Sunday, 6 September 2015

Goncalo Amaral, an appealing situation.

On the 3rd of September 2015, we finally got the news we'd been waiting for, Goncalo Amaral, the coordinator of the original investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, was granted permission to appeal the damages ruling that resulted in the banning of his book, The Truth of The Lie, the banning of the documentary of the same title, and the decision to award Kate and Gerry McCann 250,000 euros each.

Click here to read, The Truth of The Lie, English translation.

Click here to watch, The Truth of The Lie, full documentary.

Courtesy of

When news of the original decision broke on the 28th April 2015, the McCanns were said to be "delighted". Of course they would be, Kate McCann has made no secret of her hatred for Goncalo Amaral, the man who, despite Kate's best efforts to the contrary, tried to solve the case of her missing daughter. When speaking of Goncalo, she said "he deserves to be miserable and feel fear". 

I wonder if Kate and Gerry will be delighted at the news of the appeal though? Their loopy supporters frothed at the mouth when news of the fund, set up by Leanne Baulch to assist Goncalo with his legal fees, broke. As is par for the course for the more sinister of the pros, a dirty tricks campaign started, with the sole intention of stopping the fund, and attempting to stop the legal process. Of course the pros would never publicly state that an appeal is the last thing they would want for their child abusing idols, but it is.

On the 9th of September 2009, the McCanns succeeded in their bid to have Goncalo Amaral's book, The Truth of The Lie, banned from sale. Gerry McCann released the following statement:

 "I'd like to read this statement on behalf of Kate, myself and our three children:

We're pleased with the judges decision today preventing further distribution and sale of Mr Amaral's book and DVD, 'The Truth of the Lie'.

Mr Amaral's central thesis has no evidence whatsoever to support it.

To claim, as he did, that Madeleine is dead and that we, her parents, were somehow involved in her disappearance has caused our family incredible distress and continues to do so.

Without doubt Madeleine will have suffered as a result of the negative effect this book and DVD will have had on the search for her.  

Sean and Amelie need protection too, from such awful claims.

Hopefully this injunction today will go a long way towards reducing further unnecessary and unjust distress to us all and allow people to concentrate completely on what is important; finding Madeleine.
Thank you."
Gerry and Kate's happiness was short lived though. Goncalo Amaral appealed the decision, and on the 19th of October 2010, duly won. The following is a report from The Guardian dated Tuesday 19th October 2010:

Kate and Gerry McCann, the parents of missing Madeleine, suffered a setback today in their legal battle with a Portuguese police officer when a Lisbon appeal court overturned a ban on his book about the case.
The book by former police detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the Madeleine investigation in the first five months after the three-year-old's disappearance, can now go back on sale.
In September last year the McCanns obtained the ban on Amaral's book Maddie – The Truth about the Lie, in which he claims they were involved in the toddler's disappearance.
Amaral claims Madeleine died accidentally in the Algarve holiday apartment at Praia da Luz, where she was first reported missing in October 2007, and that her parents fabricated the abduction story. The McCanns, who have never ceased in their search for the missing girl, are suing him for defamation.
Portugal's attorney general, having reviewed the investigation, has ruled there is no evidence to suggest that the McCanns are anything other than entirely innocent.
The court said the decision to block sales of the book had broken "a constitutional and universal right: that of opinion and freedom of expression."
"The contents of the book do not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs," the court said, according to the Jornal de Noticías newspaper's website.
"The book is an exercise in freedom of speech," Amaral told Portugal's Lusa news agency. "Portuguese democracy has won, as banning the book was unconstitutional."
A spokesman for the McCann family said the decision did not stop the defamation case. "The defamation action against Mr Amaral is very much continuing," he said. "Kate and Gerry's lawyers are now examining the detail of this latest ruling and are considering an appeal."

With the latest appeal now looming, Kate and Gerry must be sweating over what the result may be. The Appellate (appeal) court, concluded their previous findings in the following report, with thanks to Astro for the translation, and taken with thanks from McCannfiles:

"We conclude that the applicants voluntarily decided to limit their right to the intimacy of private life, certainly envisaging higher values like the discovery of their daughter Madeleine's whereabouts, but upon voluntarily limiting that right, they opened the doors for other people to give their opinion about the case, in synchrony with what they were saying, but also possibly in contradiction with their directions, yet always within the bounds of a legitimate and constitutionally consecrated right to opinion and freedom of expression of thought.

We do not see that the right of the book's author, the defendant, can be limited by a right to the reservation of intimacy that suffered voluntary limitations by their holders, the applicants. 

In the same way, concerning the applicants' right to image and a good name: upon placing the case in the public square and giving it worldwide notoriety, the applicants opened all doors to all opinions, even those that are adversarial to them. 

In any case, we understand that the allegation of facts that are profusely contained in the judicial inquiry and that were even published through an initiative of the Republic's Attorney General’s Office, can in no way be seen as an offence against the right to image and a good name of the subjects in the process.

Finally, concerning the damage to the right to usufruct ['Usufruct' is the legal right to use and derive profit or benefit from property that belongs to another person] from the penal process' guarantees, namely the right to a fair investigation and the right to freedom and safety, we still cannot understand how it is possible for said rights to be offended by the contents of a book that describes facts from the investigation, although it parts from the interpretation that the Public Ministry's Magistrates made of those facts, yet offering based, solidly built and logical interpretations.

We thus reach a point where it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants' constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry's Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants' rights.

In a concise manner:

The book at stake in this process – "Maddie – the Truth of the Lie" – which was written by the defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights.

The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are secured to everyone by the European Convention on Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution, namely in its articles 37º and 38º.

As we arrive at this point, we conclude that the decision that was made by the Court a quo must be revoked, and the analysis of the other issues that are placed under appeal are not justified, as they are considered prejudiced.

The appeal by defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral is sustained.

The other appeals are not taken into consideration, as it is understood that their appreciation is prejudiced – article 660º, no 2, of the Civil Process Code.

III – Decision

In harmony with what is written above, under the terms of the cited dispositions, the Judges at this Appeals Court declare the validity of the appeal filed by defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, and the sentence of the Court a quo is revoked, its disposition replaced by the following:

The injunction is deemed not valid because it was not proved.

Furthermore we deliberate that we do not acknowledge the rest of the appeals.

Costs to be paid by the appellants*.

Lisbon and Appeals Court, 14.10.2010

The Appellate Court Judges,

Francisco Bruto da Costa
Catarina Arelo Manso
António Valente

*On an appeal, the party who must respond to an appeal by the losing party is called 'appellant' in the appeals court."

So despite the pros claiming that the McCanns will beat Goncalo Amaral in the appeal courts, the history books tell a totally different story. Is the appeal court really going to contradict the findings of the three judges named above? You wouldn't bet your last quid on it would you. Fact is, the McCanns got very lucky with the ruling earlier this year. I do hope they didn't have the cash earmarked for anything in particular, mortgage repayments, a European tour, some pampas grass for Pam Gurney perhaps, because from where I'm sitting, I can't see them getting a penny. A view clearly shared by the pros, who did their level best to shut down the fund, and attack the person who started it. I wonder what prompted that............

Thursday, 3 September 2015


Is it too much to ask, I mean really too much to ask, that I might sit down one day, open a newspaper, read it front to back (it's more hygienic that way), and say to myself, "toast my chestnuts on an open fire, that was a damn good, factual read".

As a newspaper editor, Lloyd Embley, editor of The Daily Mirror, has within his grasp, the opportunity to make a difference in the world. You would imagine that with such a role, his greatest ambition would be to expose child abuse, or oversee the exposure of man's inhumanity to man.

