29 Jun 2011


With my compliments to "Bren" of the 3 Arguidos for this article which would otherwise no longer be available.  

This article needs reading rather carefully, it is talking about two different scenarios, the  accidental death of Madeleine or the abduction of Madeleine.  Read whose mobile phone data they were looking at to track Madeleine's "abductors".   Russell O'Brien was apparently getting legal advice via the McCann's lawyers, that is hardly surprising given he and Gerry were missing just as Maddie was apparently getting abducted.  

I hope people can move on from the apparent accidental death and start reading what has always been there, for those that want to see.  All theories deserved to be looked at and obviously the death of Madeleine was one that needed looking at, (parents often do that) but....it was always made plain the abduction scenario was also being looked at, particularly by Goncalo Amaral's replacement, Mr Rebelo.  

This talk of them moving Madeleine's body about several weeks later is just plain rubbish.  

Deleted Express Article


Saturday December 1,2007
By Nick Fagge and David Pilditch in Praia da Luz

Kate and Gerry McCann are still regarded as the prime suspects in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine despite inconclusive findings from DNA evidence.

Portuguese police will come to Britain next week to re-interview the seven friends who were dining with the couple on the night the little girl vanished, a highly placed source claimed yesterday.

It shatters the couple’s hopes that they will be cleared by Christmas.

Investigators say that while findings revealed at a DNA summit this week did not give them enough evidence to bring charges, they do provide the legal basis to demand further interviews of the McCanns’ friends and relatives on British soil.

Leaks in Portugal claim tests on DNA samples support Portuguese detectives’ theory that the couple were involved in Madeleine’s disappearance.

Portuguese daily newspaper 24 Horas reported that a police source said: “The existing evidence up until now is far from clearing the McCann couple in the case.

There are more and more indicators that they were involved in the disappearance of the child, but it has been difficult to prove this fact. We will continue to follow all hypotheses.

Investigators still cling to the theory that Madeleine died as the result of an accident in the family’s holiday flat in Praia da Luz, and that her parents hid and later disposed of the body with the help of their friends.

Respected Portuguese daily newspaper Correio da Manha reported: “The main theory is still the accidental death of the child on the afternoon of May 3, specifically in the two hours when the parents were alone with their children.

“That is when the McCanns say they gave her a bath and put the three children to bed before 8.30pm and then met their friends for dinner.”

Detectives are understood to be intrigued by “certain inconsistencies” in the statements made by the McCanns’ seven diningcompanions.

They also want to know who Kate was referring to when she cried “they’ve taken her” when she found Madeleine was missing. These are among “100 questions” detectives want to put to the McCanns and their friends, police sources claim.

Yesterday British ambassador Alex Ellis and Algarve official Angela Morado met Paulo Rebelo, who heads the investigation, and Portimao District Attorney Jose Magalhaes e Meneses at police headquarters in Faro.

The British Embassy in Lisbon said the timing was a coincidence but confirmed the McCann case had been discussed.

A team recently returned from the UK where it was told what the Forensic Science Services lab had learned from analysis of blood and hair found at the McCanns’ holiday apartment and in their hire car.

But yesterday sources close to the investigation said the tests “are only one of the pieces of the puzzle” and “other operations were being done”.

Yesterday Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’ spokesman, said: “Kate and Gerry’s friends are happy to be reinterviewed by police if necessary, indeed are keen to help if it clears up any inconsistencies. They, like Gerry and Kate, have nothing to hide.”

The McCanns, both 39, of Rothley, Leics, were named as suspects on September 7. Gerry wrote in his blog yesterday of his hopes of being free of suspicion by Christmas.


Transcription of the articles in the Sunday Express 2 December 2007.
Paper edition. With many thanks to Bouncy for typing this up.

A close friend of Kate and Gerry McCann who was holidaying with them when Madeleine vanished will be questioned by Portuguese police this week over a "mystery" phone call.

Dr Russell O'Brien, 36, has come under investigation after a team of telephone surveillance officers highlighted a mobile phone call made to the missing four-year-old's father just over a month after she disappeared.

Portuguese detectives now believe that a phone call between Gerry McCann, 39, and Dr O'Brien is the missing link in Madeleine's disappearance and could help find her body.

Investigators are focusing on the exact whereabouts of Dr O'Brien when the call was made on June 10.

Last night it was unclear exactly what was said during the debated call but it is understood that key words aroused police suspicions.

