacks to me of a couple setting up a faked abduction of Madeleine, it was them that had her abducted!

viv said...

Hope and Di

The only things I can say that may suggest Madeleine is safe are the words of Mrs Justice Hogg, she hoped Madeleine may be found alive and well. She spoke about Madeleine being "secreted" away from those she no doubt loved.

But in addition to that the McCanns themselves have always given me the clear impression they would find her, at their leisure and when the time is right. There just never seemed to be any urgency as to when they would start this search did there?

But I am afraid I remain lacking in confidence that this is just a hoax a form of adoption where they would also make loads of cash, I fear it is much worse than that, but hope that I am wrong. But as always I wish CEOP, British Police, Dr Rebelo, Ricardo Paiva, Interpol and all the rest the very best of luck in finding her.

hope4truth said...

3 years is such a long time to leave her (unless it is for life) what I dont understand is why the fund is not audited) the money is nearly all out so where has it all gone to.... I know the banks pay out huge amounts to its staff many who have not done a good job but to pay out some of the detective firms they have employed have done nothing....

Lets face it if any of them had done a good job they would have kept them on the payroll not chopped and changed every time one could come up with a new false lead....

The 300k paid to Halligen that Clarence put his foot in it when he told the world how pleased they were with the work he had done for them was nothing more than conned out of them by a man who had no more of an idea of how to start a search for a missing child than I would yet their paid mouth piece tells us it was fantastic????

Lets hope this ends soon as there are many missing children being ignored and the tragic thing is the most famous missing child of all time is being ignored as well whilst her parents are still allowed to spin their version of events....

Surley if she is still alive she deserves be allowed to return and be loved by someone???

viv said...

hiya again Hope

The McCanns initial reaction, judging by their jogging, laughing on her birthday etc was one of pure joy. Wherever she was they seemed to be incredibly happy they sent her there.

When you read the rogatory interview of Sandy Cameron, Gerry's brother in law and a school teacher, whilst he is clearly discounting so called death scent in the car etc, he does sound to me as though he is exactly supportive of Kate and Gerry.

The Cameron couple have clearly been incredibly close to Madeleine and cared for her on many occasions. They describe Kate being "very ill" when she was having the twins and spending sometimes a week at a time caring for Madeleine, including in Holland.

So where did this question the Portuguese Police wanted answering from Kate McCann come from:

and were you considering transferring custody of Madeleine to a relative?

I think it is right to assume that not all family members are going to be supporting Kate and Gerry, particularly given Kate point blank refused to answer such a fundamental and vital question as to why her daughter may have disappeared and where she may be. I know that I would not in relation to a child I had cared for and no doubt loved very dearly.

So then we have to look at how Kate and Gerry present now, they do not show that dazzled delight any more do they?

They may have Brian Kennedy still on side, even that is not clearly apparent or his reasons for seeking to pervert the course of justice. But just who else is supporting them?

I think they are in very big trouble and they know it.

Wizard said...

I think we all agree the McCanns parenting of their children whilst on holiday was completely feckless if not worse. I suspect the children were drugged and that is why they were so confident they would not wake up and wander off.

The checks on their children or more correctly non-checks is one thing but to advertise to all on sundry that you leave your children alone whilst you go out of an evening is extraordinary. The people, Gerry in particular, passed this information onto could well have told other people and they in turn have told others. It’s complete madness to have done this unless of course they were setting the scene. Hmm…..

Di said...

Hi Viv & all

I also keep recalling a witness who said she heard Gerry on his phone saying "please don't hurt her"

What if Gerry was into something iffy, some deal etc., after all, it was no holiday for him, so he said. What if it was payback time.

Kate shouting they've taken her has always seemed wrong to me and I am sure many others. We all keep saying who Kate, Madeleine or Amelie?

Was it a myth or did Gordon Brown really say that we the British people were not ready for this, or something similar. I have searched but no luck.

Also, did we ever have confirmation that Kate & Gerry helped some drunk who was lying in the road, back to his abode? I always felt that was odd, same as Gerry saving the life of a fellow passenger on the plane.

None have come forward to say thanks and no other witnesses on the plane have mentioned anything either!

Di said...

Hi Wizard

Very good point. Why would you advertise to others that you were leaving the children vulnerable and the apt wide open to anyone.

Or as you say setting the scene.

Di said...

Hello Hope

Just read your post this morning very good point. I am sure we can all turn things into something sinister or suspicious if we try.

It reminds me of a friend who was convinced the neighbour opposite, who had been away for a while, when he returned was tagged therefore he had obviously been to prison.