So, in his own words, what was Lloyd Embley's proudest moment of 2014?

"Firstly, the jaw-dropping exclusive Sunday Mirror interview with former boxing promoter Frank Maloney, revealing that he was now known as Kellie and was undergoing gender reassignment."

Week after week, we have seen Lloyd Embley and his ilk support Kate and Gerry McCann, with either old stories, twisted stories, stories from unattributable sources, or just unadulterated lies.

Take yesterday's article for instance; click here to read, as well as the usual twaddle The Daily Mirror touch upon Euclides Monteiro, a former employee of the Ocean Club where Madeleine stayed. The Mirror states that Monteiro's widow, Luisa Rodrigues:

"insisted he was an innocent man and has been fighting to get authorities to confirm they have now ruled him out as a suspect."

They go on to say that:
"Scotland Yard, tasked with investigating Madeleine’s disappearance after Madeleine’s family made a personal plea to David Cameron in 2011, have come to focus on the theory she was killed during a bungled burglary."

Once again, it would appear that Embley, perhaps whilst busy scouring the land for his defining moment of 2015, is blissfully unaware of the editors' code of practice:


i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.

iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

That's pretty straight forward. I wonder if Embley might take the time to explain how his oily rag continually breaches this code by printing, "totally inaccurate, misleading or distorted information" with regards to the case of missing Madeleine McCann. Most men carry their car keys and wallet in their pockets, seems to me a certain Clarence "cash for lies" Mitchell, carries Embley in his.

Firstly, Euclides Monteiro was ruled out of any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, not once, but twice. After his death in 2009, an autopsy was performed upon Monteiro, and his DNA taken, this DNA was cross referenced against that found in apartment 5a, and other crimes within the Algarve, that had no evidential connection to the disappearance of Madeleine, not only was that DNA proven to not match any recovered from 5a, it was also ruled out from any other crime. In short, Euclides Monteiro was an innocent man, something The Daily Mirror failed to mention.

Hardly surprising when you compare the efit of Scotland Yard's number one suspect, with that of Euclides Monteiro. (Monteiro is the one who doesn't look like Gerry McCann)

Of course theses facts don't stop the Daily Mirror from deliberately misleading the reader. At best Embley only cares about selling papers, and as long as the McCanns are ok, anybody else, including dead people, matter not.

Moving on swiftly to the second totally misleading piece of misinformation, and The Mirror's claim that Scotland Yard have come to focus on the theory that Madeleine was killed during a bungled burglary. That statement is complete conjecture, The Daily Mirror have no idea what the focus of the investigation is. Many leads are being followed up, so to claim that one is the focus over others is blatant misinformation. I have ask myself why The Mirror have chosen now to suggest Madeleine is dead. They've ignored the fact the dogs alerted to all things McCann for years, why say she was killed now? Kate and Gerry will not be pleased, still I'm sure you'll clear up that in your next thrilling episode of: "The Daily Mirror talks bollocks" won't you Embley, you fucking yes man.

Saturday, 22 August 2015

The sociopathic traits of Gerry McCann


  1. a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behaviour.

One of the questions that poses itself for anybody who has studied the McCann case, or indeed for the casual observer, is this; could one or both of the McCanns have a severe mental disorder? 
A sociopath possesses  the ability to withdraw emotion and conscience from situations that may present themselves to them, especially when those characteristic traits hinder their ability to cope with a problem. 

  1. For instance, imagine a computer game, a shoot em up, if you will. You the player, wander the streets, armed to the teeth with weapons and shoot anything that comes your way. That is the aim of the game, and you do it because you must to win. You have no feelings for the characters you blast your way past, why would you, they're not real, you just do it because it's a game. For the sociopath, it is much the same, life presents them with a mission, a goal, or a need, and whilst they might not kill anyone in the process, the lack of conscience gives them the ability to calmly succeed without thought for right or wrong, only the desire to win.

    In Gerry McCann, we see a man who plays out the case of his missing daughter as if it were a game. He appears to thrive from the thrill of the chase, and it is that chase that makes his sociopathic traits manifest to the surface. Whereas you or I would panic if in the situation of the McCanns, Gerry does not, he is calm, he is alert, he is calculating, his mind working at high speed, reading the situation with the guile of a predator, all powerful, in control of everyone, and everything around him. He feels that he is the centre of attention, his personality absorbent of his own deceptiveness, and his self belief grows with every calculated scheme.

    Take the following scenario, it is a theory that has been put about by many as to what happened to Madeleine McCann:

    The McCanns sedated their children, so that they could enjoy nights out without the worry of them waking up. It isn't an implausible theory, Kate McCann after all, is a qualified anaesthetist, she would have a professional expertise on various sedatives, dosages, and be more than competent in the administration of them. It is a known fact that Madeleine, as is quite normal for a three year old, had history for waking during the night, as her reward chart shows. 

  2. If we are to believe that the children were left, then how could the McCanns be sure Madeleine would not wake, wander off, (she had done before). She could have encountered many household hazards in a dark, unfamiliar apartment. Kate described in her book, and to the press how "we had always suspected all three children had been sedated" yet it took her 4 months to have them tested. Now, with Gerry's cardiological background, and Kate's expertise, it is completely illogical that either parent would take 4 months to have their children tested, knowing the fatal consequences that could arise  from a qualified professional giving children sedatives, let alone a stranger. Curiously, Kate had this to say of the eventual test results:

    "Whilst this didn't totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it meant that nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise"

    There are grounds to believe the children had all been sedated, not by an abductor, but by Kate or Gerry McCann, and so back to our scenario. The children were sedated, Madeleine has an adverse reaction to the drug she was given, and either wakes feeling unwell, gets out of bed and has a fall, or dies during her sleep, and is found by her parents. It would certainly explain the cadaver odour on Kate McCann's clothes, and could even explain the crying heard by Mrs Fenn. As harsh as it sounds, and it does, Madeleine is dead, neither parent can change that fact, a decision must be made. This is where the sociopath would take over. With no regard for human decency, a sociopath would enter the realms of damage limitation, or self preservation if you like. An autopsy is out of the question, thus alerting the authorities is out of the question. Too much would be at stake, neither doctor would work again, one, or both would certainly face manslaughter charges, which would undoubtedly result in a jail term, and both of the twins would be taken from the couple. With that in mind, is it inconceivable that Gerry took over, hatched a plan to dispose of Madeleine's body, and protect what is left of his family? I think not.

  3. There is clear evidence, that suggests Gerry segregated the loss of Madeleine to concentrate on saving the family unit. Time and time again, we see Gerry refer to Madeleine as "the child", it is a classic case of disassociation. By calling Madeleine "the child", she is no longer his daughter, but an object, eg. the bus, the tree, the fridge, the emotional connection is removed, therefore making the situation more playable, remember this is a game now, there is no room for sentiment, not for the sociopath.

  4. A sociopath has the burning need to control situations, to control the characters within the game, again this is evident with the power Gerry holds over Kate. Kate has aged drastically over the years, she does not possess the same ability to place guilt or emotion into a box, thus dealing with self preservation as easily. Take for example the 48 questions Kate McCann refused to answer. We are told this was upon the advice of the McCanns' lawyer, yet Gerry chose to answer his questions. Of course he was always going to, the need for controlling the situation would mean that keeping silent, simply wasn't an option. Keeping Kate silent, on the other hand, was the only option. It was during Gerry's interview, that we see yet more evidence of displacement, when shown the evidence of the dogs alerting to all things McCann, Gerry wouldn't even look at the screen. Almost childlike tendencies, "If I can't see it, it isn't happening, and therefore it can't hurt me" again, removing the reality, the risk of emotion, from the set plan, the self preservation. Gerry had to be in control. Whilst waiting at the police station, and about to negotiate, with a man who claimed to have Madeleine, Gerry was said to be sat, calmly sucking on a lollipop, watching the television, and chatting to an officer about sport, yet again, and I know I keep writing it, he was distancing himself from the situation.