The development is a massive blow to the McCanns who had been led to believe they would be cleared of any involvement in their daughter's alleged death by Christmas.

A team of senior detectives are to fly to Britain after gaining official permission to re-interview certain members of the group, including Dr O'Brien. He has taken advice from a lawyer recommended by the McCann legal team.

The Sunday Express has learned Mr McCann told police the call, 38 days after Madeleine vanished, was made within 4km of the Mark Warner resort in Praia da Luz where the party were staying but technicians working on the mobile phone network have dismissed his claim after examining records.

It has also emerged that each member of the "Tapas Nine" was placed under surveillance after Brisitish communications experts arrived in the Algarve at the end of May.

A close friend of the group told how just weeks after Madeleine went missing, her parents and their friends had grown concerned they were being closely watched by Portuguese police.

He said: "Although they never officially thought they were under surveillance - Kate and Gerry were always cautious when making calls because they knew it was possible that somebody could be listening in.

"They were concerned that their phones could have been tapped or that the electronic traffic between them and their friends was being recorded"

Kate and Gerry, both 39, were named as "arguidos", formal suspects, in their daughter's disappearance on September 9.

They have not been charged but police let it be known they had evidence to indicate that Madeleine accidentally died in apartment 5A and her body was hidden for weeks before being moved in the boot of a Renault Scenic the family hired 25 days later.

British experts attempted to trace the movements of Madeleine's abductor by following a trail left by mobile telephone signals. The technique helped convict Ian Huntley for the murders of Holly wells and Jessica Chapman in Soham, Cambridgeshire, in 2002.

Trails are created by silent transmissions sent by mobile phones even when not in use. These create a timed computer log of the handset's movement which can narrow down its location to an area as small as a few square yards.

Police analysts examining records of mobile phones belonging to the McCanns and their holiday group returned their findings to Portuguese prosecutors last week.

Detectives used the detailed information to "test" statements by guests and staff at the Ocean Club complex.

Last week, Portuguese officers arrived in Britain to talk to Leicestershire Police and British forensic experts about the implications of DNA results from tests at the Forensic Science Service's base in Birmingham.

Friends of the McCanns thought the summit indicated Madeleine's parents would be cleared as suspects after DNA evidence against them appeared to collapse, but last night it was clear there are still doubts about contradictions in the statements the group gave to police. Both Kate and Gerry McCann deny any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance but police still maintain the case against them does not rely on DNA results.

Dr O'Brien could also be named as an arguido. Last night a friend said: "If he faces a situation where the arguido status becomes an issue, it allows certain rights, like the right to have a lawyer present and the right to remain silent."


Now hunt centres on disused barn

The hunt for Madeleine McCann last night centred on a disused barn near Praia da Luz where police found a towel stained with what may turn out to be the little girl's blood.

Fibres found on the towel allegedly match fibres from the hire car rented by Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann.

Portuguese detectives discussed the breakthrough when they met British police and a Crown Prosecution Service official last week at a police station in Leicester.

Today for the first time the Sunday Express can shed light on the new avenue plicie are pursuing in the hope of a breakthrough in the baffling case.

Based on fresh information from mobile phone surveillance police began a search of an area in the south east of the resort. They came across a towel, with an Aztec design, near a disused barn in a remote area close to Praia da Luz.

Portuguese sources say forensic scientists used a substance called Luminol to look for blood deposits and found three sites on the edges of the towel. They tested the blood deposits to see if there was a match for Madeleine's DNA.

Although the samples were not good quality the scientists were able to do what is called low copy analysis, which showed there was "moderate" support to suggest the blood deposits matched Madeleine's blood.

The results were not conclusive are not regarded as being strong enough to be presented as evidence in any court case.

They also found a loaf and a carrier bag, which produced no significant information, but close analysis of the towel revealed fibres which were not made of the towel material. The fibre fragments were microscopically examined against fibres found in the boot of the Renault Scenic hired by the McCanns 25 days after Maddie vanished.

Portuguese police said there was "strong support" that the fibres found on the towel matched fibres from the boot of the car.

One possibility being considered by the Portuguese detectives was that the towel had at some point been in the boot of the Renault Scenic, which would explain how fibres had got on it.


viv said...

So why did the British arrive and put all of this group under surveillance, not, I am sure, because they are stupid plods...but I would imagine because they knew they were involved and they were trying to find little Maddie.

su said...