We had weeks of theories as to why he could possibly have been in prison. Turned out to be a special bicycle clip LOL, but kept everyone amused for a while, himself also when he heard.

viv said...

Kate was "very ill" when she was having the twins. When LP sent a report to the PJ it stated that Kate McCann was "still on maternity leave". By this stage the twins were almost three! But even in PDL they were well turned two.

So what is it that makes Kate "very ill" and unable to look after Madeleine and why is it she did not recover and return to work to help with the family budget after the birth of the twins? When they arrived in PDL the twins were two years and three months, way beyond the normal stage of statutory maternity leave. In short it seems to me the decision had been taken prior to going to PDL she was not going back to work. But when you look at the budget with a massive £323,000 mortgage, the gym, the golf club, the bills you get on a 5 bedroomed house, two cars etc etc, the figures do not stack up.

Kate went into obstetrics Sandy told us then went into anaesthetics, then finished up working part time in a GP surgery. Just what is wrong with her?

I am afraid given her presentation on many occasions and how she has chosed to seek to explain their actions on live TV I could hazard a guess.

I could also hazard a guess as to how a plan was hatched to solve all of their problems, a child Kate could not cope with and a career and wage earning that Kate could not cope with. Just a couple of days a week on a GP's salary would have brought in quite a lot of money, so why not?

viv said...

Completely off topic *well maybe not, I know but I did so enjoy that fabulous wonderful gorgeous Jeremy Paxman (yes I think he is great) interviewing Cameron, what a stinging rebuke for this arrogant little rich boy and his agenda for the poor. Did you see the vicious glint in Cameron's eyes, he knew he had been hit really hard. Serves him right, people my age can certainly remember the last time we had a tory administration, no wonder the McCanns suck up to them. Gerry really has forgotten his roots.

That is a shame, if he was a little more concerned about the bairns and less concerned with being rich and famous little Maddie would be a happy and cherished little girl, like she should be.

viv said...

Gerry McCann in November 2007, really hammering his lies:

"The father of Madeleine told CBS that he and his wife “will always live with the fact that Kate and I were not in the apartment when it happened.”

I beg to differ, Gerry!

Then we get the other sick remarks, so sorry we were not there at the "moment she was taken". Sick, very sick!

viv said...

By TOM WELLS and VIRGINIA WHEELER

Published: 24 Apr 2010
Add a comment Add a comment (29)
DISGRACED Sharon Shoesmith was last night poised to appeal after a judge yesterday BACKED her sacking over Baby P - as she continues to pursue �1million compensation.

The former head of children's services in Haringey, North London - where blunders left tragic Baby Peter at the mercy of sadists - still refused to admit blame.


Her legal team confirmed an appeal was being considered after a High Court judge rejected her claim she was a "scapegoat".

The 57-year-old's lawyers greeted the ruling with "disappointment" - even though it vindicated 1.4million Sun readers who demanded she get the boot.

Mr David Foskett QC becoming Mr Justice Foskett of the Queens Bench.
Verdict ... Mt Justice Foskett

Mr Justice Foskett threw out her claim that The Sun forced Children's Secretary Ed Balls to UNFAIRLY remove the bungler from her �130,000-a-year post as the council's children's champion.

Shoesmith also accused Mr Balls of leaning on watchdogs Ofsted to come up with a damning report to justify sacking her.

That too was rejected by the judge, who cleared Ofsted - while decreeing the minister's actions "cannot be impugned on the grounds of unfairness".

The probe which blasted Shoesmith's department was launched after 17-month-old Peter Connelly was tortured to death while on an "at risk" register.

His evil mum Tracey Connelly, 28, her sadistic lover Steven Barker, 33, and his brother Jason Owen, 37, were jailed over the horror last May.

Asked about his decision to remove Shoesmith, Mr Balls last night insisted he would do exactly the same again.

Baby P
Victim ... Baby P

His lawyers had argued Shoesmith was "ultimately responsible" for the "shambolic, disturbing state of affairs" in Haringey's children's services department.

Shoesmith said that she was the target of a "witch hunt".

She also claimed there were procedural flaws in the way she was fired.

And she claimed her career was ruined by a "flagrant breach of the rules of natural justice".

Mr Justice Foskett decreed: "I have rejected as too simplistic that the Secretary of State's decision to commission the Ofsted inspection was driven by party politics.

Advertisement

"I have also rejected the suggestion he was improperly influenced in making the decision he did on 1 December 2008 by a petition presented to him a few days previously by a national newspaper."

Ofsted's chief inspector Christine Gilbert said last night: "I am pleased that the judge's conclusion is clear. Ofsted's inspection process has been vindicated."