    Time after time we have seen interviews on the television, or videos, where Gerry displays his true nature, he can't help it, whilst he is talking, he is calmness personified, he is in control, the toothy sneer, the arrogance, the smugness, the catch me if you can attitude, but all of that goes out the window the moment Kate speaks. As soon as Kate answers a question, or dares to speak, Gerry's face tightens, a fear washes over his face, he is not in control, and the fact that every word that comes out of Kate's mouth, hasn't passed through the mind of Gerry first, fills him with dread. Take the video below for example, Gerry goes through every trick in the book to correct Kate, he shows disappointment, both facially, and physically, leaving Kate in no doubt, that she hasn't stuck to his script.  

  A sociopath, whilst convinced they are doing the      right thing by a loved one, will ultimately destroy    them. They truly believe that they are making those  closest to them, into better people, for that person's  own good. They will attempt to mould them into  what they believe they should be, but in doing so,  they will leave the other person lifeless, scared and  desolate. Kate's face bears the scars of such  behaviour, it is barren , often lifeless, her eyes  glazed, and devoid of any happiness. Her actions  are no longer her own, as she now finds herself in a  mortal state of purgatory, ruled by her "loving"  husband, whilst tortured with the need to rid herself  of guilt. Something she will never be able to do. 

In contrast, Gerry doesn't seem to have aged at all, he has fed his needs from what he perceives as a game, a game that to he is convinced he is winning, but at what cost? How many have suffered at the hands of Gerry McCann, how many more will suffer? One thing is for sure, one day, one way or another, the games are always over, and when that day comes, Gerry McCann, the man who thought he could control the world, will lose everything. 

Saturday, 1 August 2015

More McCann lies. A crock of locked V unlocked

Philomena McCann, Gerry's sister, said on 04 May: "Some people may ask why they left the children alone in the apartment but it was locked and they had a full view of the front door and they were checking every half hour."

Ok, so the apartment was locked then.

Jill Renwick, a family friend, told GMTV on 04 May: "She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."

Still locked.

Jon Corner, a friend of the McCanns, and one of the many people who was told the lie of an "abductor" smashing the shutters, said:

"She (Kate) just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'

"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."

You guessed it, still locked.

It was these people, along with others, who were also told tales of "smashed", "jemmied" and "broken" shutters. Before we move on, let's have a look at some of the statements from people who the McCanns lied to, when they said there had been a break in:

Instead of searching for Madeleine, the McCanns were busy lying to all and sundry:

Brian Healy (Kate's father)

"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone,"

Trish Cameron (Gerry's sister)

"The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had been jemmied open."

"She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.''

Philomena McCann (Gerry's big sister)

"The shutters were jemmied, the window opened"

Jill Renwick (Kate's friend)

"Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters were forced."

"They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour and the shutters had been broken open and they had gone into the room and taken Madeleine,"

Jon Corner (family friend)

"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed."

"She just told me that Maddy (sic) had been abducted, that the shutters of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."

Daily Mail

"When Mrs McCann checked on the children, she found the apartment door wide open, the window shutters jemmied wide and her daughter's bed empty."So as things on the night of the 3rd, we have reports of a locked apartment, parents out, smashed shutters, and a missing child. 

^^^^That's an abduction right there^^^^

Only that isn't the truth is it. The truth is, there were no signs of a break in, despite the McCanns best efforts to convince the world otherwise, and the truth came out almost as quickly as it was hidden:

Daily Mail

"The parents, who were taken to the PJ in Portimão at around mid-morning, refused to speak to the journalists, but advanced the idea that the apartment had been broken into, to the British media. Nevertheless, the resort's administration and the GNR assert that "there were no signs of a break-in whatsoever"

Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, spokesman for the investigation, has confided in British former Chief Inspector Albert Kirby that neither the windows nor their shutters had been tampered with.

Albert Kirby

"I had a very interesting chat with the officer in charge. The window shutters are not an issue."

Confirming this, 
John Hill (resort manager) said that there was:

"no sign of a break in whatsoever"

Even the McCann's very own spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, finally conceded that:

“There was no evidence of a break-in"

This amazing U turn was covered in many newspapers:

Irish Independent

"Interestingly, Clarence Mitchell's statement about the McCanns reversal of their 'break in' story, came one week after Dispatches aired the documentary 'Searching For Madeleine' on 18 October 2007. In that documentary, it was effectively proved that there was no way anybody could break into the apartment and leave no forensic trace or damage to the lightweight aluminium shutters, which are covered with a fine coating of polyurethane paint which marks extremely easily."

So how did an "abductor" get into a locked apartment, take Madeleine from her bed, and make off into the night, without leaving a trace?

Think Gerry, think. What you gonna do now, you're screwed. Abductors don't walk through walls.........

Taken from Gerry McCann's statement, the day after he and Kate spent the night telling lies, whilst others searched for their daughter.

Click here to read Gerry McCann's statement 04/05/2007

"the witness, (Gerry) came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked"

What's that? Say that again.........

"the witness, (Gerry) came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked"

but I thought it was unlocked?

Well this is most peculiar. <scratches head>

Let's get this straight, first the apartment was locked, the shutters smashed, and Madeleine taken.

The next day, the shutters were fine, the patio door had been left unlocked.

Despite this patio door being unlocked, Gerry states, that both he and Kate used their key to gain access to the apartment via the front door. Here's where things get a bit odd. Check this diagram out:

The black line, denotes the route from the Tapas bar to the patio door Gerry says they left unlocked. The red line, the route to the locked door, Gerry claims he and Kate used to check on Madeleine (we will see Kate's version of events differ completely later). It beggars belief that the couple would take a route twice the distance to enter the apartment, through a locked door, when the unlocked one was much closer.

Now, over the years we've heard the excuse that the patio door was left open in case of fire. Are we really supposed to believe that if a fire was to break out, Madeleine, a 3 year old little girl, would battle through the blaze, a sibling slung over either shoulder, make her way to the unlocked patio door, and save the day? Let's say that would be possible, that Madeleine could indeed do that. Why then was Kate so sure, that Madeleine hadn't simply wandered off? How was it she was convinced straight away that "They've taken her",

Let's look at Kate's first statement now. You'll remember how Gerry said that both he and Kate used the locked, front door to gain access to the apartment. Kate however, tells a different story, she states that she actually used the unlocked patio door. The following is taken from Kate McCann's statement:

"At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did."

Statement of Kate McCann 04/05/2007

Wouldn't you think that Kate and Gerry would have known exactly which doors each other used, especially the one used for the final check?

Would it not be something you would both discuss over and over, as you desperately tried to ascertain what happened that night?

Perhaps had they not both spent the night lying to friends and family, about a fully locked apartment, and smashed shutters, (whilst not searching for their missing daughter) they might have perfected their plan B story sooner.

I will leave you to sit back and watch this video, yet another version of events, and perhaps the most ludicrous thing I have ever witnessed.


Friday, 17 July 2015

Rule number one. Never let the truth get in the way of protecting the McCanns.

To my mind pro McCanns fall into different categories.

There are those who rightly or wrongly believe the McCanns to be innocent, and will quote facts to back up their claims. I have no issue with that.

Then there are those who are friends with the McCanns or their family, and yes some of these people are active on facebook and twitter, some are probably decent people away from the keyboard, some are most certainly not.