Whilst I appreciate your trust and respect for the British police, may I suggest you read this. There are some high ranking paedos and they are protected. Maybe not by the police but certainly by the judiciary. Why is Baby P's killer being released so soon with a new identity to boot? http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2011/06/child-abuse-and-top-people.html

I had forgotten about the barn and Russell O Briens link up to it.
I have had great faith in Rebelo. Silently remaining in the background.

So maybe this precious child was handed over to someone who took her to the barn. Did whatever and killed her. This is so much worse than the accidental death theory. So very much worse.

su said...

The photo you have at the top of the page with Madeleine feeding her sister is remarkable.
To the right of them down to floor level are hundreds upon hundreds of cd's.
I have 6 kids. There is no way on earth those cd's would have been there. Kids pull out no matter what. Maybe that room was usually off bounds because it is not child proofed.

viv said...

Hi Su, I think that blogspot is rather good at knitting fog and note the need for a disclaimer at the top of it. The suggestion is made that because there is or was a large paedophile ring in Islington (a posh London area where lots of wealthy people live) and Tony Blair once lived there he is one, which is quite ridiculous. WE can all think things but in order to come out and say such things they surely must be backed by some credible evidence?

I did like the link to the Daily Mail article which is really good. They have also done really good investigative work on how bent and hopeless Kate and GErry's "private detectives searching for Maddie" are.

There are paedophiles in every walk of life and that clearly includes the judiciary and the police, doctors too, of course.

With the investigation announced by Cameron we have checks and balances, no less than 30 hand picked and senior murder squad detectives. It is absurd to think they would all take part in some coverup to protect paedophiles.

I think part of the problem is so many people just will not openly discuss paedophilia and they will not discuss it in relation to the Maddie case either in spite of clear evidence that may offer an explanation as to what happened to Madeleine.

If we want justice we should be prepared to honestly look at the available evidence, not jump to conclusions that we cannot back up and let the powers that be know, we, ordinary members of the general public want a resolution to this case. Unfortunately, so long as we have people chanting Maddie is dead, the dogs said so, the powers that be are not going to take much notice, because that is absurd rubbish. There was no forensic evidence to back such a conclusion. I think the forensics probably demonstrate something far more sinister than some accidental death caused by neglect - that is Kate and Gerry's story, one they are prepared to sue on and one that has made them lots of money. Shame on those who assist them in that process.

viv said...

This is the Daily Mail article I am referring to that is quoted on that blog and is most certainly worth a long slow read:


viv said...

Su, going on memory, I think the McCanns do have rooms that serve a dedicated play areas stacked out with toys, at least that is what we have been shown on pictures and the Channel 4 documentary.

I used to put all my things away when my boys were little, but both my own mother and mother in law chastised me for that.... children should be taught from a young age what belongs to them and what does not. I appreciate with 6 children that would be very difficult!

viv said...

Lady Kate tells us she was unable to take her eyes of her children as she struggled to reach some ice creams for them just 25 feet away, ah bless, shame that concern was not repeated all night every night.

I have never heard anything so bloody ridiculous, time and again my ex husband and I would get our children ice creams etc, did such a thought ever enter my head, what Kate does not seem to realise is normal families do things TOGETHER. That aside Gerry tells the story quite differently, they were not left on the beach at all which is hardly surprising as they do not put benches on beaches, do they?

What a stupid woman writing all this guff, just who does she thing she is trying to kid?

viv said...


The family outing

From Kate's book regarding the family outing she claims happened on the Tuesday:

""In the afternoon Gerry and I decided to take the children down to the beach. To be honest, I think they’d have been just as happy to go back to their clubs, but we wanted to do something slightly different with them, just the five of us. We borrowed a double buggy from Mark Warner to make the walk easier for Sean and Amelie. The weather wasn’t great: in fact, on the beach it started to rain. A bit of rain is not something that bothers a Scotsman like Gerry, but Sean and Amelie didn’t like the feel of the wet sand and insisted, in the way two-year-olds do, on being carried. Our trip to the beach wasn’t exactly a roaring success and the kids certainly weren’t thanking us for it. Still, we made the best of it, and the suggestion of ice-creams soon brought smiles to three little faces. The children and I sat down on a bench and Gerry went off to fetch them. The shop was only about 25 feet away, yet when he called to me asking me to give him a hand with the five ice-creams he was paying for, I was momentarily torn. Would the children be OK on the bench while I nipped over? I hurried across, watching them all the time.....Having polished off her ice-cream, Madeleine asked if she could go back to Mini Club now, please. So much for extra family time!""

First of all we have the date that does not fit. Taking the children from the beach to the creche would mean dropping Madeleine off first and the twins later because her creche was closer to the beach. The only day this happened was on the Monday. Madeleine was dropped off at 15:15 and the twins at 15:25, later than usual. According to the creche records Madeleine was picked up again only 10 minutes later. Was she so delighted at seeing her parents leave the so much loved creche WITH her siblings for the first time after dropping her off that the staff had to call the number provided and called Kate to collect her? And is this in direct relation to the "sunburn" on her right forearm to be seen on the photo of the tennis lesson the next day, the Tuesday?

Second we have a slightly different account from Gerry's 10th May statement:

Concerning the routine, on Tuesday there was a slight change given that after lunch, at 13h30, the deponent and KATE decided to take the three children to Praia da Luz, having gone on foot, taking only the twins in baby buggies. They all left by the main door because of the buggies, went around to the right, down the street of the “BATISTA” supermarket and went to the beach along a road directly ahead.

They were at the beach for about 20 minutes, the deponent and MADELEINE having put their feet in the water. During this time the weather changed with a cloudy sky and cold, therefore they went to a terrace at a café near the beach, on the left, where they bought five ice-creams and two drinks. Asked, he said that at that place there was an individual playing latin music on a guitar, to whom he intended to give some coins, but having none at the time, he didn't. That the individual had a neglected and careless appearance, unshaven and somewhat raggedy. He was Caucasian, 175cm tall, thin, 70 to 75kg in weight, dark, short hair, almost shaven-headed with grey sides, and not wearing glasses. Wearing a light brown-coloured sports jacket, with a hood at the back, and dark denim trousers, not noticing the footwear. He said that he never behaved strangely, nor approached or looked at the children in an ostensive manner. On returning they left the children at their crèches, as usual, the deponent and his wife having gone to play tennis or jogging.

su said...

Viv, when you say the death cult persisting in the death of the child - well that is all forums and Amaral.
Why would they be doing this unless they had a firm conviction that this was so?

Mar said...

I can't discount the dogs either, I'm afraid. They did signal at the McCann's apartment, clothes and car and nowhere else. Also, DNA was collected at least from the boot of the car (with a 15 out of 19 match to Madeleine), as far as I'm aware. Unless it was 'planted' as Kate has suggeseted, how could anyone not be influenced by these findings?

I'm also of the opinion that, sadly, Madeleine is most likely dead. What I'm having trouble accepting is that the McCanns would have transported her dead body in that car more than twenty days after. I really cannot see how any parents could possibly bring themselves to do that. It's too gruesome and upsetting for words.

Still, I'm sure the police knows best. And if they are sure that Madeleine died on the 3rd they must have their reasons. Perhaps there is more evidence that points to this scenario, perhaps the dogs are just one of the elements that lead them to that conclusion.

I know you don't place much importance on the dogs, Viv, so I'm curious to know what you think about all this.

viv said...

Hi Su, I believe there are others commenting about this case who, like me, see that the explanations as to what happened to Madeleine may not be so simple.

I also think that many feel as I did when commenting on general forums, you are actually attacked for failing to follow the "pack", excuse the pun. That is why I decided that it is best to just stick to my own blog. It is amazing how some people are really very zealous about insisting they are right. That defies the findings of the Portuguese Police that there was no simple explanation or clear evidence as to what took place here. I think the only thing that was consistent is the police, both UK and Portuguese felt the McCanns and their friends were involved in it.

I can think of no good reason why other doctors would involve themselves in some conspiracy to cover up the "accidental" death of a child in their party.

Mar, I will answer your point a bit better later, when I have more time. But I just wanted to say this, you talk about the dogs indicating to the McCanns clothing.

Do you not find it just a bit strange that it was just Kate's clothing, even stranger, just one t shirt that obviously belongs to Sean with a picture of an aeroplane on and the words "up, up and away".

Both Kate and her mom have suggested that cadaver odour may have been planted, now hum, who would that have been?

One big clue, I really do not like him and he could gain access to cadavers, on a trip home...just a thought.

viv said...

Hiya again Mar,

What was actually found in the hire car was a microscopic speck of blood and I am not aware from any forensic reports I have read that it was representative of Madeleine at all.