She added: "Ofsted takes its role in inspecting the protection arrangements for vulnerable children very seriously."

Baby Peter's death in August 2007 appalled the nation. The Sun's petition for the sacking of Shoesmith and other bunglers who betrayed him became the biggest in newspaper history.

Last night Haringey MP Lynne Featherstone renewed her demand for a full-blown public inquiry into what went wrong in Shoesmith's department.

Children's Secretary Ed Balls gives his reaction to the Sharon Shoesmith High Court case verdict during media interviews at the BBC offices, Leeds.
Decision ... Children's Secretary Ed Balls yesterday

The Lib Dem said of the High Court judge ruling against Shoesmith, who still plans an industrial tribunal case: "I'm very pleased.

"She was the accountable person. At some point we have to say, 'The buck stops here'."

As Mr Justice Foskett gave his ruling yesterday he reserved his final words for the little boy whose horrific death was at the heart of the case.

He concluded: "When thinking of those who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, sadly, tragically, but inevitably, one can reach no other conclusion than that was so for Peter."

viv said...

Just how dare this woman continue to bleat there was some witch hunt against her and her career has been ruined? What about the life of Baby Peter?

But is she going to give up or say sorry? Well no, maybe she should pal up with Kate and Gerry McCann.

Well done to Ed Balls and The Judge for making a politically correct decision, if the overpaid Chief Executive, who only has empathy for herself is not responsible then who the heck is!

viv said...

From The Times August 22, 2007

I’m not a suspect in Madeleine’s abduction, says friend of familyPaulo Reis in Praia da Luz and David Brown Recommend? A doctor who was on holiday with Madeleine McCann’s family when she disappeared 111 days ago insisted yesterday that he is not suspected of being involved in her abduction.

Russell O’Brien, 36, was dining with Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry, when their daughter was taken from the bed of a holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

Portuguese newspapers reported yesterday that police were about to arrest a man in Exeter, where Dr O’Brien lives with his wife, Jane Tanner, a key witness in the police investigation.

In a statement, Dr O’Brien and his wife said: “These reports in the Portuguese press are completely untrue and extremely hurtful. We have spoken to the police today, and have been assured that our status as witnesses has not changed.

Related Links
Madeleine police investigate burglar lead
“We would like to request that the privacy of our family and our police testimony are respected by the media. We just hope that the police’s considerable efforts to find Madeleine are successful.”

Portuguese police said yesterday that there was no basis for the allegations about Dr O’Brien, who moved to Exeter from Leicester soon before the holiday in Praia da Luz.

Ms Tanner told Portuguese police that she had seen a man carrying a child away from the McCanns’ apartment about 15 minutes after Mr McCann had checked that Madeleine was asleep.

Mr O’Brien, a father of two, left the tapas restaurant at about the time Madeleine is believed to have been snatched. He told police that he was looking after his young daughter, who was vomiting. The girl is the same age as Madeleine, who disappeared six days before her fourth birthday. Mr and Mrs McCann, both 39, from Rothley, Leicestershire, are understood to be deeply upset about the allegations about their friends and have said they do not believe any of them were involved.

When he and his wife were also the subject of allegations in the Portuguese media earlier in the investigation, Mr McCann said: “It’s incredibly difficult when people are implying that your daughter is dead and that you may have been involved in it.”

viv said...

Meanwhile, Portuguese detectives were still hoping for a breakthrough in the case. The magistrate in charge of the investigation is studying the findings of tests on samples taken from apartments in the Ocean Club resort, where the McCanns were staying, and from various vehicles, which have been analysed by the headquarters of the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham.

The Times revealed last week that the initial test on traces of blood found in the McCann’s apartment had not come from Madeleine. Mr and Mrs McCann have been advised to remain in Portugal after police, who have now concluded that Madeleine is likely to be dead, said they hoped to make a breakthrough.

Inspector Olegário Sousa, of the Polícia Judiciária, said that detectives hoped the samples would help to confirm what had happened on the night Madeleine disappeared. He said it was now believed that more than one person was involved in Madeleine’s disappearance. “It’s natural that in a crime of this nature more than one person took part. This analysis is not based on anything concrete, but rather on logic,” Mr Sousa said. “If it was committed by only one person, it would be even more difficult to resolve the case because he or she is the only person who knows what they did.”

However, Mr Sousa said there was “little hard evidence to work on” and that officers were attempting to reconstruct what had happened “largely on the basis of witness statements”.

The Times revealed on Saturday that the Public Prosecutor’s Office has signed warrants authorising searches at locations that may be linked to Madeleine’s disappearance. Police are also reported to have been reviewing two burglaries that happened shortly before the family arrived at the resort.

Meanwhile, a cinema advertisement urging people to look for Madeleine has been cleared by the advertising watchdog over claims that it scared children. The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the advert did not breach its code of practice, despite 22 complaints, nine of which specifically stated that it had upset children in the audience. Some cinemas refused to screen the advert with Shrek 3 after The Times revealed parents’ concerns.

viv said...

I had actually forgotten quite how much the McCanns have terrified millions of other peoples' children, not just their own.

Quite a desperate move for Russell and Jane to announce in The Times they are not suspects. Interesting David and Fiona Payne have never thought it appropriate to make similar denials. As for respecting their right to privacy, well erm we have read quite a lot of the police files. And what about Madeleine's rights you lot when you were not prepared to go back and re-enact your contradictory lies about "events" that night?

What about you trying to insist that Nanny Amy printed off those old photos that Kate and Gerry just happened to take on holiday with them eh Russell? and what about you trying to pass off Mr Carpenter an innocent holidaymaker carrying his child back from the creche as Madeleine's abductor eh Jane? You reap what you sow.

That is more than enough to make both of you suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine along with others in my book!

viv said...

and as for wanting to present the police with a typed up "group timeline" as your evidence to the police when they wanted to question you further Russell, erm tut, I think you know that is not what the police call "your evidence". That is better described as a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice into what just could not get more serious, the disappearance of an innocent little girl.

viv said...

I see that other posters are now noticing that the McCanns clearly used to dye Madeleine's hair various colours. By the time she arrived in PDL, the blond had just about grown out and her hair was back to what it naturally would be, brown.

Not only do we see Maddie with light blond hair but even red!

Gerry also seems to dye his hair as we all noticed when he arrived at the Select Committee with unnatural looking black hair.

On the age progressed CEOP approved picture of Madeleine she has brown hair.

Take a look at Kate McCann, she has brown eyes and dark eyebrows and tans well. Brown eyed ladies do not have blond hair unless it comes out of a bottle!

Children inherit from their parents. Toddlers and babies sometimes have fair hair but this grows darker from the age of 2-3 years. What Madeleine would inherit from her parents is brown hair, and that is just not so marketable as a cute little blond.

I think the reasons why the McCanns would be dying a child's hair from two years onwards just have to be very sinister. They wanted to "improve" her looks, sometimes even with makeup as we can see.

This has always been about marketing this poor little girl.

viv said...

I see that other posters are now noticing that the McCanns clearly used to dye Madeleine's hair various colours. By the time she arrived in PDL, the blond had just about grown out and her hair was back to what it naturally would be, brown.

Not only do we see Maddie with light blond hair but even red!

Gerry also seems to dye his hair as we all noticed when he arrived at the Select Committee with unnatural looking black hair.

On the age progressed CEOP approved picture of Madeleine she has brown hair.

Take a look at Kate McCann, she has brown eyes and dark eyebrows and tans well. Brown eyed ladies do not have blond hair unless it comes out of a bottle!

Children inherit from their parents. Toddlers and babies sometimes have fair hair but this grows darker from the age of 2-3 years. What Madeleine would inherit from her parents is brown hair, and that is just not so marketable as a cute little blond.

I think the reasons why the McCanns would be dying a child's hair from two years onwards just have to be very sinister. They wanted to "improve" her looks, sometimes even with makeup as we can see.

This has always been about marketing this poor little girl.

viv said...

If you cannot get a comment to appear, copy it from the comments box and the post it again as a further comment, then they both appear!

Don't talk rubbish said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
viv said...

The tennis balls pic is not a faked image of Madeleine as some suggest, it is on the Portuguese Police file. In his rogatory Russell O'Brien refers to it being retrieved from Kate McCanns camera and Alex Woolfall also refers to this in an article in The Times.

Madeleine's hair in the picture at the top of this blog is tinted various shades of red. This is clearly not natural.

In the tennis balls pic below Madeleine's hair is brown, as you would expect it to be coming from two brown haired parents.

There is no record on the Portuguese Police file of the picture Gerry produced on about 23 May following a trip home claiming this was the last picture of Madeleine, I think there is every reason to believe that picture is a fake. Not least because on the Portuguese Police file there are details of UK cops examining Kate's camera and finding the date and time were not and never had been set on it. But this picture purports to show the date and time of 1.29 3/5/07. Madeleine looks considerably younger on this picture and has blond hair, I would say it is an image of her the previous year.

The question is why did Gerry want to put out pictures showing Madeleine with red or blond hair when in reality she had brown hair. I suppose for the same reason the McCanns insisted she is only called Madeleine when family members have frequently confirmed she was actually referred to as Maddie. Perhaps also for the same reason the McCanns never once managed to mention the massive reward on offer for her, they were too afraid of someone stating where she is.

viv said...

You have been reported to your ISP Virgin Media/Telewest:

United Kingdom flagspacer United Kingdom, London
(London, City of)
82.44.83.161 (OBSCENE CHINESE LINK) [ isolate ] [ name ]
Telewest Broadband

viv said...

And this is you also recorded on Feedjit, still think you are clever do you, or just plain sick!
Teddington, Greater London left via dailymail.co.uk from "JUSTICE FOR MADDIE AND THE TWINS: Gerry's "emotional" return to build bridges and look for Madeleine/PARENTS SUE"
02:08:00 -- 1 hour 16 mins ago
[United Kingdom]
Teddington, Greater London left via joana-morais.blogspot.com from "JUSTICE FOR MADDIE AND THE TWINS: April 2010"
02:07:39 -- 1 hour 17 mins ago
[United Kingdom]
Teddington, Greater London arrived from google.co.uk on "JUSTICE FOR MADDIE AND THE TWINS" by searching for vivs blog and madeleine.
02:06:02 -- 1 hour 18 mins ago

Don't talk rubbish said...

Why delete my post, Viv ?

Because it proves you are trying to pull the wool over people's eyes about hair colour and inheritance, perhaps?

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-10/972070002.Ge.r.html

Even you can't argue with science, Viv.

There is nothing to suggest that Madeleine's hair was dyed. It looks a different colour in different photos ? So does mine, so does yours.

viv said...

Your posts can stay if you refrain from being offensive, the above is not quite as bad as usual.

Madeleine's hair is a completely different colour in many of the photographs we have been allowed to see and what is more you can see the colour growing out with dark roots, just the same as you can with Kate McCann.

I repeat the perfectly tinted red hair with various highlights of Madeleine at the top of this blog does not come naturally. I am just one of what are clearly a very large number of people who query why on earth parents would subject a two year old to this, including a perfect makeup job on occasions.

THENTHEREWERE4 said...

"45 minutes later Martin Smith sees the same abductor carrying Madeleine but does not realise he has till he has a flashback 3 weeks later. And then 4 months later, he has another flashback and realises it was Gerry McCann".

I have watched the way in which Gerry McCann carries Sean down the plane steps time and time again. I have to say I see there to be nothing at all remarkable or particular about Gerry's carrying of Sean.

The way in which Gerry McCann carries Sean is only remarkable in that there is absolutely nothing remarkable at all about this series of images.

Unlike Tanner's described version of carrying, Gerry's version is normal beyond definition.

This does not strike me as evidence for anything at all.

If this is evidence then it is only evidence of interference and obfuscation on the part of Smith and his entire family

viv said...

Hi TTW4 and what a nice suprise to see you on hear!

I think Martin Smith suddenly deciding, four months later, when he apparently sees Gerry carrying Sean that this was the man he supposedly saw is quite farcical really.

It is easy to see that the police themselves found it that way given the inquiries they were making.

There are things that mark out a McCanned witness and this chap has all the hallmarks. An amazing recall of memory, a long time after the event, visits from Brian Kennedy, disbelief by the police.

I do not find the way in which Tanner saw a man, which I believe is actually the truth an unusual way to carry a sleeping relatively small child and I think that was quite obviously Mr Carpenter, hence her initially stating the child was covered in a blanket, as it was, and then changing her mind and saying it was not. Of course, if the child had been covered by a blanket she would not have been able to describe the pyjamas, details of which Fiona Payne avidly gave to her. Then Jane thinks oh right then that was Maddie, oh really!

Martin Brunt knows what he is talking about and prior to British Police taking over this case and telling the British press to close it, was disclosing some amazing details. He categorically states Gerry's tennis bag is missing, and he categorically tells bloggers they have got this seriously wrong, he will turn out to be right about that.

I do not believe for one minute Maddie disappeared whilst being "neglected" that is what all of this is to cover up, including the Smith sighting. She disappeared about 7 pm and a check of what we have been allowed to see will confirm that is what the police think. I would say in that missing bag and quite possibly drugged, as were her siblings, but still alive.

viv said...

Speaking of carrying across the arms, admittedly in my younger days I was incredibly slim, but even as an adult I can recall being carried in that way on at least three occasions.
When having my first son and being in agony with my back. My ex husband carried me to bed, fortunately we lived in a flat at the time!

I collapsed drunk at my 40th birthday party and my current man carried me to bed in that way from my childrens' room where I had been sharing a hilarious joke with them prior to said collapse.