We have a minority, within the minority that call themselves pros, but are actually nothing more than sad lonely individuals who jump from case to case with the sole intention of "trolling". I hate that term, it is far too readily thrown around for the sake of it. The press love to use it to describe anybody who asks questions, as we all too well know.

Then of course we have the extremely stupid, I'm not talking leaving your bath running here, I'm talking eating crayons because colourful stuff looks appetising. I'm talking about those who are so innately lacking in brain power that no matter how many times you show them a link to disprove what they are saying, they won't have it, and in barely legible writing will tell you that it is you who is thick. Basically we're talking about the likes of Alfibab3 (from twitter) whose real name is Wendy Grandfield.

So that leaves us with one other type of pro, now this type of pro is extremely worrying. For those of you on twitter, you may have come across a tweeter who goes by the name of Safari Sara, and boy is Sara a weird un. Sara loves to claim she is debunking the evidence of the dogs, and also claims to discredit Amaral. Now the two ways she does this is to use the Haut de la Garenne child abuse investigation in Jersey in 2008, and the investigation into the horrendous murder of 8 year old Joana Cipriano, which Goncalo headed in 2004.

Firstly let's look briefly at the background of HDLG, how Eddie, the human cadaver and human blood dog was deployed, what he found, then how the disturbed mind of Sara makes out that nothing untoward happened there, and goes onto claim Eddie's alerts were false.

HDLG was opened in 1867 with the purpose of being a school for neglected children, it went on to serve a few purposes, but it's main use was as a childrens home, until in 1986 the home closed. After the home's closure it was used for a short period as a temporary respite centre for children with special needs. When you think of the number of vulnerable children that passed through the building's doors, and knowing what we now know went on there, it sends shivers down your spine. Most of us, thankfully, can only imagine the horrific happenings that took place, and what it must be like to be scared and alone, with no one to trust, no family to help you, and abused at the hands of those who are supposed to be your saviours.

In February 2008 a police investigation started on site at the home, this investigation was brought about after allegations of the abuse, and murder of children at the home. Eddie, the dog widely regarded as the best in the world, and who had also, the year previous worked on the Madeleine McCann case, was brought in with his trainer, Martin Grime. Below is a link, filmed by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, present with him at the time was former Deputy Chief Police Officer Mr. Lenny Harper:

As you will hear from the start of the video, Mr Harper was in no way confident as to Eddie's abilities, not least of all because of the bad press Eddie had received at the hands of pro McCann claims after his findings in 2007. That opinion was soon to change, as you can see by the report he made to accompany the video below, take note at some of the amazing tests that Eddie passed with flying colours Mr Harper describes at the start of his report. JAR/6 is a fragment of a child's skull:

00.00.0 Getting ready. I was reluctant to let the dog inside as I did not feel that it would do much good. In truth, I was a little sceptical – I had not felt a favourable impression from the handler (Martin Grimes (sic)) at our initial meeting and I was dubious, although my opinion of his qualities and integrity was to markedly change as events unfolded. I began to realise as I worked closely with him over a period of months that what I originally took as arrogance was simply supreme confidence in the ability of his dogs in the face of jealous, empire protecting rivals who were not as professionally capable. Throughout the investigation, we subjected Martin and his dogs to many ‘verifying’ tests, from burying swabs in sand (which he always found no matter how large an area), to minute blood stains. The dogs never failed. Many of these tests were carried out in front of Jersey politicians and media, including Channel Television and Diane Simon of the JEP. Frank Walker and Andrew Lewis were only two of the politicians who witnessed the ability of the dogs in hugely impressive displays. Funny how they all forgot this when they jumped on the bandwagon which sought to ruin Martin Grime’s reputation. One of the most spectacular exercises occurred when one of the Anthropologists brought a vial of sand back that she had removed from the tomb of a mummy in Egypt. We put this vial on a beach, below the sand, and let Eddie off to look for it. The dog amazingly sought it out in a few minutes and gave us the reaction you will see in this video. To get back to the start of the video and my initial doubts, after a few days outside I had at least gained a grudging respect for Martin’s hard work and dedication. I still was not keen to extend the search inside the house with the dog; however, I reluctantly conceded that we should look at all our possibilities so that we could walk away and say that we had given it a good shot. You can see me standing looking less than confident.

00.00.45 The first indication that the dog (Eddie) is finding something amiss. His behaviour has changed, and is remarked on by the handler. He is initially reacting further down from where we were to eventually find the initial fragment, (which ILM and others still incorrectly claim to be definitively identified as coconut) and in the flow of the drainage from the area where it was found. To clarify, Eddie is trained to trace the scent of dead human flesh. He will react where this scent is found, not necessarily where it was originally located. His strongest reaction will normally be where that scent is strongest, which will usually be where the dead flesh has lain longest, but he will sense it in areas where the scent has been carried, for instance, by drains.

00.01.08 Eddie is starting to react strongly now. Although still some yards from the finding of JAR/6, he smells something which has been carried down in the drainage from the original source. We were later to find that the drain ran down from where we found JAR/6 and where the bones were found by the builders, who suspected that they were also the bones of juveniles. One of them identified a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. These bones were found with children’s’ shoes which were to be later the source of interesting conflicts between the evidence of the pathologists and the staff at the Jersey Museum.

00.01.50 The doors and wall where Eddie is reacting so strongly now lead into the room where the top wall adjoins the stair area where JAR/6 (the infamous initial fragment) was found. Note the change in the dog’s behaviour, and the strong indication from his that there is something to be investigated here. It is important to note at this point, that the dog is only telling us that the scent of human death is here. He is not telling us that there has been a murder; he is not telling us that this is the spot where a body has been buried. He is only telling us that the scent of human death is at this spot. He is saying, “There is something here for you to investigate.” It is worthy of note, that this is also next to the location where builders found the bones which they thought were human juveniles, and where they were told that if they found bones to let “bygones be bygones.”

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found. Note that he is reacting strongly. To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human. However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones as identified by one of the builders. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

00.04.15 Note the dog’s return to the wall. This was almost the exact spot where JAR/6 was found. It is a few inches from where the builders found the bones which they thought were human and which they were told about, “Let bygones be bygones.” If this dog was a waste of money, then how did he lead us to this exact spot? How did he later, in the ‘live’ presence of Wendy Kinnard (the then Home Affairs Minister) and Graham Power (the then Chief Police Officer), lead us to the bones in the cellars which an Anthropologist in the United Kingdom said were “fleshed and fresh” when burnt and buried? It cannot be a co-incidence that this dog, trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, reacted so strongly in an area where we were to find a fragment of substance initially identified by a professional, accomplished, Anthropologist, as a part of a child’s skull, and right beside the spot where builders found bones and children’s shoes which they thought were human bones. No amount of spin by Le Marquand and others can contradict this, and no amount of misinformation from Warcup and Gradwell can conceal this truth.

00.04.41 Eddie still on stairs, right above the location where JAR/6 was found. He comes down again to the exact spot.

00.05.20 Eddie still reacting strongly at the spot where JAR/6 was found.

This is the live video, filmed on a mobile phone as it happened. The film was made by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, on his mobile phone. He was to later say that the way we had carried out the search of HDLG was a “shining example” and should be documented as an example of good practice. Where has this recommendation been lost in the mists? The reactions of the dog speak for themselves. Eddie is not telling us that murder was committed at HDLG. He is telling us that somewhere in the floor-space of the premises; the scent of human death has been present. He is telling us that there is something there for us to investigate. His findings have been corroborated by the finding of the bones and teeth, by the results of the surveys carried out by the most sophisticated of electronic geological equipment, and by the evidence of builders and former residents and victims of abuse in HDLG. This video totally contradicts the spin of Frank Walker, Andrew Lewis and Diane Simon of the Jersey Evening Post, all of whom were taken on a tour of the building and given a demonstration of the ability and capability of Eddie and his companion "Keela" the blood detection dog. All of them were aware of the true situation relating to the dog and the finds. All of them, for their own reasons, chose to ignore the truth and to peddle the myths of those seeking to discredit the victims of the horrific abuse within HDLG. They are now, in my opinion, exposed as craven cowards and not fit to lick those victims’ boots. As for Martin Grimes (sic) and the dogs that they have tried to discredit, they are now working full time for one of the best Law Enforcement Agencies in the world in the USA.