However, in the apartment they also found microscopic traces of blood and I believe one of those samples was a reasonably good match to Madeleine.

Goncalo Amaral aside, I am not aware of any police officer who actually says that Madeleine died in the apartment. Ricardo Paiva actually described it as a theory and that Goncalo's preoccupation with that particular theory prevented others from being properly considered. Again, I think this was at least partially the reason Goncalo was removed from the case.

Throughout this case we were told the McCanns had become the prime suspects and that the police were investigating both her death and her abduction. It was written in British Press (see last post) that it was suspected Russell O'Brien was involved in the abduction of Madeleine.

When I saw Goncalo Amaral's video of how he claims Madeleine died that night and within about an hour Gerry disposed of her body by walking through the streets with it, I had to confess to thinking oh what a lame and absurd theory.

Aside from being quite impractical it just doesnot fit with the rest of the evidence. For example, Gerry taking those two sets of pictures to Portugal with him and his comment, I am not here to enjoy myself.

Neither does it fit with what a trained child social worker thought or the evidence from former close friends The Gaspars. Neither does it fit with the email exchange between Ricardo Paiva and DC Marshall in October 2007 where it was clearly thought the Paynes were involved in removing Madeleine from that apartment.

In light of all of this, I am sorry but internet bloggers, a very large group of them have simply hero worshipped those who say they know what happened and failed to have an enquiring mind, actually looking for the truth. It is easy to chant, year in year out, Maddie died, the dogs say so, and seeking to discredit the professional final analysis of the Portuguese and the stance of UK towards this case. That does not make it right.

I have a horrible feeling they have mixed forensic results that may demonstrate Maddie was a victim of very serious child abuse.

I do think it is necessary not to go into too much graphic detail about that, but take her cries on the Tuesday night for example, Daddy Daddy, people say she was crying for him, that is not how I read it, she may have been crying at him, please stop.

I also think Di, is quite possibly correct when she suggests that Maddie got drugged and taken away to shut her up. No one can explain to me why it is that the bed she was supposed to be sleeping on has no forensic trace of her (so far as I know) since the bed was changed on the Wednesday.

I am sorry but I do believe Goncalo conceals the other half of this case. Whether that is to draw Kate and Gerry out or to sell a book and supplement his pension I do not know. I have always tried to see the best in him because what I do like about him is, he has always been a massive thorn in their side.

But let me put it this way, I have been suggesting for the last three years Maddie's disappearance has more to do with sexual abuse that accidental death and that whatever happened Gerry planned it. That is much worse, but do the McCanns ever refer to such things? Do they ever threaten to sue anyone who repeats the Gaspar statement or seek to explain? To me I would have thought it was obvious they are not fearful of the dogs, they are fearful of what they do not want to talk about or sue anyone for mentioning.

viv said...

We know that much of what was written in the Daily Express turned out to be correct when we subsequently got to read the police files.

When you read the above report it suggests a scenario whereby, at the end of May 2007, the British Police brought over experts to follow what this group were doing by tracking their mobile phone data.

That led to the finding of the towel in the barn with traces of blood that may match Madeleine. It says that fibres from that towel may also have been in the boot of the McCanns car.

I can read this report as clearly suggesting this group were moving Madeleine around, perhaps a very badly injured Madeleine who, at all costs, had to be kept from the authorities because this group needed to cover up what had actually happened to her.

Why did the British start doing this at the end of May? Is it because that is when the McCanns hired the car, or is it because they know an awful lot more than we do? I am certain they do.

I do not believe CEOP would have put out that request for Maddie to be found if they were quite certain she was dead.

Why did the McCanns always put out such a confusing array of old pictures of Madeleine and stick to one that just looks nothing like her, the red dress one? Why did they not use the tennis balls pic? Does this suggest they had got rid of her body? To me it does not, it clearly suggests they are petrified of someone actually contacting the police with her whereabouts and that would be the same reason they were simply not prepared to ever mention the reward for finding her.

I remain pretty sure that her disappearance stems from what was happening to her on the Tuesday night and that was absolutely nothing to do with any "stranger" being in the apartment, it was "Daddy".

Mar said...

Hello Viv,

Thank you for your detailed response. You have obviously researched this case a lot more than I have.

It had never occured to me that whatever happened to Madeleine might be connected with the crying episode on the Tuesday. How awful to think what she might have been going through.