When I was about 30 I was sat near the front watching a horror show, when all of a sudden this bloke rushed off the stage, gathered me up in that way and went and placed me into the coffin on the stage, getting fake blood on my lovely outfit which miffed me a bit but it was funny!

So I really cannot understand why people suggest that mode of carrying is only for the dead, I am still here, many years later, but alas no one is offering to pick me up and carry me now, they may get a hernia!

viv said...

copy post I have just made on TTW4 blog:

Hi TTQ4

I think I am right in saying (I will check) that when the cleaner came in on the Tuesday morning Kate and Gerry had taken the children to creche and were in the apartment. She found the bed under the window messy but not Madeleine's bed. She also found a cot in the McCanns' bedroom.

This was therefore the morning after the night that Mrs Fenn heard Maddie crying for one hour and fifteen minutes and it clearly implies that either Kate or Maddie slept in the bed under the window that night also. Assuming it was Kate, maybe she was with Madeleine because something had happened to her. But where was Madeleine when she has been crying out Daddy Daddy, was she in the cot in their bedroom?

I think therefore you are suggesting the wrong night for when the serious disharmony really started.

I would also point out that what you state about the forensic tests on apparent semen being found on the cover of this bed are wrong. It was actually tested in UK and was a poor match for semen, then it was tested in Portugal for saliva and found to be a proper match. There was no loss of samples and it was not semen. On this occasion the Portuguese lab clearly performed better than the British one.

viv said...

But I am afraid I do understand why the British were testing samples for semen, the same reason CEOP were immediately involved in this case.

Whatever semen samples they have found they will not be telling us about them!

viv said...

Actually Bonnybraes & co, the reason I delete your posts is because you are a bullying stalking thug who could not care less about little Maddie. All you care about is sitting in that hellhole you call a blog writing the most foul abuse about people including me.

You are probably linked to perverted filth being sent to this blog because you are very perverted and so if you come here again or anyone else I recognise from your filthy little corner of cyberspace you will be deleted. No matter how many times you arrive and this is the last comment you get from me.

JUSTICE FOR LITTLE MADDIE AND ALL ABUSED CHILDREN WHETHER SHE IS DEAD OR ALIVE

viv said...

In his statement to police on 10 May, sly Gerry sets out how Maddie had supposedly been crying on the Wed (we know it was actually the Tue when Russell was missing), he then points out David Payne did a check that night, he thinks! Say you had a couple of mates who are paedophiles and you are one yourself, and you know that the police already have some information about one of them? You wanted to make sure that if there was going to be suspicion on the three of you it fell where the police already knew about that person, rather than yourself! Just my thoughts, of course! But this is what Gerry actually says, later, as you point out we are told he 100 per cent trusts these mates, odd really given what he does say here and the very close relationship to Maddie crying and David Payne checking when he is saying it. It seems to me that at this point in the interview of 10 May, where they had hauled Gerry back in for re questioning they are asking him some very touchy questions about sleeping arrangements/who has Maddie been sleeping with. If, Kate and Gerry were sleeping the same bed on the Mon or Tues why would he say Maddie just slept with Kate, why is he avoiding accepting that she also slept with him by clear implication:



On the day that MADELEINE disappeared, Thursday, 3 May 2007, they all woke up at the same time, between 07H30 and 08H00. When they were having breakfast, MADELEINE addressed her mother and asked her “why didn't you come last night when SEAN and I were crying?” (SIC). That he thought this comment very strange given that MADELEINE had never spoken like this and, the night before, they had maintained the same system of checking on the children, not having detected anything abnormal. When he questioned her about the comment, she left without any explanation.


On Wednesday night, 2 May 2007, apart from the deponent and his wife, he thinks that DAVID PAYNE also went to his apartment to check that his children were well, not having reported to him any abnormal situation with the children. On this day, the deponent and KATE had already left the back door closed, but not locked, to allow entrance by their group colleagues to check on the children. He clarifies that the main door was always closed but not necessarily locked with the key. He does not know if the window next to the front door, and that gave access to the children's bedroom, was locked, given that he assumed that the shutters could not be opened from the outside. Still on this night, KATE slept in the children's bedroom, in the bed next to the window, because the deponent was snoring.


He cannot say exactly, but he thinks that on Monday or Tuesday MADELEINE had slept for some time in his bedroom, with KATE, as she had told him that one or both twins were crying, making much noise.

Wizard said...

Good Morning,

I was just listening to the breakfast news on TV about the Blair Peach case. It is alleged one of the police officers struck the fatal blow to Mr Peach but other officers covered for him. The Prosecutor’s office say unless new evidence emerges i.e. “a confession” no officer will face charges.

Hmm…by deleting police officer/s in the above and inserting doctors there is a similarity in professional support amongst individuals in certain professions when a tragedy occurs. I suspect this misguided solidarity is what we have in the MBM case.

Yesterday I was reading The Sun article about Leicestershire police’s £22K expenses for flying back and forth to Portugal. I just love the spin on this – we were told that Leicestershire Police were in Portugal to support the McCanns hmm….and there was me thinking they were highly suspicious of them and suggesting to the pj that the dogs be brought in.

viv said...

Hello Wiz

You make a very good point there, there is this unwritten code among many professionals within the same profession that they will stick together and protect each other. Whether that conduct comes from police officers, doctors or solicitors it is always utterly abhorrent and dishonest.

The facts of the Blair Peach case and the police coverup are simply heartbreaking and it is a good analogy you make to the Maddie case where those doctors considered to be the key to solving the Maddie case have been so utterly obstructive towards the police. And that would be even more so the case, if there was any chance of little Maddie still being alive as they have sought to insist. But for their conduct they must live with the fact they are forever blighted in the eyes of the public, the McCanns created the interest and the media circus and we remain interested and blogging as we continue to hope that Maddie gets the justice she deserves.

I agree the spin being put on police officers expenses in relation to pursuit of the McCanns and their co-conspirators who went abroad to commit the most foul deed is quite pathetic.

viv said...

And there was me thinking our top criminal profiler, Lee Rainbow, in relation to sex crimes and murder thought Gerry McCann should be classed as a "prime suspect".

Oh hang on a minute Wiz, he did!

That is the thing isn't it, they try to tell us Brit cops are covering up for them, is that why they brought the dogs over then!!

They try to tell us CEOP are their "friends", well I have seen quite a few who were subsequently convicted sitting making "appeals" at the behest of those investigating them as prime suspects!! One of CEOP's main responsibilities is to investigate sex crimes against children committed by Brits abroad, so cut the rubbish Gerry. We know why UK sent all that top brass straight out!

viv said...

Some of the comments on certain places just make me spit they are so sick and stupid. Gerry apparently came back to UK, with Madeleine's decomposing body, dug up the foundations of his house and buried it, then rebuilt the foundations. Of course he is an expert builder too and the neighbours and the police were none the wiser. Words f ing well fail me ! I would be surprised if some of these posters are not detained under a mental health section..

Anonymous said... 31

Can I make a suggestion to Leicestershire Police - Dig up the foundations of Kate and Gerry's house in Rothley - I think you will be surprised at what you may find, and you may even redeem yourselves in this saga. IMO Gerry brought Maddie back to the UK in the early days, sorry to sound morbid, but he's cold and calculating and capable of doing just that!

Di said...

Hi all

Viv

Kate's mobile was picked up as being in the apartment on the night Madeleine was heard crying by Mrs Fenn, do you know if this has been verified? I have always said and I repeat again I do not believe Mrs Fenn heard anyone returning that night I believe someone was leaving.

With regards to Gerry saying he trusted his friends 100%. We now know, from their statements, some of the tapas did not know Kate & Gerry as well as Fiona & David did. Therefore, why did Gerry not want the others checked out completely, I know I would have insisted they were all thoroughly investigated whether good friends or not.

Yes, Gerry is certainly keeping his options open regarding David Payne and if the going gets tough I can imagine at least two people taking the fall, but not Gerry, or so he thinks.

hope4truth said...

Hello Di

I have wondered about the trusting all the friends thing as well.... We go on holiday with groups of people and some are friends of friends and we all get on really well. Some I have known most of my life others more recently and some not until the holiday starts as they are closer to others.....

Maybe Gerry does not trust them all but cant risk having any of them checked out????

As for the nutters and odd theories of where he hid the body I think half of them are pros just trying to keep the line going we must be mental to keep posting and we all want her to be dead blah blah blah as Kate would say....

One odd theory I cant help wondering about is if they ever took the real Maddie on holiday with them????

A borrowed child to cover an accident at home???

Crazy I know but the whole damn thing is crazy and when the truth does out I dont think the world will ever be the same again when a child goes missing and that is unforgivable because every child is special....

Di said...

Hello Hope

I know exactly what you mean, Madeleine tripping up the steps of the plane, was it the plane to Portugal or was it the plane going to Ireland Then again we only had a rear veiw of Madeleine so do we realy know it was her?

Or do we go back to a hoax, as many people are now starting to believe.

There was someone on 3A's who said we were all being taken for a ride and WAKE UP. I cannot remember who the poster was, can anyone else?

Viv

I don't believe Madeleine's hair was dyed, I also don't believe she had makeup on in any of the photos. I honestly think said photos were enhanced to make one believe that was the case.

viv said...

Hiya Di and Hope and good to see you both back!

Di, I know there are posters who have really studied the mobile phone records and state that Kate's phone was located in the apt at that time. But that does not mean she was actually in there with her phone. I find it incredibly unlikely that she could possibly have been in there with Maddie crying so pitifully for such a long time.

I absolutely agree with you then what Mrs Fenn presumed was the parents returning when she heard the patio door at about 11.30 was actually someone leaving and that is why little Maddie stopped crying. But I remember a particularly sick image of Kate, her expressions were just quite bizarre when she queried so could someone have been in there, attempting to do as they usually do, move it forward a night to the Wednesday. Whatever was happening to Maddie that night I have absolutely no doubt, Kate knows all about that.

I agree with you both, in normal circumstances you just simply would not say you trust your friends 100 % or even think it, you would be paranoid, thinking quite the opposite, e.g. well Jane and Russell were up and down away from the table did they do it? That is another clear expression of guilty knowledge IMO. This pact between them all, they all profess each other's innocence. Rubbish, why would they need to start codging together "group timelines" before the police had even arrived. Should they not have been searching desperately for little Maddie? Well, no, because they knew she was long gone and that was a waste of time.

When you look at police interest and comments you can see they focus a lot on who was searching for Madeleine and who was not. It is important, because if a child really had been left with the door open like that you would be quite frantic to find her, before she met some terrible fate. But there was no anxiety to do that, to rush out and hire a car etc like normal parents would have done.

viv said...

Hiya Di

Well that is an interesting theory, the photos were enhanced to make it look like she had been madeup etc, but why on earth would they do that?

viv said...

I still believe the most reliable guide we have who could speak out because he was required to do so in court, is Mr Menezes the Pt Prosecutor. This is a man who has been on the case from the Portuguese end, end to end, he knows all of the evidence and he has the expertise to properly assess it and see where it leads him.

He says there is a 50:50 chance of Maddie being dead or alive, and he says McCanns could have been charged with kidnapping and trafficking Madeleine. Ricardo Paiva also said that Goncalo was preventing other theories from being explored.

What clearly is a load of useless spin is doggy death theories. The dogs simply did not find any evidence whatsoever that Madeleine had died in that apartment.

Di said...

Hi Viv

I think Madeleine was made to look as cute and marketable as possible that's all. However I think the people who were marketing the photos were very clever, very clever indeed.

Di said...

I say again, if only our Ambassador had not intervened and had allowed Kate to be questioned and had not stopped the questions when Kate became flustered! I am sure we would have seen an end to this case and justice for Madeleine there and then.

The Ambassador was then removed, all the staff from PDL were either removed or transferred, why?


What about the priest? Removed WHY?

viv said...

Hiya Di,

I do agree the red dress pic/red tinted hair is the McCanns favourite for marketing purposes.

But I can see nothing cute and marketable in that posed picture of Madeleine lying on the floor with the cameraman looking down her top and her hair carefully draped on her shoulder. I think it is just 100 per cent sick.

I do not think the McCanns realised just how badly so many people would view all these varying and bizarre images of Madeleine with multiple shades of hair etc and I still cannot understand what you mean, with roots growing out on some of them?

viv said...

Unless of course you mean they are deliberately appealing to a certain type of person, sometimes the mind just boggles at the McCann mentality.

viv said...

Hiya Di, It is a suspect's right to refuse to answer questions, I am not sure what that has to do with the Ambassador, but Gerry was certainly wanted to throw his weight around from the first moments demanding he turn up, I can just imagine him on the phone!

The law basically provides (and it is human rights law applicable in both UK and Portugal) it is up to the prosecution to gain the evidence, not the suspect to provide it. The development of the law does go back to the Star Chamber etc, effectively to stop people from falsely confessing to crimes they did not commit whilst under torture. Maybe it has gone too far, but in UK, that refusal to answer police questions or evidence put to the suspect etc can be used against that person at trial. Not so, in Portugal, still far more lenient still. There is a lot of evidence in this case that could be used against them in a UK trial and that is definitely where it will happen. Bugging is always admissible in serious cases, providing the relevant authority to bug was obtained, and no problem for UK security services etc getting that!

viv said...

I think the most likely reason for their removal was that they had become involved in a highly confidential and very distressing case, for them.

viv said...

I think the most likely reason for their removal was that they had become involved in a highly confidential and very distressing case, for them.