So what we have there is a pathologist (a physician who interprets and diagnoses the changes caused by disease in tissues and body fluids) claiming that the bones found weren't human, and an anthropologist (someone who can examine human skeletal remains to determine the identity of unidentified bones.) claiming that the bones were human. Have a guess whose opinion was taken as correct. The pathologist said the findings were coconut shell, and it is this claim that our child abuse apologist, Safari Sara goes along with. The mere fact that a lab in Oxford found collagen, (something that is only present in mammals, NOT coconut) doesn't put Sara off her false claims, Sara doesn't fall into the category of dense as lead like poor Mrs Winch, a draft doesn't WHOOSH through her ears as with Wendy Grandfield. This is the other evidence that was found on the HDLG site:

JAR/30: 3-4; 1940s to 1980s. Two fragments of burnt bone one is fragment of longbone? Tibia. Submitted to University of Sheffield with KSH/158. Origin confirmed as human. Submitted for dating awaiting results.

JAR/33: 3-4; 1940s to 1980’s.
Calcined fragment of bone. ?human.

JAR/53: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
5 fragments of calcined long bone ?human.

JAR/54: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
4 fragments of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/55: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/57:183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
2 fragments of bone of unknown origin.

JAR/56: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/67: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human Tooth: deciduous left maxillary first molar, age 9 yrs ± 3 yrs. Could have been shed naturally (Anthro exam).
Submitted to odontologist, see report.

JAR/69: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments x 3 of possible human cortical bone.

JAR/61: 183 Zone 4 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
23 Fragments of bone:
1 Burnt fragment which closely resembles a human juvenile mastoid process.
2. Burnt fragment of ?human mandible.
3. Fragments of burnt long bone x 3 measuring between 11.3 and 16.3 mm.
4. Fragments of unidentified burnt cortical and trabecular bone x 7.
5. Fragment of slightly burnt long bone measuring 33 mm. The cortex of the
bone resembles human but it is quite thick and the trabeculae can not be seen because it requires cleaning. It appears to have been cut at one end.
6. Fragments of unburnt unidentified long bone. x 3 The appearance and texture of the cortex of the fragments appears more animal than human but it is advised that further examination should be undertaken in order to confirm this.
7. Fragments of unidentified long bone x 7. 5 have been burnt and 2 haven’t. Species
uncertain although two of the burnt fragments could possibly be human

JAR/90: 183 Cellar 3 Zone 3 East.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments of unidentified bone of unknown species. One which is calcined is possibly human bone.

Cellar 4 Context 169 (redeposited char material from fire elsewhere. Unsealed)

JAR/36: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/37: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone. ?human mastoid process

JAR/39: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone ?human.

JAR/40: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

GMK/18: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human tooth. Anthro exam – deciduous left maxillary lateral incisor. Age range 6 yrs ± 2yrs

Sara has been shown the facts many times, yet she still spouts more coconut crap than a bounty production line.


Because it suits her agenda.

What is her agenda?

To back the McCanns, OR to to back ALL child abusers?

Moving on, let's look at the case of Joana Cipriano, now this is another case of extreme child abuse, and Safari Sara uses this one to discredit Goncalo Amaral, she's not alone either, she is supported by that other font of misinformation, the buck toothed fiend Pamela Gurney.

On the 12th September 2004, Joana Cipriano disappeared from the village of Figueira, near Portimão, in the Portuguese region of the Algarve. The investigation by the Portuguese Judiciary Police (Polícia Judiciária - PJ) ended with the conviction for murder of Leonor and João Cipriano, Joana's mother and uncle. The prosecution claimed that Joana was killed because she saw her mother and João Cipriano, her mother's brother, having incestuous sex, in accordance with the testimony of the stepfather of Leandro Silva, the common-law husband of Leonor Cipriano. Leonor Cipriano confessed to killing her daughter. Her uncle confessed to having beaten her up after which she stood "quiet on the floor". He said he cut his niece's body in small pieces, put her in a fridge box, then put her inside an old car that was taken to Spain to be crushed and burned. When he was asked if he had sexually abused his niece he said in the presence of his lawyer "I did not harm her, I only killed her"

Goncalo Amaral was the lead detective in this case, now the impression that Sara and Pamela like to give is that Goncalo and his team beat a confession from Joana's mother Leonor, and that Goncalo played a part in this beating. This lie, as with the above coconut cobblers is lapped up by the pros, some believe it, which no doubt bring Sara and Pam much happiness. The simple facts are as follows:

At the time of Leonor's alleged beating Goncalo Amaral wasn't anywhere near the building.

Leonor Cipriano was given an extra 7 months for lying about being beaten by the PJ.

The only thing Goncalo did was to fill in the paperwork incorrectly regarding Leonor's injuries.

Leonor's injuries couldn't be attributed to anybody, and it was claimed in court by a fellow inmate, that it was prisoners that gave her these injuries.

The only reason Leonor made these claims, was to try and get off on the charge of murdering her own daughter, and feeding her body to pigs, which she did to cover up an incestual affair with her brother, she deserved everything she got.

Do you hear the pros congratulating Amaral and his team for catching these two child killers?

Not a chance, they wouldn't let that get in the way of discrediting Goncalo Amaral, whilst at the same time being apologists for child abusers! As I pointed out at the beginning of this post, pros like Safari Sara, and Pamela Gurney worry me greatly when they knowingly use such slurs to discredit people or facts.

I ask the question again, is their agenda merely to protect their heroes the McCanns, or are we dealing with something far more twisted and sick? As I said, pro McCanns that deal with facts I have no problem with, it is a free country, and thank God it is, but child abuse apologists posing as pro McCanns who knowingly lie, now that is something very sinister and wrong indeed.

Wednesday, 17 June 2015

It's not what you know, it's who, or could it be both?

It's not what you know, it's who...

We all know the McCanns lie, there are examples of their deceit everywhere. One of the first, and possibly most powerful set of lies they told, were the porkies Kate told to her old friend Jill Renwick.

Jill Renwick is a long standing friend of Kate McCanns, both Kate and Gerry worked with Jill at Glasgow hospital in the 90's. Jill was one of the friends Kate phoned during the early hours of the 4th May 2007, and possibly the most influential. It was through Jill that the lie about an "abductor" gaining entry to apartment 5a having smashed the shutters, manifested across the nation within hours of the parents reporting Madeleine missing. This fabricated story was remember, concocted by Kate and Gerry who sat indoors, whilst scores of volunteers searched throughout the night for a missing 3 year old girl they had never met. 

In an article for the Guardian by Esther Addley, on June 2nd 2007, Jill Renwick discusses her conversation with Kate:

"She just said, 'Help me, please help me'. She said, 'We've been searching all night until 4.30am, and then everybody left us'. At that stage there was only one police officer at the door. They didn't know what to do. So I phoned GMTV."