However, if what you are implying is actually what happened, how could Kate possibly go along with it? How could she allow her daughter to be (allegedly) abused and ultimately disposed of? I just can't accept it, it's too evil. Surely no mother would allow anyone to put her child through that.

I realise that the 'accidental death and later disposal' theory is probably one of a few possibilities the authorities are working with (and that we only know a tiny - and perhaps insignificant - fraction of what possible scenarios they might be working on). To me, however, the dogs reactions are still quite significant, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one! ;)

Why would Gerry plant anything for the dogs to find only to repeatedly and vigorously discredit their reliability afterwards? He's always maintained that Goncalo's theory has damaged the 'search' because if Maddie is dead then noone will carry on looking for her.

So why would he go to the trouble of planting cadaver smell in all those places knowing that the conclusion the police would reach would be that Maddie is most likely dead? Why would he then go to the expense of hiring expensive lawyers to discredit the dogs and spend thousands taking Amaral to court to challenge the conclusions he reached about Maddie based on said dogs?

What a long-winded question! LOL Apologies for that, I'm not very inspired tonight.

If there's anyting at all in the Gaspars statements and what they imply is actually what happened to Maddie then the 'accidental death' scenario could still apply (hence the blood in the blanket found in the barn and the blood in the apartment). God - how awful.

Anyway, thank you for your interesting thoughts. I know what you mean about message boards, I've stopped going on them myself for various reasons. I don't like the constant taking the p*ss out of the McCanns, the snide comments about Gerry's nose or Kate's breasts. It's all very silly and in pretty poor taste, and I fail to see how it adds anything to the discussion of the case.

The sometimes flippant remarks about Maddie's death are upsetting to me also. Not because I don't agree that she is most probably dead, but because sometimes they are said in such a casual and matter-of-fact way (when none of us knows for sure) that it's almost like we have forgotten we are talking about a little girl, not a character in a film that didn't realy exist in real life.

Anyway, I should leave it here, I have gone on a bit, haven't I? Have a good evening everyone.


viv said...

Hiya Mar

Sexual abuse of children within the family is extremely common. I do not think that women like Kate "allow" it to happen, it just does and then they find out. Then they are faced with going to the authorities to report what their husband has been doing. That obviously means the end of everything and terrible shame and humiliation. Men who abuse children often also abuse and terrorise their wives. Gerry denied to Portuguese Police that Kate had to give up work due to depression. He also denied Kate was thinking of handing Maddie over to a relative. If she was thinking of doing that can you see what I think the reason may have been?

It is even possible that Kate took the decision to end it for Madeleine to save her suffering any further.

So far that is all excusatory for Kate. Unfortunately there are women who do not bond with children at all and there are women who are a very willing party to the sexual abuse of their children. Especially if it means huge amounts of money can be made. What I think are just possibilities and there are so many of them.

I have always said that it is possible that Eddie did indeed smell cadaver in that apartment, but I think if he smelt anything it was most likely decomposing human blood. I still do not understand why people just focus on the dogs and do not look at all the other evidence against the McCanns, it is far more illuminating as to what may have been going on.

The key point really is Keela's alerts to blood were verified by forensic science although the samples did not always belong to Maddie. Eddie did alert in exactly the same place and so it seems logical to me he was alerting to human blood. Unlike Keela he alerts to smells, so if he could smell blood in their bedroom also then that is why he was barking in there. Keela is trained to only alert when she actually finds blood, not just when she smells it. That is because her role is different, she is trained to actually find the blood for evidence purposes, Eddie is trained to find the body or traces of it. The fact remains in Maddie's case he did neither and Grime is perfectly frank about that. He states very clearly his alerts do not mean anything unless they are verified with proper forensic evidence. Clearly they were not.

It is no use people trying to say otherwise, his words are perfectly clear. (both Grimes and in the final report of the Prosecutor) There was absolutely nothing resulting from the dog searches that would have enabled an allegation of homicide to be made. But that does not mean it did not happen.

Gerry needs to defend himself. To throw the police off track by getting them to look for a body and getting them to look at Kate instead of him and his mates would be a clever thing to do. Gerry is clever, he is also very scheming and manipulative. I believe he derives great amusement and pleasure out of making money from the barks of the dogs and let's face he has made a packet. But, he did come unstuck, people like him always do, he is very arrogant and believes he is invincible.

