12 Jun 2011


This information belongs to the Ministério Público in Portimão, Portugal.
It was released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law
Procedural Rights and Duties Defendant/ "Arguido"G McCann
2565 to 2566 - Constitution of Arguido for Gerald McCann with rights in English and Portuguese
10 Processos Vol X Pages 2565 2566
Constitution of Arguido for Gerald McCann with rights (in English and Portuguese)
10_VOLUME_Xa_Page_2566  (in English and Portuguese)
2567 to 2568 Statement of identity and residence for Gerald McCann
2569 to 2578 Interrogation of Gerald McCann 2007.09.07 with written timeline on Sainsbury's sticker book.
2579 Support page with written (Gerry?) timeline and cover of sticker book
2580 Opening of appendix I
Processo 10 pages 2567 to 2580
(from DVD)

September 7/2007 16.05 to 20.50  at Portimao

When asked if he wished to reply to the facts which he is being imputed with, he replied:

He is of British nationality, he cannot speak or write Portuguese; therefore an interpreter is present taken from a list provided by the Consulate: ADSR.
Also present Carlos Pinto de Abreu, attorney.

He is present in his capacity as an arguido, and the rights and duties thereof have been explained to him; he is obliged to comply with TIR (Terms of Identity and Residence).

He confirms all of what was stated previously to the Police on two occasions, and has nothing further to add.

After being made aware of the facts attributable to him, he says that he wishes to make a statement.

When asked if he had any responsibility or participation in the disappearance of his daughter Madeleine, he peremptorily denies this.

When asked if on the night of May 1, 2007 he went to have dinner at the Tapas with Kate, he says yes. As customary they would come and check on the children every half hour, usually alternating. They arrived at the Tapas around 20:30, and then went to the apartment every half hour, until they arrived back, at around 23:00, plus or minus 10 minutes. Occasionally one of the others in the group made the check, he does not remember if this happened on the 1st. It is not true that Madeleine had been crying that night for an hour and 15 minutes, because she was not alone all that time.

When questioned, he said that on the day they arrived, April 28, they removed two cribs that were in their room, and placed them in Madeleine's room. He is unable to confirm, but it could be possible, that there were 3 cribs, and they asked them to remove one.

It is not true that on a certain day they placed one crib in their room, leaving the other in Madeleine's room.

He did not remember what days were scheduled for cleaning the apartment.

He now states that he also joined the two single beds in his room, which had been separated by a night table. He transformed the two beds into a double bed.
Regarding the windows, he says they were normally closed, he does not know if they were locked *** blinds also closed. Regarding Madeleine's window he says that he made sure the blinds worked so as to darken the room for the children.

--- On the day of arrival, he does not know if the blinds in Madeleine's room were open or closed. He did not open them again, and does not know if somebody else did. When confronted with a testimony that states having seen the blinds on this window open after their arrival, he says that it was not him who opened them. When asked about the window behind one of the sofas in the living room, he says that yes, he remembers the window but does not remember if the blinds were also closed.
--- Regarding this sofa, he remembers it was next to the window. He is not sure, but thinks that this sofa was probably a bit closer as his children threw objects behind it, mainly playing cards. When asked, he does not know if any of the children was behind the sofa or passed behind this sofa.
--- When asked, he says that on one night, he cannot say which, Madeleine slept in his room in his bed. He thinks it might have been shortly after their arrival at the apartment. Madeleine came to his room saying that Amelie was crying and she couldn't sleep. He thinks that he hadn't heard crying before, and was alerted to this by Madeleine. He does not know if he or his wife comforted Amelie. That night Madeleine slept in his bed.
--- With respect to his wife, he says that on the Wednesday she slept in the children's room in the bed next to the window. He doesn't know why, but thinks it could have been because of his snoring. Also on that day, and after dinner, he returned to the apartment sooner than Kate.
-- Regarding the episode where he spoke to David on the 3rd of May, he says that he was playing tennis at 18:30 when David appeared near the tennis court and asked him if he was going to continue playing. G. said he didn't know because Kate might be needing help to look after the three children, because they intended to bring them to the recreation area after their showers. He thinks that David offered to check if Kate needed help, which he did, and returned minutes later. Regarding his previous statement where he states that David returned half an hour later around 19:00, he says that he returned to the tennis court after half an hour, as this time frame refers to the second time he returned to the tennis court after getting ready for the game.

-- When questioned, he says that Madeleine usually sleeps well at night. During the first months of her life she had some difficulties sleeping due to feeding problems. After moving to their house in Rothley in April 2006, twice a week Madeleine wakened, left her bed and went into their roomthis sometimes happened between 23:00 ' 24:00 for no apparent reason, maybe because she was used to sleeping with (*** blank ****).

--- When asked about a chart highlighting the characteristics of the children at the house in Rothley, he says that he does in fact have such an object, where several stars show the nights when Madeleine did not get up, as she was rewarded this way.
--- When questioned if it was therefore safe to leave Madeleine in the apartment if she woke and got up at night, he says that this rarely happened, and then only after her parents were in bed.
--- When questioned about whether the couple's and the childrens' lives were peaceful, namely regarding the work that three children can give a couple as well as the stress this can cause, he replies that in fact since the birth of the twins their life has been very busy, and that especially during the twins' first year life was difficult. He states that since the twins were born, he and Kate have gone out at night only once, leaving the children with relatives. He adds that in spite of this he never saw Kate depressed as a result of too much work. He denies that Kate had changed her work habits for reasons related to depressions. He affirms that his wife never gave him to understand that at some time she had the intention of giving Madeleine into the care of a family member.

When questioned, he says that he works at the Emergency Room of the hospital where he works every 15 days, however he is not usually called out at night, and if this happens then it is once for 4 days prevention. Kate's specialty is general medicine, and works two days a week. After the birth of the twins, Kate did not work for a year, on maternity leave, and currently works part-time as above.
--- When questioned, he states that none of his children takes any kind of medication regularly in England.
--- When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen,for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losecfor gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever. He did not give any of these medicines or any others to the children while on holiday in Portugal.
---- When asked about the time he went to check the children on the night of Madeleine's disappearance, he states remembering that he did it, according to his watch, around 21:04. He remembers that once inside the apartment he thought strange only the fact of the door to the children's room being slightly more open than how the defendant had left it when he and Kate left for dinner. However, he puts the hypothesis of 
[proposes; suggests] it having been Madeleine opening that door after having woken and having got up, possibly to go to her parents' room. On this occasion the three children were lying in their beds and asleep, he is sure of that. Moreover, he says that with respect to Madeleine she was in the same position in which he had left her at the beginning of the night. Madeleine was lying down on her left side, she was completely uncovered, that is, lying on top of the covers, with the soft toy and the blanket, both pink, next to her head, not knowing if they were placed in the position in which one can see them in the photograph attached to the files.
--- The second person to go and check on the children should have been Kate, but Matt offered to go as he was going to check on his own daughter. When Matt returned to the restaurant G. asked him if all was well; Matt replied that all was quiet. G. is not absolutely sure, but he is under the impression that he asked Matt if he entered their apartment, to which Matt replied yes.
--- The third check was made by Kate at around 22:00. He does not know how long it was before Kate returned, but he does remember that shortly before she returned he was thinking of going to see what was going on, as it seemed a long time and he thought that one of children might have woken up.
--- He does not remember if he had taken his mobile phone to the restaurant. He is under the impression that he did not take anything with him, except maybe his wallet. He was wearing tennis shoes (trainers), blue jeans and a light brown polar top. He does not remember what Kate was wearing that night. The arguido did not take a camera and does not remember if Kate did. He does not remember if anybody in the group took photographs that night.
--- He remembers that after it was known that Madeleine had disappeared he looked for her all over the apartment. He particularly remembers having looked under all the beds, inside the wardrobes in all the rooms at the same time that Kate told him she had looked everywhere.
--- He remembers that at one time the lady who lived in the apartment above theirs, went onto her veranda and asked what was going on. He does not remember specifically who replied to this lady, but he remembers that somebody spoke to her, assuming it was himself who did so.

When questioned, he states that from the first moment, after the first fruitless searches, he thought that Madeleine had been abducted and it was this information that he gave to everyone to whom he spoke. He reached such a conclusion because he did not think it possible that she had gone out on her own or opened the blinds and window in the room.

--- When questioned, he says that on that night he made several phone calls, including calls to two sisters, a couple of Kate's uncles, his brother or certainly sent him a message, father P. S. who baptized Madeleine and married G. and K. When questioned he says he did not get in touch with any media and does not know if anyone did. In the morning his family did contact the press. G. spoke of contacting the press, however he never did so.
--- When questioned he says that he did not request a priest, but to Kate to seek spiritual help.
--- Regarding the disclosure of Madeleine's photograph, he says that he gave the authorities a photograph from a digital camera, and he thinks it was Russell who printed it at the main 24-hour reception of the complex. He made the delivery thereof, or of these pictures on A4 paper to the Police, and he is sure he never delivered any of these photographs to GNR.
--- Around 19:00 the interview was stopped for a rest period, to be recommenced at around 19:40.
--- When questioned if the twins woke while the apartment was being searched, he replies negatively. When they were taken to another apartment he does not know if they woke as he did not take them. When asked, he says that this was not normal, and can find no reason for it happening. He still thought at this moment that the twins might have been drugged by the possible abductor, even if he only mentioned this to the Police several days later. When questioned, he says he never gave his children anything to help them sleep, nor did Kate. When asked why he did not ask the twins what happened to their sister, he says that when the events took place they still did not speak fluently, which is now a normal developmental difficulty. At this point he did not ask them because he thought that they would not have the correct perception of what had happened, in addition to thinking that they would have been sleeping.
--- When asked why instead of scouring the land next to the complex they did not look inside the apartment, he replies that it did not happen that way. While the guests and employees of the resort were searching, he went to the main Reception to check whether they had called the Police, and told Kate to wait inside the apartment. After going to the Reception he went back to the apartment where he stayed in the living room and in their bedroom.
--- When asked if he had life insurance, he says that he does, and so does Kate. The children do not have any life insurance, nor are their parents, Gerry and Kate the beneficiaries of any insurance regarding the children.
--- When asked about the contents of the wardrobe in his room that can be seen in the photographs, he says that on top is a suitcase and below a pile of dirty clothes that he cannot make out. This wardrobe was opened to look for Madeleine.
--- When asked if in fact they went to the apartment every half hour, he says it is true, and that this was never created to justify absences during dinner.
--- When asked what the expression 'we let her down' means, he says that it has to do with the fact that they were not present when Madeleine was abducted. It was Kate who first used this expression.

During this interview several films of a forensic nature showing sniffer dogs were shown where their signalling can be seen regarding indication of cadaver odour and traces of blood also human, and only of a human nature, as well as the comments made by the expert in charge of the procedure.
-- After viewing the films and after the signalling of cadaver odour in their room next to the wardrobe and behind the sofa against the window in the living room, he says that he has no comments, neither has he any explanation for this fact.
--- Also, the dog that detects human blood signalled human blood behind the sofa mentioned above, he says that he cannot explain this fact.
-- Regarding the cadaver odour in the car that was rented at the end of May, (xx)-DA-27, he says he cannot explain more than what he already has.
--- Regarding the presence of human blood in the boot of the same vehicle, he says that he has not explanation for this fact.
-- When confronted with the fact that Madeleine's DNA was collected from behind the sofa and in the boot of the vehicle and analyzed by a British laboratory, situations also described before, he says that he cannot explain.
--- When asked if on any occasion Madeleine was injured, he says that he has no comments.
-- When questioned, he says he is the usual driver of the car. In addition to G. the car could also be driven by his wife Kate, sister in law Sandy and a cousin of Kate's by the name Michael.
-- When asked if he has anything to add he says that he has not seen any proof that his daughter Madeleine is dead, and therefore he will continue to search for her in the hopes she is alive. He knows nothing more than what has been said.
-- The lawyer for the defence says he wishes the arguido to be asked again if Madeleine bled. To which he said it was common for Madeleine to have nosebleeds. He says that he doesn't know if in fact his daughter bled while on holiday in Portugal because he does not want to be influenced by the news in the Press, regarding the detection of human blood in the apartment where his daughter disappeared.
-- During this interview the arguido was informed of his duty to respect the secrecy of justice as well as the consequences of not complying with same, stipulated in current law.
--- At around 22:50 the present interview was ended.
--- He says nothing further. After reading the document and finding it to be satisfactory, he confirms and signs it.
Processos Vol X
Page 2577

Policia Judiciaria

Terms of Joining

On this date, due to being considered of interest to the investigation, joined to the files are two cover sheets of a children’s book, with handwritten notes on the inside covers, which were provided to this police force on the night of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann by one of those who feature in the case files and a member of the McCann couple group of friends, named Russell O’Brien.

The present terms of joining was drawn up and will be signed.

Portimão, 9th September 2007.


Inspector Ricardo Paiva


viv said...

A heart specialist takes abroad with them an antihistamine that had been banned in UK since 2005 and causes dangerous heart irregularity (arrhythmia) - terfenadine.

He says Maddie got in their bed twice a week but then he denies they should not have left her because this "rarely happened"?

He denies that Kate altered her work due to depression and denies that she was thinking of handing Maddie over to a relative.

If you were a mom of three young children and you felt the eldest one was just not safe in your home, might you think this was one way of protecting her from harm?

Why does Gerry admit that Maddie slept with him? For fear of them saying well we know that she did, forensics say so.

Why does he deny that a cot was placed in their room and who was it for?

There is no much in this arguido interview of Gerry McCann that should cause the reader grave concern about him..

Why does he choose to say "no comment" when he is asked if Maddie had been injured? Because he knew that she had been?

What do the Portuguese Police mean when they talk about the 30 minute checks being forged to cover absences from the table? I get their clear implication, poor little Madeleine.

viv said...

Could it be that Russell O'Brien is actually innocent in the disappearance of Madeleine and handed the two timelines written out by Gerry on Maddie's torn up book to the Portuguese Police as they represented incriminating evidence against him?

How could he have been so certain that Maddie was abducted when he says the door was left open? Why was he even spending time phoning Kate's uncles rather than out looking for his little girl? What would you have done in those circumstances where you had apparently wilfully neglected her with the door open and then she was gone? A little girl who keeps getting up? A fully mobile four year old. I think the answer is obvious. YOu would have thought oh my god, the road works, the pool, the sea, my poor baby...run.

viv said...

We can read his responses above and we can read how the McCanns and their McCann friendly media like the News of the World in the last thread, want to tell us the Portuguese Police left gaping holes in their investigation and they are incompetent.

I think they were asking all the right questions and it makes Gerry sound like something very much worse than a highly incompetent parent who left gaping holes (he claims) in the security for his own children. Of course, had he not done so, Maddie could not have been "abducted".

This is an abduction he arranged, I have no doubt about that.

Wizard said...

Hi Viv,

It was interesting reading about antihistamines. I suffer from hayfeaver and take Acrivastine; trade name Benadryl that can be bought across the counter. This is very effective for the condition but despite saying on the packaging it does not cause drowsiness – it does. It is not suitable for children under 12 years of age. I remember reading on an American website a man who had difficulty sleeping saying, referring to Benadryl, ‘I take two of those babies before going to sleep and I sleep all night.’ I have to say I have tried this and yes – it is an effective sleeping aid. Makes you think.

Di said...

Hi Viv & Wizard


You would have thought oh my god, the road works, the pool, the sea, my poor baby...run.

Exactly Viv.

You would be screaming Madeleine's name, searching high and low. However, we know the only person who heard Madeleine's name being shouted was, iirc, the Carpenters at 9.30pm. Why did nobody shout Madeleine's name after Kate raised the alarm?

I cannot understand anyone in their right mind leaving three small children alone in the situation they did. We have the balcony, with a drop, although I believe Kate says in her book it was on the ground floor, hmmm. Then we have the steep steps, and the pool, but it was like being in their back garden.

Sadly, the majority of people who read Kate's book will be fooled unless they decide to search the internet.

Di said...

Hi Wizard

I can agree with you regarding Benadryl, my Daughter has tried it for her hayfever and it causes her drousiness.

I know of two people who suffer from sleepless nights. They both take nightnurse and swear by it, and sleep soundly. It just shows there are certain meds that perhaps should not be available over the counter.

viv said...

Hiya both

If terfenedine actually does cause drowsiness and he knows (and he would know this far better than any ordinary person) it can also affect the central nervous system, and he knows that effect would be far more dangerous in a little child, hence it is not to be used upon them...

I just cannot understand why he would take such a dangerous and banned drug with him, other than perhaps it knows of its potentially fatal effects and perhaps this could have been explained as another of his little accidents, like apparently leaving both the back and the front doors unlocked.

When he started to say, in his 10 May interview, well I do not think I locked the front door either, as I was wrong when I said we went out that way, we did not, we went out the rear as Kate says....I would just like to hit that vile man.

Di, is your implication that Kate did a check on Madeleine around 9.30 and could not find her, the Carpenters heard her calling Madeleine. It is clearly possible that he, being the domineering so and so that he clearly is, insisted on the rear patio door being left open like that and Kate was worried about it. She was worried about how long he disappeared from the table and went to see if Maddie was OK and found she was gone. That would put Russell right back in there. I have to say, reading his rogatory, he sounds a very guilty and angry man. Also one who went into a very lengthy and furious tirade in relation to a simple question from Leicester Police, will you attend Portugal for a reconstruction. Any normal doctor, concerned about little Maddie would have simply said, well yes of course I will, but this lot were seeking their lawyers' advice. The fear of self incrimination was clearly far more important to them.

They worked hand in hand with the McCanns, attending the hotel meeting in November 2007 to get their lines well rehearsed. They were even demanding private flights and 5 star hotels, any ruse they could think of to make sure they did not have to go.

Russell says he would not wish to face a media circus. Well he had no trouble going back to Portugal along with Rachel and Fiona to face the media and Robert Murat did he. Really, the proximity of where he lives to where Robert lived in Exeter is just too much of a coincidence for me. But it is also very odd that Robert was lending them a car, wanted to hire a car in a hurry, in spite having two vehicles and never says a word about this case. Who was Gerry exchanging all those calls and texts with and why did Robert coming rushing back from UK on 1 May.

I still find it very possible he is involved. He mirrored their behaviour in so many way, including getting a huge libel payout.

I still have this feeling that Kate genuinely does think there is just a chance she may get Maddie back. Additionally I do not accept that CEOP are bent and they issued that viral video in conjunction with the McCanns seeking her. Of course the police do some very strange things with suspects and Gerry is clearly a very difficult nut to crack.

Kate's recent immediate tears when the twins were mentioned, she knows she stands to lose them also now. Quite why she continued to do as she was told and get herself into even deeper trouble only she can explain.

viv said...

I also still tend to think that good as the McCanns are at bluffing and extracting cash, they would not have sued Goncalo if his story was actually correct. I simply do not believe Madeleine just died an accidental death in the apartment that night and Gerry promptly carted her off for all to see, it is beyond absurd. This man is clever.

He flatly denies handing those pictures to the GNR guards, but I am sure he did. He talks only of A4 photos but it is very clear the police had those postcard type pictures from him. There are times when all a criminal can do is deny and say well it is their word against mine. I see no reason why police officers would invent such a story or the Portuguese lady who was helping out either, that again is absurd. IMO, the photos are a very major part of the police case against Gerry McScam. He planned to go there and get rid of Madeleine. He was not going to allow her to go to school.

viv said...

There is a piece on MM saying Arthur Cowley has left the McCann Team due to ill health.

Well, I thought he left a long time ago because the last we heard of him, he was sent to Spain and according to the Daily Mail made no inquiries whatsoever to trace the Poshalike. Silly man!

He is quote as saying he made a promise to Kate never to speak, in spite, apparently, being offered a fortune from the media to speak of his erm work.

I am not sure if this can be taken seriously but these detective(s) seem to work for Kate, everything really seems to be run by Kate. Is she really looking for Maddie? I am just wondering why she does not give Gerry some terfenedine in his dinner and then when he is all whoozy, ask him what he did with her, that would save the Fund pots of cash.

It has been one heck of a long time since we hear from either of them. I wonder if Kate explains in her book what Eddie gets up to these days. Or did London Met retire him again? That would be a good idea...

viv said...

Come to that, does Clarence just work for Kate as well, really?

Not sure about that, he seems very pally with Sir Gerry OBE, Mason, apparently.

I am enthralled to read the whole of London Met as well as all the Labour men and all the Conservative men and all the SOCA men and all the Leicester Police men and of course CEOP men are Masons and they all worship at the feet of Sir Gerry and Lady Kate.

Only certain nutters could make this stuff up, Knutsford!

I will give you just one good reason why it is time I took a safe, non banned, sedative/antihistamine. Shall I ring Sir Gerry and see what he recommends for me?

Maybe not. xx

viv said...

The PJ obviously think the men were saying they made checks on the children to excuse "absences".

Kate is making much of this brown stain on Maddie's pyjamas. Is she going to finish up saying well it was Gerry or one of the other TAPAS men who was giving that to Madeleine.

If Kate was worried in the first place, "what will my parents think", I wonder how worried she isnow because I bet Kate's mom had everything figured out a long time ago.....Kate needed to write her account, ummm/.

I would be interested to hear more Di, on what you think about who the Mrs Carpenter heard faintly calling Maddie, was Kate worried her mum might hear her and know she went and lost Maddie> Oh the shame of it.

viv said...

On East Midlands this morning it was announced there is a parliamentary inquiry into whether these is sufficient support to the relatives of missing persons.

Kate McCann is today to give evidence to that inquiry today along with two others.

I have to say that increasingly it is looking like Kate just may be innocent, note it is just her again,not Gerry which I find odd. Although he does work full time and obviously she does not.

Di said...

Hi Viv

Mrs Carpenter claims to have heard someone calling the name Madeleine at 9.30pm, although her husband Stephen heard nothing, which I find strange. Several other independant witnesses say the tapas left their table at about this time, admittedly they are OC staff. It was also reported that a scream was heard, again before 10pm.

I really have no idea which timeline is correct but we do know their routine on May 3rd was different from other nights. I am surprised with all the continual checking on the children any of them managed to eat a thing let alone drink several bottles of wine.

Animator on MCF has an interesting thread regarding hire cars. It would appear that Robert Murat did not lend the McCanns his car, he hired a rental car as his was in the garage being repaired. I assume this was verified by the PJ. It would also appear that the McCanns and their family had more than one hire car between them during their stay. I wonder if these other hire cars were checked out?

Di said...

Well we all know Kate's ambition was to be the spokesperson for missing children. I just wonder how other parents of genuinely missing children will feel about Kate speaking. The other parents did not neglect their children and the government can't be expected to intervene in all missing children cases.

I really feel this is just Kate jumping on the bandwagon again, she is not one to miss an opportunity.

Wizard said...

Hi Viv and Di,

I just saw Saint Kate on the evening news. Words fail me the length these two will go. Even if we were to believed MM was taken by a stranger, the truth of the matter is the McCanns left their children unattended to go out drinking with friends. Wrong by anyone’s standards.

There is a dark cloud over what really happened to their daughter and until that cloud is lifted, it is morally wrong for them to engage in missing children campaigns with KM as spokesperson.

By the way Lady Macbeth’s book still heads the hardback non-fiction best sellers list surely it should be listed under fiction!

Di said...

Hi Wizard

Well said. imo Kate is now advocating to all that it is perfectly acceptable to leave your young children unattended whilst going out and enjoying yourself.

The person who should perhaps have headed this campaign is Ben Needham's mum, who truly has never had any help whatsoever.

viv said...

Hiya both

Well I swing between trying to believe in Kate ( I obviously never will believe in him) and utter fury and it is the latter at the moment.

As you say Wiz, at the very least she criminally and very seriously neglected her children. No matter how domineering the husband that is not something any decent mom would do. There is always the divorce courts.

I imagine she has created fury in stating this given the two lads who went missing were 18 and 19, why would Kate think it appropriate that their mums should feel the guilt that Kate feels, they did nothing wrong!!

It is extremely galling that still she seeks to put herself forward as some Princess Di God type, the saviour of children, my goodness me, just how dare she!


The three women held up photos of their missing children, and Ms McCann spoke out about the "unending heartbreak, confusion, guilt and worry" they had all suffered.

viv said...

It was interesting to note that on the early morning news it was Luke's mum they interviewed, not Kate.

It is odd because we can just imagine Kate would have no problem in putting herself forward and East Midlands BBC have shown a lot of bias towards the McCanns.

I think the Police would be troubled by her speaking publically at the current time and find it strange she has been allowed to give evidence at the Parliamentary inquiry. I have not read up on this yet, is it being held behind closed doors?

Gerry seems to be increasingly shy and retiring which is quite out of character, there must be a reason why only Kate is putting herself forward. The end seemed to dawn for him as he exited Portugal in a rage, I believe it was the revelations of Mr Menezes - they could have been charged with kidnap and trafficking Madeleine.

I could be wrong but I do not think British authorities have any more confidence in the indications of the dogs than I do. BUt on the other hand they clearly seem to feel the McCanns are involved, I still think, him and his mates in particular, the women being onlookers who are afraid to speak out and no what their duty towards their children actually is. To speak out and to protect.

viv said...

Thanks for your feedback on Mrs Carpenter perhaps hearing someone call Maddie around 9.30 p.m.

I find it quite possible that it was agreed to put Kate's discovery to a later time to set up a timeline and make it appear as though they were regularly checking the children prior to this, but even so, Maddie got abducted.

It is not inconceivable Kate was told the police were on their way and when she found they were not she became very stroppy?

I think it is a very pertinent point that the PJ are accusing Gerry of faking checks to excuse the mens absences. There was a waiter who said only the men left the table. You know what I think.

My sister agreed with me that if Maddie was sobbing Daddy Daddy on Tuesday 1 May that could well have been because he was being horrible to her.

What I find particularly inexcusable about Kate is allowing Maddie to be left on her own and with the door open, seemingly for easy access to her. That is very shocking. If she knew it was wrong to go on that holiday, why the heck did she go? Why did she not say, well OK I will go, but Maddie is going to stay with my mum? But having said that, I do think Kate is very unwell and that can affect a person's ability to resist coercion and make wise choices, I suppose. It is just that I have always been so fiercely protective of my children, it is hard to understand mums who listen to the husband, rather than always putting the needs of their children, after all, their own flesh and blood, first.

If there were not so many mums like this, child sexual abuse would not be endemic in British Society, but the sad fact is, it is.

viv said...

I would love to know what Kate means,

"families should be spared the additonal pain of financial and legal bureaucracy".

Does she mean they should be spared the pain of having to set up a fund to defend themselves from the inquisitive police and the angry bloggers etc?

I am not aware of any other mom of a missing child, who has made it her job to go through a police file investigating her and her husband and needed £100,000 to have it translated. Needed I would say half a million to shut an ex cop up etc.

Why does Gerry not sue Lee Rainbow top UK police adviser who states quite clearly there are inconsistencies in the accounts of Gerry McCann and he should therefore be considered a suspect. Too right there are, we can see that from his arguido interview above.

I wonder why some senior people do appear to be supporting Kate but pointedly fail to mention him? Could that be because Kate was considering placing Madeleine in the care of a relative and her reasons for wanting to do that?

Be that as it may I have never seen her display any real emotion for Madeleine and whilst she was now guffawing with laughter like the drain next to her on Maddie's 4th birthday, she did manage to pose and smile with her neat hair and makeup. I would have needed holding up.

Like others, this may be a distraction but I just want London Met to get on with their job and tell us what happened to little Maddie and do as LP promised to do "bring those behind the disappearance of Madeleine McCann to justice".

AT least he is silent now, I am sure he has good reasons for that...

Di said...


I am totally with you, let's hope we finally hear the truth.

Kate has never had to have the financial burdon though!

Wizard said...

Yes – why does the Thane of Rothley remain in the background and the talking left to Lady Macbeth.

Well - would anyone have him lead a public relations offensive? A few things against him – arrogance, belligerence, a whining terrier accent and the impression of guilt!

He's a disaster.

viv said...

Hiya both

Di, I think it was very odd for Kate to stand in the middle of these two ladies and suggest they had a load of "bureaucracy" to get through. That was of their own making in being suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine, and, on their own admission, behaving in an inexplicably criminal manner towards their own precious little children.

Kate was given the support she needed, a counsellor was sent out, gratis, Martin Warner, and I believe no less than three liaison officers from Leicester Police, but she imperiously sent them packing. Again, that is not how normal parents who genuinely have had their child stranger abducted would behave.

The way she speaks it is almost like she is saying you should get some financial handout because you have lost your child. I would say Maddie has been an even bigger earner for them since they got rid of her than she ever could have been with them, but who knows, this is the bizarre McCanns we are talking about who are so far removed from normal parents.

Wiz, Quite how Lady Kate has the brass neck, I just do not know, her holier than thou self righteous attitude does not sit well with the general public. But you are right, she is a much better publicity deal than he ever could have been. Maybe that is the simple explanation, the McCanns know he just needs to keep out of sight because the public see him for what he is. A thoroughly obnoxious piece of work who even to this day wants to sell us some utter bo$$ocks about dining in your back garden. Always the justifications and excuses rather than just saying we are so sorry, please public do not do this.

As Di points out Kate is actually saying to the public, I was right, there is nothing wrong with my behaviour, it was the bad man who noiselessly and DNA lessly slipped in and stole Maddie. In between all these so called checks.

viv said...

"Children who go missing are at risk of harm. When a child goes missing, there is something wrong,
often quite seriously, in that child’s life."


Although long winded, this is a very interesting report and does show just how little Kate has learned since she adopted the role of International Czar for the Welfare of the Missing Child. I seem to recollect that according to Kate, there is absolutely no evidence that Madeleine has come to any harm. When you read CEOP they absolutely disagree with you there Kate, psychological, physical aside the definition can even include death of course accidental or intentional. In fact CEOP note that accidental child deaths often promote a "missing child report". But I fear it is not quite that simple for poor little Madeleine.

viv said...

There is a piece by Pat Brown on Jo Morais but for me it is very disappointing. She does not tell us what her "profile" is although says she has changed her original opinion, one must pay for it!

She also makes some glaring mistakes in relation to the facts of the case. For example she claims they were out for their "last night on the town". Odd that given it was Thursday!

More pertinently she adopts the McCann evidence as the truth, presumably taking it from Kate's book rather than reading the case files. Had she done she would know the controversy about when Maddie actually was crying in the apartment. According to Pat Brown (and of course Kate and Gerry) it was the night before and it was Sean and Amelie.

But I prefer the evidence of Pamela Fenn who is very clear, and her evidence is corroborated by a friend who she telephoned, that it was JUST Madeleine who was crying and it was NOT the night before, it was Tuesday 1 May.

So I am sorry I will not be paying Ms Pat Brown for anything, I would be too concerned all proceeds are going to the McScams or at best, another who just wants to cashin rather than offer an honest an professional opinion on this case.

Di said...

Hi Viv

SteelMagnolia, comment on Pat Brown's site.

SteelMagnolia said...
Good morning Pat,

I believe the most explosive part of this mystery is yet to be known, the fact that the group did not leave the children alone.

Let me explain, Paulo Rebelo on taking over the case said 'I am going to look at this from a completely different angle'

Within three weeks he let it leak through a newspaper he had discovered 7 of the children were together, he said nothing about the eighth child or who it was even. This threw the McCanns and their PR mouthpiece Mitchell into a dizzy fit. Rebelo had discovered their darkest secret, the fact that neglect had been invented to make a window for the abduction.
No neglect , no abduction.

Rebelo waited for the McCann response, he had said seven of the children were in the McCanns apartment ?...no response ! and then Mitchell bellowed back 'Ludicrous how can you get 7 children to sleep all at the same time, it would be much more difficult'

Mitchel, so busy in trying to push the 'neglect' (that never happened) said nothing about the McCanns apartment nor did he ask of the whereabouts of the eighth child...????Curious reaction No ?

Within a matter of weeks Kate McCann wrote in a panic to Rebelo, he had discovered they had not left their children alone, so how the hell would they explain the disappearance of Madeleine.


Di said...

SteelMagnolia said...
Another point of interest ,on hearing this news of ' no neglect' two of the witnessess wanted to change their statements but were afraid, due to the power behind the McCanns. The witnessess?..Surprise , surprise, Jane Tanner and her partner Russell O'Brien. PR mouthiece Mitchell once again denied this information and we had an accusation of PJ leaking the McCanns personal files,,,all lies but the information that was alleged to be leaked was about the McCanns leaving the children alone to cry...HERE we see again the need to push the 'neglect' NEGLECT is the ace card if people start to realize neglect did not happen then the truth is plain to see.

Tanner and O'Brien were pressured enough to keep their mouths shut and the reconstruction did not go ahead due to new information...we are now looking at nine people who had lied about neglect to cover-up the truth of what really happened to Madeleine.

viv said...

Hello Di and thanks for those very interesting comments. And so, sadly, we come back to the harsh reality, I believe, of just what was happening to poor little Maddie McCann. The sad little girl in the Snow White outfit who nervously sucked her mouth in (as very sad children often do) when looking at the person who was videoing her.

I keep that image on my blog because to me, I am afraid, it says it all.

I can see my own granddaughters shriek with delight when playing "dress up" and then I can see poor little Madeleine and also that hideous posed picture in her near perfect makeup.

There is something most terribly wrong here and the most massive conspiracy to make the public think otherwise, but London Met will arrest those responsible.

Di said...

Hi Viv

You can read it for free.

Get your free kindle download for laptop and PC here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/feature.html/ref=kcp_pc_mkt_lnd?docId=1000423913

I agree Viv, there is much to be disclosed.

viv said...

Oh hiya Di and how nice to actually be here when you are !

I will go off and have a read.

Just developing the theme a little more of Kate's partial innocence. I was looking at a thread on here, I think Jan 08, News of the World, a Portuguese poster always logs in here to that one. It says that according to the McCanns mates they never came out that night until 9 just a few minutes after the Paynes. So the PJ are looking for that missing half an hour. Why would Gerry go check his children at 9.05 if he only just came out?

Tying it in with Mrs Carpenter, just suppose Kate really was worried as Fiona and others state and she did do that check at 9.30 it was not Mat Oldfield (I never did believe that one). First she is calling Maddie, then increasingly she starts to panic and go into a strop until in the end by the time the Nanny saw her just after 10 she is absolutely hysterical, "they have taken her".

This does not of course make Kate innocent, it means a lot of jail time almost certainly because she knew Maddie was not safe with the TAPAS men IMO, including of course, her own husband.

She has not co-operated to get Maddie back, if she was disposed of alive, she has only thought of herself. So when I see she is "innocent", it is a relative thing, I just mean she is not as bad as her husband and she is ill, IMO.

Rebelo was quoted as saying he was going back to the "kidnapping theory". So many antis at the time laid into him for that, that was foolish. This man is an expert on child sex offenders.

viv said...

It has always been very black and white to Tony Bennett and Co, "60 Reasons Maddie was NOT abducted". He has always plugged this accidental death and negligence thing...

But I am sure she was, by her own father. But who am I to say whether she was dead or alive, either is such a clear possibility. Dead would be preferable for little Maddie.

viv said...

Oh drat, you have to be an Amazon customer which I am not.

Can you paste it, Di?


viv x

Di said...

We have always said were the children all in one apt. Every night at least one adult was missing from the table.

We now know that the staff who were working at the OC at the time, were then removed after the McCann's returned to UK.

So, if there was someone babysitting the children each evening, why the sudden lies. Perhaps it is to cover up for the person or persons who left by private plane in the early hours on the 4th May. Hmmm. I think you know who I believe that was and his son, all imo of course!

viv said...

OMG Di, NO, I did not realise you thought that, but what an astute thought. I think you could well be right.

I certainly have him down as one of them, maybe enough said! I have always thought about his private planes and boats, and I seem to recall the PJ stating at one point they knew where she went to the first few days.

He has certainly gone very quiet, I suppose it costs millions to keep shutting people up.

Oh at the Sale Sharks or whatever it is called, Clarence was there too, oh, the mind boggles.

viv said...

Even more ominous Di, if someone was babysitting every evening, as seems likely, why does a waiter report it was the men who kept leaving the table?

It is just too horrific really and I am so glad London Met have been given the case. 30 old and very experienced murder cops, they will surely get this all figured out, complex as it obviously is. I am sure Brit cops and Portugal's input already had an advanced case anyway. That is what people do not seem to realise. CEOP deal with exploited children. SOCA deals with fraud but CEOP was part of their overarching framework.

It makes me smile when I read people coming up with such gems as do you think the London Met will realise this. They are so flipping green. The Ch Con of LP said in April 2008 he had 11000 pieces of information the McCanns were not getting their maulers on, do they not think it has grown since. Then there are many others who seem to think it is only the Portuguese who have any files. Words really do fail me!!

I notice Pat is going with the accidental death theory, not very impressed. Why the photos then? Why Brit cops so utterly fascinated with all of David Paynes intricate plans and emails prior to the holiday, why Gerry's mobile calls BEFORE she went missing. Utterly naive an unbelievable! Something dreadful was taking place on 1 May, poor little angel.

Wizard said...

Hi Viv & Di,

I’ve just been reading what Pat Brown has to say on JM’s blog. From the summary, she alludes to the fiction in KM’s book mingled with fact. She says the book is about KM portrayal of her feels and thoughts as the victim and not her daughters. Me, me, me! (As we are well aware even if we have not read the book.)

Brown highlights:-

(a) KM now says nobody came through the bedroom window – therefore, the police did not botch the evidence.

(b) The Mc’s were grateful JT saw an abduction going down but not angry that Tanner did not tell them at the time so they could do something about it. (Brown comments this illustrates the mindset of the McCanns)

(c) KM wrote the book not to re-energise the search for M, as she claims, but to convince people of her innocence.

Brown also says defence lawyer want their clients to keep quiet but the police want persons of interest to talk, nuggets of truth within the lies appear. She says KM’s book in a carefully crafted revisionist history of events.

I wonder how many times lawyers edited the book before publication. Point C is interesting as the mindset of the Mcs imo is they were very grateful to Tanner for confirmation of their staging story, however vague it was.

Brown highlights the crying children, not Mrs Fenn’s evidence, but KM’S. Her account allows Madeleine the next day to report to her and Gerry that she and Sean were crying the night before. I think this incident didn’t happen and why KM insists it did is for a very good reason. Perhaps M was already dead and this establishes she was alive and therefore has to be reinforced. Most people haven’t read Mrs Fenn’s statement so the book was a good opportunity to muddy the waters between fact and fiction.

Wizard said...

Di - I'm very impressed you have a Kindle?

Wizard said...

In KM’s book apparently she describes the ill-fated attempt to get her hands on the Leicester police files in the summer of 2008. LP’s response was there is “no clear evidence” to eliminate the couple from involvement in the child’s disappearance and therefore they would not entrust them with the requested files. The LP position remains unchanged; the files are still denied to the parents.

Another little snippet from the book was Portuguese police claimed that a witness saw her and her husband carrying something in a large black bag on the evening of 3 May. Hmm…

Di said...

Hi Viv & Wizard

Interestingly, on the McCann's Facebook page they are now asking for people who have made earlier statements to the Police to contact them. As they can't get their hands on the files they are now desperate to know what information people have given. I am sure most sensible people will resist.

The McCanns are also asking people to pass any new information they have to them and then they will then forward it to SY, I am sure they will, err not!

Di said...

Hi Wizard.

I was dubious about buying a Kindle at first. I love reading books and was not sure I would get used to not turning pages. I have to say I am so glad I bought one, I love it. Do you have one?

viv said...

Hiya Wiz and Di

Wiz, I see you still do not think we are right. I would love to be wrong but I just cannot believe the rest of the TAPAS group would enter into a pact whereby they keep their mouths shut and cover up what happened to little Maddie if it really was a death caused by an overdose. Even if it was I cannot fathom how anyone could call this an accident, it would be almost murder, most definitely very serious manslaughter.

Pat seems to be selective about what evidence she finds relative, I think both the PJ and Leicester Police actually have far wider concerns as shown by the questions above and the rogatory interviews. They very plainly think David Payne was heavily involved in whatever took place.

I do not buy the dead before theory, I do not believe the young nannys would dream of or dare to lie to the police in such a serious case. They would be positively terrified. I may not always accept what Goncalo says, but on this I most certainly agree with him. It is also clear from the email of Ricardo Paiva and DC Marshall it was taking place that afternoon/evening. I suppose your forensic answer to that will be they hid her body in an empty apt and then needed to get it moved and that has some credit. I suppose I am just talking through my thinking here. Gerry is controlling and needs to have everything ordered. If Maddie just died that night, it just does not make sense he would rush off as claimed, but hiding her for a few days whilst he made plans, yes it does, but on balance I still find it far fetched. Mainly because I agree with Pat here, Kate probably did not know. The nanny and others paint a picture of her just going completely crazy with horror and then going into deep shock. In PDL the first few days she looked very ill and totally numb with shock, then it was as if, and you could almost see him doing it to her, Gerry said for God's sake lady pull yourself together or the game is up. I think he is so disordered he did not realise that Kate was actually putting on a more normal reaction than him. It is one I believe she has recently tried to explain away, including in her book.

I think there is indeed a very sinister reason as to why both Kate and Gerry were immediately telling the PJ about Maddie's co called crying report that morning, placing it nearer to the so called abduction. They obviously realised Mrs Fenn (and maybe others) could be trouble and I think it is that distance in time. Two nights before suggests Maddie was subjected to abuse her members of that group. Just the night before and the McCanns come up with the ridiculous theory, that was the abductor doing a dummy run. But that is what you always hear from lying criminals, ridiculous scenarios that exclude them.

I have not read Kate's book, but also taking into account comments recently from her mother as well as what I know it says, I think kte has deliberately dropped some people in it. Maybe that is revenge for all the times Gerry has done it to her. To me, their exits from Portimao Police Station told a story. Gerry was the one who was really worried, she was thinking they can go and get stuffed I did not do that. I believe her. She may be a better actor than Gerry but she is not that good!

viv said...

Di, how very trendy of you to have a kindle, I did not even know what one was, lol!

I am sure it is much easier to curl up in bed with and read than a proper book, no? My RHS books of plants is a flipping pain!

viv said...

Di, I am just completely shocked that the desperate McCanns are still trying to get police witnesses to tell them what they told the police. They will have been warned not to discuss their evidence with anyone.

This is why I have been so scathing about Martin Smith, only McCanned/Kennied "witnesses" blab away to the press etc.

I am sure it is also why Brigitte O'Donnell spoke to the press, her husband was not allowed to. It is notable that in the rogatories he is complaining about harassment from Team McCann. I know that can be pretty intense!

viv said...

I was just reading MM about the red t shirt, that is far too big for Sean, and has the chilling words on it

"up, up and away"

Which seems a very sad prophecy of what happened to little Maddie after she went on that flight to Portugal.

But even more chillingly I noticed something else, those words in Gerry's blog:

Sean has developed a taste for sea bass.

It was his red t shirt that was found to have the cadaver odour on it. I think this man is far beyond sick.

I still find it very possible he went back to UK, maybe even bought Sean that t shirt with the logo that he would have found so amusing and then got it contaminated with the scent of sea bass, or cadaverine. Gerry does his research, to suggest he did not know all about cadaver odour is very naive IMO, and not just because he is a qualified doctor. He is also a fully qualified psychopath.

Di said...

Hi Viv

Apologies, I have tried and failed to copy any of Pat's book. I have downloaded it to my Kindle, and laptop but can't copy and paste as it is copyrighted. You can easily open an Amazon account Viv without any hastle and then download it free to your computer. I have not read it yet as have not had time.

Viv I hope SY are keeping a very close eye on the McCann's Facebook page. It is incredible the lengths they are going to.

viv said...

Thanks Di, I might have known you would not be allowed to copy it here.

I will have another go later on after I have fetched Luke.

I have a feeling that at least one or two of those officers will have been assigned to watch the movements of Kate and Gerry quite intensely. In fact I would not be surprised to learn they always have given the serious nature of this case and the obvious wish to locate Madeleine, dead or alive. They are clearly key to that.