First line, and it's a lie, Kate did NOT physically search, and Gerry managed an hour, but that's by the by. Good old Jill phoned GMTV, surely GMTV would check that the information Jill gave them was correct, precise, and accurate? Not a hope, what they did was to fail Madeleine, whilst at the same time, helping the McCanns plant the abduction seed. Jill provided more lies to 6.1 million UK viewers:

"They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour."

"Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open. The shutters had been broken open and they've gone into the room and taken her."

BANG! In one fell swoop we have 6.1 million people being told that A, there was opportunity for an abduction, and B, there had been a forced entry. Total and utter nonsense, we now know, as did the McCanns, that there was NO forced entry, but there it was, out in the public arena. 

Support began to gather pace. Think about it, of those 6.1 million viewers, how many of them went into work that week, spoke to friends and told them; 

"hey did you hear on the news today? An intruder broke into an apartment in Portugal and snatched a little girl" 

The lie grew legs and multiplied, the press reported it as fact, and before the week was out the Mcanns had a nation behind them, in fact they had so much support based upon lies that when the Official Find Madeleine website was set up on the 10th May 2007 it received 75 million hits in the first 48 hours, and all due to one phone call. Pretty impressive stuff eh, but that's the way the media work. Being the first with the stories is more important than being the first with the facts. As we know facts are something that the Official Find Madeleine website is seriously lacking in.

So the McCanns owe their friend Jill a huge debt of thanks, but her influence on this case didn't stop there, far from it.

The high level of support might not be as much of a mystery as people think. Renwick, possibly with perfectly good intentions, and without knowing she was being used as a pawn in the McCann's scheme, rallied more support, in the form of Gordon Brown. Jill lived on the same street as Gordon's brother, John Brown. The following quote could explain just how the future Prime Minister came to be so involved:

"I stopped him in the street the day afterwards and said, 'These are my friends. Do you think you could speak to Gordon about it?' And he said of course."
As we know Gordon Brown took up the post of Prime Minister at the end of June 2007, in September that year his head of media monitoring, Clarence Eden Mitchell, resigned from his reported £75,000 a year cabinet office job to work as PR consultant for the McCanns. A bold move indeed if he truly believed that Madeleine could be found any day. Much has been said about the influence Gordon Brown had upon the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine Mccann. Certainly the political intervention in this case was something the like of which had never been seen before. 

In her diary, Kate McCann wrote:

"WEDNESDAY, MAY 23: Gordon Brown (then Chancellor and PM in waiting) called and spoke with Gerry -very kind and giving encouragement.
Feeling a bit emotional afterwards."

On the 27th May 2007, and with the original source being the Guardian, Brendan de Beer wrote:

"Gordon Brown has personally intervened in the search for missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann after her parents became frustrated by the lack of progress in the police investigation.
After a series of telephone conversations with Madeleine's father, Gerry McCann, in recent days, the Chancellor requested assistance from the Foreign Office and the Home Office. He asked that pressure be brought to bear on the Portuguese authorities to allow more information about the inquiry to be made public.

Gerry and his wife, Kate, have been desperate for a description of a man seen carrying what appears to have been a child on 3 May to be made public, but Portuguese police refused for three weeks because of the country's laws, which forbid the details of an investigation being released.
The Observer understands that Brown gave the McCanns an assurance he would do 'anything he can' to help. The British embassy duly applied pressure on the Portuguese authorities to find more flexibility in their secrecy laws. British ambassador John Buck visited the Algarve last Thursday. A day later Portuguese police made a U-turn and issued a detailed description of the man, said to be white, 35 to 40, 5ft 10in and of medium build, with hair longer around the neck, wearing a dark jacket, light beige trousers and dark shoes.

Asked whether Brown had influenced the decision, Clarence Mitchell, a Foreign Office spokesman for the McCann family in the Algarve, said: 'Draw your own conclusions.' He said in a statement: 'I can confirm that telephone conversations have taken place between Gerry McCann and Chancellor Gordon Brown. During them, Mr Brown offered both Gerry and Kate his full support in their efforts to find Madeleine, although details of the conversations will remain private.''

This efit was of course the man Jane Tanner saw, that sighting eventually amounted to nothing. I find it very strange the McCanns didn't push the Smith sighting with such vigour, but then from all of Tanner's many descriptions, none looked like Gerry.

We're not done, Renwick's sister called a friend she had in CID, and another contact was made, the former Defence Secretary, Des Browne. 

Can you see how this charade snowballed?

Two lies, made by Kate McCann, convinced a nation of their innocence within the space of three media frenzied days, and these bastards had a nerve to sue others! 

So whilst we're all considering theories as to why the McCanns have got away with so much, and the pros bleat like sheep claiming "The McCanns were just an ordinary couple like any other who didn't have friends in high places", let's not forget that they only needed one friend, Jill Renwick. As the old saying goes, it's not what you know, it's who............

Wednesday, 10 June 2015

21 Facts about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Most of the country do not trust Kate and Gerry McCann, despite the MSM's recent efforts to avoid saying anything against the couple for fear of being sued. Here are some basic facts, with links from the official police files, direct quotes, photographs, and videos to back them up. If you'd like to learn more I highly recommend joining, or following the above groups. 


A statement was taken by Leicestershire Police from Katherina Gaspar. That statement raised serious questions about Gerry McCann, and one of his friends, David Payne. Katherina was on holiday with the McCanns and David Payne in 2005. It was on this holiday, that she witnessed the two men having a discussion, and making sexual gestures. Horrifyingly, she believes they were discussing Madeleine at the time.

Despite the statement being given to Leicestershire Police only two weeks after Madeleine was reported missing, it wasn't passed onto the Portuguese authorities, until October 24, 2007, after the McCanns had been questioned as arguido (suspects), and after the coordinator of the investigation, had been inexplicably removed from the case, and only then, because the PJ requested it.


The McCanns claim they were doing regular checks whilst they left their three children in the apartment, alone at night.

Gerry McCann:

"The kids were sound asleep and they were being checked regularly. We didn't think we needed a babysitter. We are good parents and what we did felt perfectly reasonable at the time."

"It's like we were sat in our back garden, all be it at the end of our garden."

Yet a neighbour heard one of the children crying out for approximately 1 hour 15 minutes. This crying went on until the parents arrived home. To leave a child alone, and crying for a parent is neglectful, pure and simple.


The nannies who were said to be in contact with Madeleine in the days leading up to her being reported missing, all tell a different story. With regards to confirmed contact, no one statement matches.

(confirming links to the official police files are within the above blog entry)


On the night Madeleine was reported missing, the McCanns and their friends state that regular checks were being made upon the children. Gerry McCann claims he was only away from the table for a matter of minutes at the time it is believed Madeleine was "taken", a claim not backed up by one of the friends who states that:
"Kate had been moaning that you'd been gone a long time watching the football" 

At this point Gerry McCann has no alibi for longer than 2 minutes.


One of the group of friends, Matt Oldfield claims, in his statement, that he went to check on the McCann children just after 9:30pm, however, he cannot state whether Madeleine was in her bed or not, despite having a clear view, and stating that he could see the twins breathing in the same room, the picture below illustrates where Matt would have been stood as he entered the room. Madeleine's bed is immediately to his left, the twins cot beyond it, in the centre of the room. 


At 9:55pm, a family witnessed a man carrying a small child toward the beach, not 5 minutes away from where Gerry McCann was last seen. This family were said to be convinced the little girl was Madeleine McCann, the head of the family was up to 80% sure that the man carrying her was Gerry McCann.


The above sighting is the main focus of New Scotland Yard's investigation, who described it as a "revelation moment". Another man was seen passing by the McCann's apartment, but was ruled out by both police forces, having come forward and identified himself. Despite this, the McCanns still promote him as a suspect.