I believe those senior judges in Portugal understand Gerry only too well and were quite sure he was not going to take another million out of Goncalo. As they said, he was exercising his right to freedom of speech by writing a book setting out what the investigation thought was most likely to have happened, at that point in time. At this point in time things have quite obviously moved on.

viv said...

Hello again Mar

I see I missed a bit, since I read the PJ files and found out there was nothing conclusive about the dog alerts, I have always found the tactless talk about Maddie's corpse very offensive and yes, it is upsetting. I do believe they just think it is some kind of pleasure to post such loose talk on a blog and they forget how others may feel about it.

Maddie may be alive and suffering terribly, in those circumstances those mocking comments about her dead body are just well.... maybe I should not say any more!

They are not moving any further forward by keep on repeating those remarks are they, or getting decent people to listen to the real issues which do include the fact the McCanns have consistently told a pack of inconsistent lies about the disappearance of their daughter. That, on any level, makes them complicit in that disappearance. But if people just read a bunch of cranks making jokes about her body, they are hardly going to read on.

viv said...

What a great post from Isar on MM, I have seen people attack her (they are to be pitied for feeling the need to do this) but she just talks plain common sense rather than following anyone else's agenda, that is how people can arrive at the truth.

Bravo Isar! I wish there were many more like you!

viv said...

isar Yesterday at 11:22 pm

I had high hopes for Goncalo Amaral's book and film - IMHO neither delivered anything substantive to clear up the disappearance of Madeleine

I had high hopes for Kate McCann's book too - IMHO it delivered nothing substantive to clear up the disappearance of Madeleine

Both Amaral and McCann wrote their books in their respective native languages (no dodgy translations - giving a slant - so no excuses of the content having been messed with)

Amaral's book was flakey, devoid of insight and certainly never delivered the smoking gun he so promised it would

McCann's book is about Kate and her emotional topography-a Mills and Boon effort that added nowt to the few available facts. And the comment on page 129 is unforgivable.

Both books IMHO let the wee girl down-and as anathema as this will be to the few who still visit these forums - I can almost understand Amaral trying to get even with his little tome -whilst Kate McCann writing pretty much ONLY about how she was affected by the disappearance - without giving any concrete information on what exactly happened on the 2nd and 3rd of May is in my eyes the worse culprit.

Who was where, when and why on the 2nd and 3rd of May is paramount to clearing this saga up all else is fluff and window dressing - and Kate couldn't or wouldn't answer these real questions in her own book.

therefore, in my book NSY is the only hope remaining - if they get the co-operation of the PJ

the only hope for Madeleine and other 'disappeared' people

viv said...

Gerry, during the week, started telling people about how they left the children alone...

An "accident"??

viv said...

That man was starting his PR campaign before he even got rid of her..

Come on London Met, lock him up!

viv said...

The old double act, defending those overpaid dogs, never does make for a very informative read (see the early days on this blog, hail Goncalo Amaral)

One could even call them attack dogs, to anyone who dares to challenge their dogma, oooh!


Heaven help you Isar for daring to speak the truth on Missing Madeleine, shame on you lady!

viv said...

Anyone who tries that will either get bullied off or banned off. Same old routine.

Isar says Grime trousered £93,000 in Jersey for finding nothing more than a coconut shell, Rubbish says Docmac? Sorry Doc, but oh please!

viv said...

"Had Madeleine wandered off"??

I was forgetting only Docmac and Claudia have this divine insight to know for a fact exactly what happened to Madeleine. Maybe they should speak to the cops then?

Claudia79 Today at 1:23 am

In fact, both sets of dogs are great. They are simply trained to detect different things. And that is exactly what they do. Sniffer dogs have in fact a more complicated job because they detect a living person's scent and since Madeleine has been to PdL and supposedly walked around, it would be expected that the dogs would detect her scent. They could have been very helpful had Madeleine wandered off.

viv said...

I would have thought a scent trail of Madeleine ending up in a car park could actually mean she was carted off and put in a car, but how simple of me to think such a thing.

Maybe she got put in a McCann missing holdall, oh no, that is not possible, Martin Smith saw Gerry carting her off, walking through the streets with her, dead, of course.

Sometimes I just wander what these people get off on or who is paying them?

viv said...

They are gold plated dogs, if you are Kate and Gerry you can sue people for millions and write books that make millions too. If you are Goncalo you can do the same. If you are Grime you can get money for old rope too.

I think those dogs are just as exploited as poor little Maddie.

There is a distinct smell of rubbish associated with the dog stories.