Despite the McCanns having the evidence of the sighting in their hands since November 2008, it took them 5 years to put the efit on their Official Find Madeleine page, and only then a few weeks after Scotland Yard put it up on Crimewatch.


Kate McCann got up to "check" on her children at 10pm. Only she wasn't actually going to "check", despite having walked all the way to the apartment. I realise how ludicrous that sounds, and that's probably because it is. The link below takes you to a video of Kate McCann giving the most implausible account of her "check" that evening.

FACT 10.

Kate McCann refused to give a detailed statement, as to what happened when she claims she realised Madeleine was missing. In fact she refused to answer any questions about what she saw, what she did, or where she looked after 10pm, immediately prior to her raising the alarm, when, according to her sister in law, she came out of the apartment, leaving the twins behind, shouting: "THEY'VE TAKEN HER"

FACT 11.

The McCanns did not search for Madeleine. Apart from a brief look around the immediate vicinity, and a trip down to the beach for Gerry, where he didn't actually search, but was "consoled" by a friend (David Payne), Kate and Gerry did not search until 6am the following morning.

FACT 12.

The McCanns lied to their friends back in the UK. As hard as that is to believe, the McCanns claimed that an intruder had "broken" "smashed" "jemmied" the shutters, and taken Madeleine out of the window. All this took place whilst scores of locals and guests searched for Madeleine McCann. Yep, whilst all that was going on, the McCanns weren't searching, they were creating lies.

The story was eventually retracted, and corrected by their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, and only after a documentary, by Channel 4 dispatches, proved that no break in had taken place. Mitchell stated that:

"There was no evidence of a break-in"

FACT 13.

On May 4th 2007, the morning after Madeleine was reported missing, Yvonne Martin, who worked for child protection services in England, and who was also on holiday in Portugal, introduced herself to the McCanns outside their apartment. She showed them her identification, and offered to help them. Curiously, and despite no leads, Kate McCann told her that Madeleine had been abducted by a couple. This claim also ties in with the report of Kate shouting, "THEY'VE TAKEN HER", but with no leads, how could Kate be so sure?

Stood with the McCanns at the time was David Payne, the man accused of making sexual gestures about Madeleine. It was Payne who pulled the couple away from Yvonne Martin, and after whispering to them, ushered them inside. Payne then returned to the street, where he told Yvonne Martin that the couple did not require her assistance.

Yvonne Martin states that she recognized Payne from the course of her work, and indeed, her concerns were great enough for her to write a letter to british police, stating that she felt the parents were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine. She also noted that Payne was wearing the same clothes, as a description of as man police had said was carrying a small child, the previous night.

Yvonne Martin also asked the police to check if David Payne was, or had been on any child abuse, or paedophile registers.

FACT 14.

A Ltd company was set up within days of Madeleine going missing. This wasn't a charity, it was and still is, a Ltd company. You'd be forgiven for thinking the company, called the Madeleine Fund, Leaving No Stone Unturned, was set up to find Madeleine, not so, it was set up "mainly for legal expenditure", as the video below proves.

FACT 15.

The McCanns made mortgage payments on their house in Rothley, directly from the fund.

FACT 16.

Madeleine's birthday, May 12th 2007, 9 days after Madeleine was reported missing. The following excerpt is taken from Kate McCann's book, and describes in her words how their mood was on this day:

”We ate mostly in silence, concentrating on the kids. I couldn't eat much, and alcohol was completely off my agenda. Fiona recalls that Gerry and I were completely shut down that day, barely able to talk, and although our friends tried to remain cheerful and behave normally to get us through it, they all felt awkward about being at this lovely villa, in the sunshine, in these circumstances. There was no cake. Gerry did attempt a toast but he was visibly upset and couldn't manage much more than ‘I can’t even say happy birthday to my daughter . . .’ before choking up. The physical loss was more intense than ever. I ached for Madeleine."

This is just one of the many blatant lies that appear in the book. Here we see a photograph, and below a video, taken on that very day, that shows the parents, and in particular, Gerry McCann, behaving in a manner totally different to the one Kate describes in her book.

FACT 17.

May 21st 2007, the McCanns meet with Labour Government spin doctor, Clarence Mitchell. In an unprecedented move, Mitchell is deployed to deal with the press on behalf of the McCanns. Mitchell's involvement in the case hindered the police investigation, he also lied to the press. Here are just some of his lies:

“There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever, nothing, to suggest Madeleine has been harmed, let alone killed” LIE

and an odd statement to make given that in 2008 he also said:

“Madeleine is probably dead”

“I can categorically state that Gerry did not have a blue tennis bag” LIE

When talking about the Helping to find Madeleine fund Mitchell described it as:

“Independently controlled” LIE

“Kate and Gerry would have no issue with taking a lie detector test” LIE

“There are wholly innocent explanations for any material the police may or may not have found”

When talking about the “tapas 7” and the McCann’s he stated:

“None of them were wearing watches or had mobile phones on them that evening” LIE

“Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest, and utterly open with the police and all of their statements since the moment Madeleine was taken” LIE

“We have nothing to hide” LIE

“We are always willing to cooperate with the Portuguese police” LIE

The head of the Portuguese police department Carlos Anjos described Clarence Mitchell as “a manipulative liar” TRUE

He also said that “He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth” TRUE

FACT 18.

May 29th, despite the possibility of an abductor still being at large, the McCanns embark on a European tour, leaving their twins behind in the very town they claim Madeleine was abducted from. Let's just say your child was abducted after you weren't there to protect them.

Would you really do it again, less than 3 weeks later?

Would you trust anyone other than yourself to look after your two youngest children?

In fact only the day before Kate was telling the press how:

'she could not face sleeping away from the twins. She said: "We've become totally protective parents."' - Daily Mirror 28 May 2007

Of course, yet again, Kate McCann was lying.

FACT 19.

The dogs, possibly the most damning element against the McCanns.

Let's have a look at their findings:

Keela, a 16 month old springer spaniel, was at the top of her field when she went to PDL in 2007, trained by Martin Grime (who now works for the FBI) she could sniff out the most microscopic specks of blood, even if the item had been cleaned or washed. To avoid any confusion Keela was trained to alert to nothing but human blood. So any talk of her alerting to anything else is pure fiction. At the time of the searches Keela earned £530 per day plus expenses, more than the chief constable at that time.

Eddie (pictured right) who was 7 at the time, had worked on over 200 cases worldwide and boasts an outstanding record of success. The FBI rated Eddie and Martin Grime as "two of the best in the law enforcement speciality of canine forensics, able to find evidence everyone else missed." Eddie was trained to alert to smell of human cadaverine (the smell given off from a human corpse) pro McCann's love to put about unfounded rumours that these dogs alert to other smells, nonsense, it was the McCanns who blamed the alerts on items such as dirty nappies, seabass etc.

To give a better idea a dogs nose is 10,000 times more sensitive to smell than our own. They can pick out every ingredient of a smell and separate it, much in the same way you or I could sort out different shaped wooden blocks, if we were handed a box of blocks containing sphere's, cubes, and pyramids, and told to put all the cubes to one side we could do it. A cadaver dogs nose works in the same way, it separates all the elements of one scent, examines each one in it's own right, and determines if human cadaver is present.

So what did the dogs find? Having gone through several other apartments at the Ocean club, and alerting to nothing, both dogs alerted to a number of places in and around the McCann's apartment, and their hire car.

Keela (below) alerted to human blood in:

The living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment.
In the McCanns’ hired Renault Scenic, hired 25 days AFTER Madeleine's disappearance.
On the car key.
In the interior of the car boot.

Eddie alerted to the scent of human cadaverine:

The wardrobe in the McCann's bedroom.
In the living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment. (the same place as Keela).
The veranda of 5a.
In the garden of the apartment.
The flower beds in the back of 5a.
The steps leading down from the patio.
Also, a ‘lighter’ scent of death was found in the flower beds in the back yard, near the foot of the steps leading down from the patio.
On two items of Kate's clothing.
On a T shirt belonging to Madeleine.
On cuddlecat (Madeleine's soft toy)
Not only that, but out of several cars in a car park Eddie only alerted to one, the McCanns' hire car.

Couple that with the fact that it was Eddie and Keela's findings led the forensic team to the discovery of DNA that could have belonged to Madeleine. In fact the original forensic conclusions were that it was DEFINITELY Madeleine's, that was later changed to say "It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample." The reason for that change was that John Lowe who compiled the report said he couldn't be certain how the sample came to be in the car. I fail to see what that has to do with the DNA being Madeleine's or not. It either is or it isn't.

Below are three videos showing Eddie and Keela's searches.

....and here more information on their findings.

FACT 20.

The refusal of a reconstruction.

Crime reconstructions are a vital part of police forces investigations Worldwide, they give a clearer picture of what actually happened. It's all very well having all the pieces of a jigsaw, but without the picture on the lid of the box it can be difficult to put the pieces together, especially when, as was the case with the McCann's and their friends statements, those pieces don't fit.

In 2008 Ricardo Paiva, an Inspector with the PJ, sent an email to Mick Graham, Detective Inspector of the Major Crime Unit. In this email Ricardo requested that the tapas 7 (the group of friends who were on holiday with the McCanns) be contacted with a view to attending a reconstruction. What followed was a series of ridiculous demands by the group of friends, followed by the refusal to take part. Below are the first set of questions, followed by Ricardo Paiva's replies:

1 - Why do the PJ want them to take part in the re-enactment?

2 - What is the aim, what are the PJ trying to achieve with the re-enactment?

3 - Why so close to the anniversary?

4 - Why don't the PJ use actors?

5 - Will the footage of the re-enactment be released to the press/TV etc?

6 - What protection is there for the friends in relation to the media coverage/likely frenzy?"
The responses from Ricardo were more than satisfactory:

1 - Why do the PJ want them to take part in the re-enactment?

The PJ wants them to take part in the re-enactment because they were the ones who experienced the situation. Therefore, they are in the best conditions to reproduce it.

2 - What is the aim, what are the PJ trying to achieve with the re-enactment?

The PJ is trying to find out, with accuracy, the circumstances of the events occurred, using for that purpose the exact place of events and the same persons who took part in it.

3 - Why so close to the anniversary?

Only now has the PJ conditions to carry out these proceedings, and also because it is desirable that the weather conditions are as similar as possible to those at the time of the events.

4 - Why don't the PJ use actors?

The reason is because only the persons involved can clarify, with accuracy and at the same place, their position and movements.

5 - Will the footage of the re-enactment be released to the press/TV etc?

The PJ won't release any pictures/footage to the press.

6 - What protection is there for the friends in relation to the media coverage/like frenzy?

The place will be isolated and press interference will be avoided to its maximum.

The re-enactment will be carried out in one single day, at the exact time the events occurred.

However, the witnesses are requested to stay in Portugal for a couple of days more, in order to allow the production of all the material which shall be analysed, checked and signed by the persons involved."

So having asked 7 questions of the PJ and duly been given the answers you'd expect the tapas 7 to be more than willing to help, you'd be wrong. Their next move was to start haggling with the PJ, putting forward demands that needed satisfying before they would co-operate:

Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner demanded the PJ;

• publicly dispels the damaging and disturbing lies churned out by the Portuguese press regarding alleged changes to statements, re-interviews or alleged lack of co-operation.

• publicly states there are "no suspicions over [us] regarding the commission of any criminal acts." This in no way compromises Judicial Secrecy.

Rachael O'Brien wrote:

Either they believe our version of the events of May 3rd 2007, or they don't. If they do, why the need for a reconstruction?

If they don't believe us, do they want a reconstruction so we can convince them otherwise?

If the purpose of a reconstruction is to convince the Prosecutor to lift Kate and Gerry's arguido status then we would consider taking part in it. If it is to properly focus the investigation on the person seen carrying a child away from the apartment, again, we would consider taking part because that would help to find Madeleine.

That would be the sighting Jane Tanner stands accused of lying about. The sighting she changed her description of several times, the sighting that has now been ruled out of the investigation by Scotland Yard, and indeed the sighting that is still promoted by the Official find Madeleine page.

Are you starting to get an idea of how impossible the PJ's job was?

The full details can be viewed on the link below:

FACT 21.

Kate and Gerry McCann have never been cleared of being involved in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

Jose de Magalhaes e Menezes was, along with João Melchior Gomes the man responsible for producing a 58-page report - the concluding volume of the case files - which explained the reasons behind the decision to archive the process.

Despite reports on Wikipedia and some pro McCann forums this report did NOT clear the McCann's of any involvement in the loss of Madeleine, in fact by raising doubt over their stories it did quite the opposite, below are some quotes from the report:

“The witnesses’ statements revealed important details which were not entirely understood and coherent”.

“The technique for this is a reconstruction, but despite every effort by the Public Prosecutor’s office and the JP [Policia Judiciara]…this was not possible”.

“The work of these dogs can be appreciated much better on film...the dogs are trained in detecting dead persons".

“The fact that the parents were the last people known to have been with Madeleine, alive and in a known place, particularly with the possibility of a body having been in the apartment and in the vehicle used by the parents…meant they had to be placed under suspicion. The parents had no plausible explanation for these facts. Faced with the evidence produced by the dogs and the laboratories, they had to be named as suspects…”

"The possibility of abduction was exhaustively investigated. No ransom was ever requested, nor were there any sufficiently consistent clues found to support this theory”.

“…the parents were the last people known to have been with Madeleine, alive and in a known place…the possibility of a body having been in the apartment and in the vehicle used by the parents were reasons for suspecting their involvement. As they were called once more to make a statement, having no plausible explanation for these facts and faced with evidence produced by the dogs…they had to be named as suspects…”

So far from being cleared the McCann's it would seem STILL have questions to answer, plausible explanations to give.......remember Kate refusing to answer those 48 questions? Neither Kate or Gerry have been interviewed by the PJ since. The attorney general wasn't the only person to doubt the McCann's:

Moite Flores, former police inspector and now political commentator in Portugal: “The only thing proven was that there was no abduction. I have no doubt that the child died”

Lee Rainbow, Britain’s top criminal profiler: “Madeleine's father was the last one to see her alive. The family is a lead that should be followed. Contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide”.

Assistant Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police (2007): “While both or one of [the McCanns] may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance”.

Former top British detective, John Stalker: “My gut instinct is that some big secret is probably being covered up”.

Ricardo Paiva, one of the chief detectives on the original investigation, told a Lisbon court in January 2010: “I share Gonçalo Amaral’s statement in the book. Maddie died, probably in a tragic accident, and all indications point towards the parents hiding the body”.

Director of the Portuguese National Counter-Terrorism Unit, Luís Neves: “Hiding a body and accidental death are possibilities”.

Intercalary report: Chief Inspector Tavares Almeida: "Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their daughter, Madeleine McCann"

And of course the main man, Goncalo Amaral: "Let's remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine's DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance."

"The McCanns knew that I was going to get them."

If only the political interference hadn't halted the case and those queries and questions had been cleared up.

If only good old fashioned policing had been able to run its course.

If only...................

The official police files can be read at:

There is also a extensive catalogue of news stories, and information at: