13 August 2009

The Crying Incident

Last Monday,‘Stevo’ posted an excellent video about the Madeleine case – or rather, about the McCann case, because Madeleine is, after all, only a ‘story’, in the words of Mr Mitchell.

The video contains a very impressive passage about a little episode that was reported by Mrs Fenn, the lady that lives in the apartment directly above apartment 5A, in her witness statement to the Polícia Judiciária, on the 20th of August 2007, as follows:

“She [Pamela Fenn] thus mentions that on Tuesday, the 1st of May 2007, and while alone at home, at around 10.30 p.m. she heard a child crying, that by the sound of it seemed to her to be coming from a young child and not from a two-year-old or younger baby. Simultaneously with the crying that lasted for about one hour and 15 minutes, and became increasingly more intense and expressive, the child screamed “daddy – daddy”, the deponent has no doubt that the crying came from the lower floor. At around 11.45 p.m., which is to say, one hour and fifteen after it started, she felt the parents arriving, but didn’t see them, nevertheless she heard the balcony door opening, which she noticed because she was quite worried, given the fact that the crying lasted for over an hour and increased steadily. When asked, she said that she didn’t know the reason for the crying, maybe a nightmare, or any other destabilising factor. She adds that as soon as the parents entered the house, the child stopped crying.” in Process 201/07.0 GALGS, pages 2412-2413

Now, instead of following diversionary tactics that lead us to faraway places like Australia, fun as it could be, maybe it would be interesting to take another look closer at home. Literally.

The witness statements that were given to the PJ by the McCann couple and their friends are widely available on the internet, duly translated by so many people who have offered their time and knowledge and did not receive thousands of pounds from any Fund for their work. As anyone can verify, the ‘crying incident’ is briefly mentioned in Kate and Gerry McCann’s statements:

“Between April 28, the day of arrival, and the time at which the disappearance was detected, the deponent [Kate McCann] said that nothing out of the ordinary had happened, except that on the morning of Thursday, May 3rd, MADELEINE asked the deponent why they hadn’t come into the room when the twins were crying. The interviewee had not gone into the room because she hadn’t heard anything, yet found her daughter’s comment strange, even because it was the first time that she had made it.” Kate McCann's statement on 04.05.2007 in Process 201/07.0 GALGS, page 59

“Between April 28, the day of arrival, and the time at which the disappearance was detected, the deponent [Gerald McCann said that nothing out of the ordinary had happened, except that on the morning of Thursday, May 3rd, MADELEINE asked the deponent why he had not come into the room when the twins were crying. The interviewee had not gone into the room because he hadn’t heard anything, yet found his daughter’s comment strange, even because it was the first time that she had made it.” Gerry McCann's statement on 04.05.2007 in Process 201/07.0 GALGS, page 35/36

Now maybe you have noticed the same thing that I did: the McCanns told the police the exact same episode, mentioning the exact same details – that the twins had been crying – in a manner so similar that their witness statements read almost identically. We’ll retain this curious detail for later use.

Thank goodness we have the McCanns' spokesperson, former Media Monitoring Unit director Clarence Mitchell, that paragon of truth, to assure us that the McCanns were absolutely truthful in these initial statements:

“The only reason this has come out is because of Kate and Gerry’s utter honesty in their original statements.” in The Telegraph, on April 10, 2008

So truthful, that Mr McCann even reveals what I can only presume to be the truth about his wife’s visit to the apartment:

“At around 22H00 it was his wife KATE who came to check on the children. She entered the apartment through the door, using the key, and immediately discovered that the door to her children’s bedroom was completely open, the window also open, the shutters up and the curtains apart. The side door [patio door] that opens into the living room and as mentioned earlier was left unlocked, was closed.” in Process 201/07.0 GALGS, page 37

Now that opens a whole different can of worms, but we’ll leave it for another day, when the Australian-Spanish-Swedish hullabaloo dies down and news are slow again.

“It is very curious that this is being released now, having been sitting in the police files for 11 months. The timing of this is frankly suspicious.” Clarence Mitchell, cited in The Telegraph, on April 10, 2008

Mr Mitchell is right about one thing, though: The timing was suspicious, especially because at the same time that the news was being broken live on tv by a Spanish journalist on a morning talk show on Telecinco, Fiona Payne was being interviewed by DC Messiah, at the Leicestershire Police Headquarters in Enderby, telling him in considerable detail how Kate McCann had mentioned the crying incident over dinner, on the 3rd of May 2007, at the Tapas Bar.

And also at the same time, the McCanns were holding a press conference in Brussels, to push their petition that hijacked an already existing project in the European Parliament for a missing child alert system.

The 10th of April, 2008, was a busy day, by any measure.

But let’s go back to Mrs Fenn for a moment. She stated that on Tuesday, the 1st of May, two days before Madeleine vanished without a trace, she heard a child – one child – crying in the apartment downstairs, for over an hour. She said that the crying had stopped exactly when the parents entered the apartment.

Now I’m the first one to acknowledge that all children are different, and although my own experience tells me that a child that has been crying incessantly for over an hour does not stop crying instantly, as if it had a switch, I’m not going to say that this is impossible. What I do find rather strange, is that the parents never heard the child’s cries as they approached the apartment – while Mrs Fenn upstairs was worried enough about the situation to call a friend for advice -, nor did they notice anything unusual inside the apartment after entering it. Not a sigh, not a whimper, nothing. Or so they say, in their truthful initial statements.

Of course, their truthful initial statements mention the episode as having taken place on Wednesday night. Nobody asked them about Tuesday.

Fast forward to late November 2007

The McCanns are back in England. The Portuguese investigation is stalled, swamped with bureaucratic issues concerning the questioning of the so-called ‘Tapas Seven’, under the rogatory letters that take months to be accepted by the Home Office. A meeting at a hotel in Rothley reunites the couple with their friends, for the first time after the events in Luz. The press reports that the rogatory interviews are “weeks away”.

In fact, they would only take place in April, more precisely between the 8th and the 11th of April, 2008. A team from the PJ, led by Paulo Rebelo, then the coordinator of the CID in Portimão, travelled to Leicester to attend the interviews, but returned to the Algarve in the early hours of the 11th of April. They missed the questioning of what would be considered a key witness in any criminal case: David Payne, allegedly the last person, apart from the arguidos, to see Madeleine alive.

According to the transcripts of these interviews, it was Rachael Mampilly who first mentioned the crying incident to the British police, during the morning of the 9th of April:

“Kate did, when we sat down at the table on the Thursday night, Kate said that erm, Madeleine and Sean had cried, said they’d been crying, erm and you know wondered where she was, or wondered where you know, Mummy and Daddy were, erm I mean this was kind of after Madeleine disappeared, we talked, she mentioned that when we sat at the table on Thursday and then after Madeleine had disappeared, erm McCANN’s said, oh well I wonder whether on the Wednesday, you know somebody had tried to get in perhaps or had got in and they’d seen something, erm you know and I was next door in the apartment but I mean I didn’t hear any, well you know, I didn’t hear anything, I could well have been asleep, erm you could hear quite a lot through the apartments because Grace, she always wakes up early but because she seemed to have diarrhoea every night, she’d wake up sort of six o’clock most mornings and we’d always have to put her in the, in the shower or in the bath first thing, and Gerry and Kate would always hear that and so you know, most of the comments first thing in the morning would be like, oh so Grace was up early again, she’d be invariably screaming her head off, so.” in Rachael Mampilly’s rogatory statement on 09.04.2008

This ‘crying incident’ seems to have been a rather significant episode for Kate and Gerry McCann. Significant enough to be mentioned at dinner, apparently for no reason, and to be offered by the couple, separately and almost in the same words, to the PJ in their very first statements.

Another curious detail is the fact that Rachael’s husband, Matthew Oldfield, states that Rachael stayed home on the Tuesday night, contradicting his own wife and placing her in the apartment next door to the McCanns’ on the night that Mrs Fenn reported hearing the crying:

“Rachael was sort of, erm, became unwell the Tuesday evening, erm, and she stayed in the apartment, yeah.” in Matthew Oldfield’s rogatory statement on 09.04.2008

Confused?

The next morning, while the McCanns were conveniently concentrating the world media’s attention on their visit to Brussels, and Fiona Payne was repeating the story of the crying incident to DC Ivor Messiah at the Leicestershire Police Headquarters, a well-known Spanish journalist, Nacho Abad, was breaking the news live on ‘El Programa de Ana Rosa’, a morning talk show on Spanish channel Telecinco.

“’El Programa de Ana Rosa’ has obtained, in first hand, and for the first time in the world, the exclusive statements from the parents and friends of Madeleine McCann, hours before and after the little girl disappeared. These highly impacting and chilling statements render Kate and Gerry’s innocence in their daughter’s disappearance clear, and point towards the window of the apartment where they were staying, as a key element in the famous disappearance.” in Telecinco website, on 10.04.2008

Mr Abad launched a controversy of epic proportions, with consequences that would have been hard to imagine only days earlier.

It took the British media only a couple of hours to release an avalanche of articles reporting on the “leak” by the Portuguese police, that allegedly had given Mr Abad copies of the McCanns’ early statements to the PJ, to be deliberately “exposed” exactly on the same day that the couple was visiting the European Parliament, "undermining" their campaign. One of the first articles that appeared online was from the Mirror, and it cited an array of “friends” of the couple, as well as the unavoidable Mr Mitchell:

“Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken. The very fact that the comment from Madeleine is now in the public domain is entirely because they themselves told the police about it at the time. It is more than curious that this comment, taken in isolation and out of context, that has been in the police file for some 11 months, should now emerge on the very day that they are in Brussels trying to improve children's welfare and child safety. They would be more than interested to know if the Portuguese justice ministry will now demand an internal review of the police investigation to get to the bottom of how this material emerged in the way it has, on the day it has.” in The Mirror, 10.04.2008

On the 11th, Mr Mitchell was in full combat mode, going as far as stating live on Sky News that he knew what the PJ was "up to":

“We are not happy and the gloves are off.” in Sky News, 11.04.2008, Video here

In an unprecedented move, the Polícia Judiciária, which had endured all sorts of humiliating, degrading remarks from the British media without uttering a word to defend its reputation, or that of its officers, released a press note from its National Directory, four days after the scandal broke:

“At the end of last week, the Spanish television station Telecinco broadcast a news piece that reported that they had enjoyed exclusive access to alleged statements from the McCann couple to the "investigators" into the disappearance of the underage child, Madeleine.

Based on this news piece, the spokesman of this couple, Clarence Mitchell, expressed publicly, to several media, the certainty that the Polícia Judiciária had been responsible for its publication.


The Polícia Judiciária clarifies that it is entirely false that the contents of the news piece reproduces matter that is part of the inquiry, which is under judicial secrecy.

On the other hand, the Polícia Judiciária cannot fail to lament the baseless intervention of the spokesman, especially at a moment when significant diligences to the investigation were being carried out.”
in Polícia Judiciária’s website, 14.04.2008

Now, the fact is, the Polícia Judiciária could, potentially, have leaked the information to Mr Abad.

There would have been two possibilities:

a) To source the information from Kate and Gerry McCann’s initial statements, which mentioned that Madeleine had told them that the twins had been crying, and never cited the actual sentence that had been spoken by the missing child; or

b) The officers that attended Rachael Mampilly’s questioning, on the previous afternoon, could have called Mr Abad and instructed him to act accordingly. The timing is feasible. They would, of course, have nothing to offer Mr Abad apart from an oral reproduction of what Rachael had said under questioning.

The only problem is, Rachael didn’t say much. The already anecdotal inability of the Tapas Seven to produce a single fluid, coherent sentence, makes it impossible for anyone without previous knowledge of the matter, to make much sense of her mention of the crying incident. Transforming the confusing half sentences that Rachael had said about the matter, into the following, requires more than a bit of imagination:

“Crime reporter Nacho Abad, read out in Spanish an excerpt of the statement he said Kate had given Portuguese police. He said: "While we were having breakfast, Maddie said, 'Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?' "Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children.” in The Sun, 10.04.2008

I have no doubts in saying that none of the statements that were made public, in the official case files, contains anything that matches the above citation.

There is only one possible source for the above mentioned ‘statement’, which seems to be a complete fabrication, based on facts that had only been superficially mentioned the day before, in Leicester, and 11 months earlier, in Portimão.

The very same source that, despite feigning for the PJ its availability to take part in the upcoming reconstruction, which was to take place in May, had absolutely no interest in its fulfilment – and didn’t bother to conceal the fact, either:

“Portuguese detectives want the McCanns to go to the Algarve for a reconstruction but the couple’s lawyers are concerned about being summoned back to Portugal.” in The Telegraph, on 10.04.2008

The friends would ultimately be responsible for the reconstruction flop, as one after another, they informed the PJ that they would not be attending. Nobody can actually state that the McCann couple refused to attend the reconstruction; merely that the re-enactment would have been incomplete without the presence of their friends. And how terribly that is true.

So, did Madeleine McCann cry for her daddy on Tuesday night, for over an hour? Did she cry on Wednesday? Did she cry at all?

I suppose that, like so many other details in this case, this question will have to remain a matter of personal opinion, rather than fact. Whom we choose to believe has made an enormous difference in the manner how we individually perceive the Maddie case.

What I don’t think anyone can refute is the fact that the manner in which this story was broken to the public – once again, involving Spanish ‘resources’ at a time when Método 3 was still employed by the McCanns, thus placing the source of the ‘leak’ conveniently outside the PJ’s jurisdiction – was actually a rather clumsy attempt to turn a negative fact that would, sooner or later, become public anyway, into something that would ‘work’ in favour of the McCanns, painting them as victims of a conniving Polícia Judiciária.

After all, the PJ had taken all sorts of ridicule and abuse, lying down, for almost a year.

But what it did, was to reinforce my personal belief that Mr Mitchell is capable of anything, including lying, manipulating and scheming against the legitimate police force of a sovereign country, to defend his clients’ image. Because according to the data that is publicly available, that is precisely what he did, in this case.

I’m haunted by the sound of a crying child, tonight.




57 comments:

  1. THIS is why this blog scares the shit out of the pros. Thank you. Absolutely BRILLIANT reasoning, looking forward for more!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Once again, I bow my head to you Astro.

    Textusa

    ReplyDelete
  3. Makes me shudder to think of madeleien weeping half the night afraid in the dark..
    Perhaps it was the crying that night that made the McCanns decide to sedate Madeleine..Or maybe the crying stopped abruptly because this is the night Madeleine died?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I second the above. This site is a barrage of truth that the McCanns cannot handle.

    We all know they are guilty of one crime or more and I am very confident there will be an outcome very soon.

    I've no time for that McCann family or Mitchell so when they all go down it will be justice as far as I'm concerned.

    With the greatest of thanks to Joana and her team for presenting us with a flow of honest journalism for over two years now.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You lot are Briliiant ever thought of forming the next british govenment with Mr Amerel as prime minister.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry, to burst your bubble - I don't think many pros come here and read the garbage. As for the video, if I want to hear crying children, all I have to do is go to the grocery store.

    Joana and Astro are busy inciting a judged by the public and sorry many people on this site has emotional problems - this is not support for any legal system or country - it's actually referred to as anarchy all over the world and is not usually tolerated.

    ReplyDelete
  7. About the statments made by the Mccann's. they use exactly the same words and the only conclusion which we can take from that it is: THE STATMENT WAS METCULOUSLY PROGRAMMED BY THE COUPLE OR SOMEBODY HELPING THEM TO FOOL THE POLICE AND THE PUBLIC, PERAPHS WITH IDEA OF MADELEINE CRYING BECAUSE A STRANGE ENTER THE FLAT AND SCARE MADELEINE... BUT THE story did not work because Mrs. Fenn said that the child stop crying immediatly after somebody enter the flat and there is no other noise. If the Mccann's spoted the abductor on that night they will screem at him( or not?) or they know him and the all story was a fabrication to get ride of Madeleine and save the Rothley luxury Villa with a victim position and their marketing to fool public donnations?

    It is clear who spread the statments to the Media: Somebody working for the Mccann's and so truthful as M3 or all KEY WITNESSES find by them to spread Maddie sights everywhere. And what is the OBJECTIVE? BLAMING AND DESCRIDIBILISING THE PJ. VERY VERY CONVENNIENT.

    What is amazing on that saga it is aswell the way which Mccann's Team and british Media watch the PJ, WITH PERSONAL PERSECUTION AND DISCRIMINATION.... AMARAL WAS VILIFIED because he works hard, find the truth and almost got them.... Rebelo was ignored. We don't know what Rebelo have done to find the truth. I think he arrived to the same conclusion as Amaral ( the only one logical and possible) and decide to leave the water flow without many waves, saving his job and his name. His salary was payed by portuguese Public Taxes... I think one day, a truthful journalist should investigate the work of this man in Madeleine case. The portuguese people deseves to know if he act as an INSPECTOR or a YES MAN- the most convennient....

    ReplyDelete
  8. I sign the PETITION advertised on this blog to RE-OPEN MADELEINE CASE, but I think the PETITION SHOULD BE ADVERTISED IN THE MEDIA TO GET MORE PEOPLE KNOWING IT. IT EXPRESSES THE FEELING OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD and can be the way to get our voice heard and force the justice to work on the behalf of MADDIE.

    ReplyDelete
  9. A judged by the public? LOLOLOLOLOL
    Anon, the Macs CALLED the public to help them, they USED the public for donations to their fraudulent fund, and now when it doesnt please them anymore, they want the public to shut up?
    Sorry but doesnt work that way.
    Keep coming to this site and you might actually learn something. There is information here to make up ones own mind, not only the biased stuff from the UK papers.
    Problem is, the pros dont like people who think on their own. They dont like people who think to begin with.
    Too bad.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have always been under the impression that the statement by the Mccanns that Maddy had questioned them at breakfast as to why they hadn't come, when Sean and her were crying? may have been fabricated to make it appear that Maddy was actually there and okay at breakfast time. Was Maddy actually seen by any reliable witness on that last day , at all?

    ReplyDelete
  11. One of the conclusions that one arrives after reading this brilliant article is that the McCanns probably created the leak themselves to minimize the "damages" of Mrs.Fenn statement.

    The most pertinent and striking in connection to this issue, is the the evidence that Clarence Mitchell lied, and so did the McCanns since Mitchell speaks for them.

    Clarence Mitchell at that time, in April, blamed the Judiciary Police for the Nacho Abad leak, when in fact there is nothing in the public ministry's process with the text "Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?" - a clear invention arranged by the McCanns and the Tapas group at the Rothley Hotel meeting.

    There is also another relevant idea when reading this article, one has to ask if the statements given by the McCanns at the Judiciary Police in May 2007, and the leaks by the McCann team in April 2008 were made just to give the impression that Madeleine McCann was still alive on the 3rd of May morning.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The Maccans have the british govenment behind them the Portugese justice system the british media the pact of silence great Aunty Philly ( is Branson still in their fanclub)Good Old Clarence (gives me the creeps that man) 2 years on are they really going to be exposed and face a court of law, with only Mr Amerel (God Bless Him) pressing for justice for Maddie how will it be done They seem to have won Ironside , answer me please

    ReplyDelete
  13. In the “We are not happy and the gloves are off.” video @ 3.03 the PR spokesperson of the parents who claim that their child was abducted by an organised gang of professional paedophiles and is findable, not only findable but findable alive and well says "she was a child". Hmm WAS a child! What does he mean WAS? Why is he using past tense?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yet another thoughtful & insightful post. Thanks to Astro & Joana.

    It is clear that for however long the McCann's & Mitchell keep up their pretence, there remains a significant section of the population that aren't buying into their lies.

    We will never go away until justice is served.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Joana and Astro are busy inciting a judged by the public and sorry many people on this site has emotional problems - this is not support for any legal system or country - it's actually referred to as anarchy all over the world and is not usually tolerated"

    UTTER RUBBISH.... UTTER MISTAKE! You are talking about Mccann's and their team. your words are not aplied to people working on that Blog and you are the prouve that the Pro came here to get angry and show who are the mental ill. In fact no one of you any time show us a single evidence of Madeleine being abducted. We discuss and context facts. You show up with nothing, only insults to a Country and the police doing their work- This is XENOPHOBIE and BLINDNESS. BY the WAY... Almost ONE WEEK PASSED... WHERE IS MADDIE IN AUSTRALIA? Annother rubbish wichc came out as a tornado with all media Circus and is fading and droping down so smmoothly like a feather.

    Read more: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/#ixzz0O3fpqURL
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives

    ReplyDelete
  16. Of course we in this site have emotional problems.
    We used not to have them and we got them because of what happened to Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  17. An interesting article as always.

    The statement by both Mr.& Mrs McCann that the TWINS were crying, contadicts other reports which say that it was Madeleine and Sean who cried on the 2nd May 2009.

    That aside, I found it interesting your point that whilst children are not all the same, they do not in general stop crying instantly, not when they are genuinely upset or afraid (in a tantrum, yes.)

    I am in agreement that they do not automatically stop crying the moment that they see a parent or are attended to, especially after such a prolonged period of crying and upset.

    In general, one would have to hug and hush the child, as generally having cried for a long period they are quite inconsolable having worked themselves into a terrible state through fear, and sob, gulping breathlessly when telling you what is wrong. Partly too, through relief that someone has come to care for them.

    There is much controversy over the unlocked patio door. I do not believe it was ever left unlocked.

    From this stance, I suggest that on the night Mrs. Fenn heard a child cry (Tuesday 1st May 2007) that they, the McCann's entered the apartment as usual by the locked front door using the key.

    While one of the parents settled/calmed the child, the other opened the patio door for air or to perhaps step outside to the patio to sit.

    The opening of the patio door which Mrs. Fenn heard may not have been the McCann's entering the apartment, but just happened to co-incide with the point that the child became quiet.

    It is a thought!

    As for Clarence?

    I have thought many a time that the McCann's and their friends are the most despicable people put on this planet. I was proved wrong when Mitchell came on the scene.

    I do not know how the man sleeps at night, accepting payment to protect these people. I quite believe he would say or do anything in this regard.

    In my opinion there are more decent persons behind bars for less!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  18. Did Mrs. Fenn hear the two children crying on the evening of May the second, 24 hours before she disappeared?
    Two crying children make more noise then one.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hello -On August 13, Anonymous said...

    sorry you are a sick person maybe you are really one of the Tapas or the mais actors of this tragedy.

    Joana is fighting for Justice and for Madeleine and why? because the Mccanns are very BAD parents and leaved the child died.

    Your statement is an injustice against Joana . Forgot the dogs?and all the evidences?

    get lost!

    if you do not like to read what we write you do not have to.
    go to work or read a paper, something like that.
    go shopping for example but go away from us.You don't belong here.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Everything Kate says contradicts what others and she herself said before.
    That's why she was not allowed to answer the 48 questions.
    She makes too many mistakes.
    And I believe she is not working as a doctor at least one day a week because of her incapacity of realising what she is saying.
    She could make too many mistakes at her hospital, people would know more and more.
    Gerald must fear her more than he fears Amaral and the PJ.
    She got to stay home, for the rest of her life.

    ReplyDelete
  21. From Kate and Gerry's statments:

    "The interviewee had not gone into the room because she hadn’t heard anything,"...

    Yeah, of course, how could they hear anything all the way from the Tapas bar or Chaplins! Were they suggesting they were in the apartment, and not hundreds of metters away?!!!

    And about Mitchell,

    ..."reinforce my personal belief that Mr Mitchell is capable of anything, including lying, manipulating and scheming against the legitimate police force of a sovereign country, to defend his clients’ image. Because according to the data that is publicly available, that is precisely what he did, in this case."
    Exactly, Astro! This is Mitchell's trade! This has always been his job, a professional liar!
    It's amazing how people like him can look their children in the eyes and not be ashamed of themselves, how they manage to sleep at night? I bet he has some terrible nightmares...ah, but having a big fat bank account helps to overcome any little morsells of remorse, I'm sure!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sorry, where are my manners?!
    Forgott to say:
    A BIG THANK YOU, ASTRO!

    ReplyDelete
  23. I can't think of staying home for the rest of my life, feeling in prison at a such young age.
    Going too often to visit the Paynes would attract the attention, receiving the Paynes too often would alarm the neighbours.
    My god, what a life.
    Think of this, the rest of her life not being part of society, not making new friends and possibly not keeping her old friends, to whom she can not talk frankly.
    Not using the telephone as a free person.
    She will get more and more stressed, much worse than she is now.
    I also can't think of that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Slightly off topic (I've been on hols and am just catching up with things) I watched the press conference re the Barcelona woman.

    I note that Clarence is confused/lies once more.

    I may have heard incorrectly, but almost at the end of the video, Clarence, in response to a question, states:

    "Dave (Edgar) has spoken to the witness."

    Immediately after, Dave is posed the the following question by a journlist -

    'How many times have you spoken to the witness/interviewed witness, two three?'

    Edgar replies that he hasn't spoken to the witness, that another member of the 'team' did so!

    Edgar is the head of the PI's I believe, yet in this important new 'lead' it transpires that he has NOT spoken to the witness?

    Extraordinary!

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  25. Excellent! Obrigada dear Astro & Joana.

    I very much doubt if Anonymous, who came here to post insults, even bothered to read it. Empty vessels make most noise.

    ReplyDelete
  26. anonymous at 13/08/09 01:52

    Do you even know the meaning of anarchy? Stop being silly and search the meaning of anarchy, it will do you some good in terms of vocabulary.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous said: "Sorry, to burst your bubble - I don't think many pros come here and read the garbage.

    Joana and Astro are busy inciting a judged by the public and sorry many people on this site has emotional problems - this is not support for any legal system or country - it's actually referred to as anarchy all over the world and is not usually tolerated."

    Have you ever heard the expression 'pros and cons'? I finally understand why the two are linked together LOL.

    And after all, the McCanns write on their website: "Madeleine and possibly other children are dependent on good moral ‘everyday people' to help them".
    Well there's a lot of those people on this site, that actually do want to solve what happened to Madeleine.
    And none of these people seem to have mental problems imo.

    By the way, isn't manipulating the media into fabricating a lie, called 'indoctrination'? Or was it con-tempt (tempting to con 'everyday people, as well as the pros).

    ReplyDelete
  28. Carissima Joana,

    nao permita que o lixo invada nosso blog o qual prezamos tanto com voce e os outros escritores e pelo respeito o qual cultivamos.

    VOCE MERECE TODO NOSSO RESPEITO E ESTAMOS COM VOCES SEMPRE!

    nao dá pra evitar estas publicacoes absurdas?
    como dizemos no Brasil eu irei com voce até encontrarmos a pedra- a laje!

    nao desista nós nao vamos nos abater por estas neuroses , quem sabe um dos implicados está usando nosso espaço?

    é possivel`?
    fico com tanta ira que atiro pedras na lua.

    beijos

    Maria - Rio de Janeiro/ Leblon

    ReplyDelete
  29. Querida Maria,

    Tens absoluta razão, de facto no espaço de comentário dizemos que comentários de ataque pessoais não serão tolerados, seja em relação a nós, editoras, seja em relação a outros comentadores. Ás vezes(muitas vezes) deixamos passar comentários de pessoas que apoiam os McCann a qualquer custo, no fundo também têm direito à sua voz, desde que não sejam canalhas e cobardes.

    Mas já é tempo destes tipos aprenderem a ler, raciocinar, e mudar de tácticas - não lhes serve de nada continuarem por aqui ao ataque, e a nós(global) não nos serve para discutirmos os artigos que são publicados.

    Portanto, a partir de hoje deixaremos passar só os comentários relevantes para a discussão/debate do artigo publicado.

    um beijinho e obrigada por teres passado por aqui :)

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have thought for a long time that Madeleine went missing May 2nd rather than May 3rd. I believe she was signed into the creche as usual on May 3rd but there were 8 little girls in the party and several others with blonde hair - I think its possible that the creche staff did not know them well enough to always distinguish who was who. If you believe that some of the tapas 9 were in some way involved, then it makes the fact that she disappeared without a trace easier to understand if it happened well before the glare of publicity made their movements so public and the police investigation put them all under the microscope.

    ReplyDelete
  31. When Kazlux met G. Amaral.............

    Q: Have you considered the possibility that Madeleine died on the previous night or even when mrs. Fenn heard the crying?
    A: Naturally - the investigation begins with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist and then, who was the last person to see her - the investigation shows clearly that she was last seen around 17.30.

    Q: Have you any doubt as to the validity of Madeleine attending the creche on 3/5?
    A: No doubt whatsoever

    ReplyDelete
  32. Joana, I don't know if it would be wise not to publicise the insults this forum is receiving.
    This forum would have the same colour, all the time, we all agreeing with each other.
    Give these people the chance to analise us, to criticise us,to defend the Mccanns and, who knows, it would be useful to the PJ and Amaral.
    I don't believe those are people of the Tapas7.
    Tapas 7 must be vomiting this subject and they will not take the risk of writing , even as anonymous, on any forum.
    I believe they want to forget what happened.
    Tapas 6 got involved in a crime they did not commit(comit?) and they fear they will be eternally suspects at the eyes of the public.
    I think David Payne is running from the problem at 600 miles per hour and he has the chance to do it.
    The Mccanns are carrying his cross as well, lucky guy,and they will always do it because they have no other choice.
    We don't hear anything about Brown, lucky guy, who disappeared after the couple went back to England.
    The McCanns are getting more and more lonesome.
    I don't believe Tapas 5 are doing their best to remain friends with them.
    These insults could come from their families or from themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  33. It was a fabrication, according to myself, "why did you not come when we were crying"
    I remember somewhere Gerry's comment:
    probably the abductor came to the apartment the night before, Maddie started crying and he went away and came back the day after.

    If this happened the night before, did he open the window and shutters, coming inside of the bedroom or did he come inside the apartment through the very much safe, visible(from the Tapas) patio door?

    Gerry said to the PJ that, on the fatal night, he felt somebody was behind the bedroom door.
    If the man was already in the bedroom, how come Gerry did not see the open window?
    If he opened the window immediately after Gerry left, how come he did not hear both noises, the window and the shutters?

    If the man came in through the patio door, how come Tapas 9 did not see it?
    It would have been much easier for the abductor to wait a few minutes and to leave through the patio door or the window, after Gerry had arrived in the restaurant, because he had already left the apartment.
    The biggest problem here is Jane, who saw Gerry, Jezz and the abductor at 9.15.She wanted to innocent Gerry by seeing him,the abductor and Jezz all at the same moment, and the poor abductor got extremely short time to leave the apartment.Hurry up, hurry,up!
    Jane is coming, hurry up!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Querida Jonana, bom dia!

    Obrigada pela sua ressonancia ao meu recado.

    O fulcro central de minha mensagem nao é retirar o direito de outras pessoas terem uma opiniao diferente sobre o caso.Absolutamente. No nosso espaço aqui estamos tentando encontrar um consenso nao é?Mas tem que ser em bom nível e compatível com nossas conclusoes sobre o crime.

    Pois, eu também trabalho na Justiça e tenho consciencia disso só que nosso blog nao é uma sessao de Juri com debates entre advogados e promotores e por isso acho desagradável termos que nos confrontar com quem nao tem nossa linha de pensamnento e lógica criminal.

    Tenha um bom fim de semana , confio em voce,sobretudo e sei que um dia a verdade vai eclodir porque existem pessoas como voce.
    Insista, persista, nao desista.

    Beijos e meu profundo respeito a Portugal.

    Maria

    ReplyDelete
  35. This deserves a wider audience!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Re last post.

    Exactly! Sr Amaral, in his documentary, proved, that it was not possible for a grown man to have secreted himself behind the bedroom door - not enough space.
    Gerry would have seen an open window, if he is saying, that is the way the supposed intruder entered?

    Matt Oldfield we must not forget checked (we are told) at this bedroom window and the others at around 9pm, just before Gerry went on his check. So it was closed at this time.

    Oldfield has stated that he was annoyed at Gerry for going to check 'immediately' after he did. He felt Gerry did not trust in his check.

    Up until this point no other member of the tapas group had ever checked on the McCann children, either by going into the apartment or by listening at the window during that week.

    What made Oldfield decide to do so on this night?

    I often wondered at this.

    Did Gerry, when Oldfield told him he had done an impromptu check, then hurry round immediately thereafter to the apartment, as he was afraid that Oldfield may have seen or heard something/someone, which he should not have?

    Something about to happen which was not for Oldfield's eyes? Or was Oldfield up to something himself?

    Someone was!

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  37. Oldfield met the Payne family on their way down to the restaurant, as he went to check, and spoke to them as they crossed paths, joking about the Payne's always being late.

    It would seem quite unlikely that any intruder would have had the opportunity to go into this apartment by any of the accesses during this period of time.
    Too many of the group on the street during this time going back and forth to the restaurant.
    We must remember also that this chap Jez was in the area that night walking, with his young child in his pushchair. Other members of the public may also have been walking on this street and surrounding ones. Not only the tapas group were in PDL.
    As for Oldfield then doing another check at 9.30, this time entering the apartment?

    Seems most unusual! He is annoyed at Gerry for what he feels, not trusting his check at the window earlier, yet he agrees (Kate states he offered) to do another check by going into the apartment?
    Would you do this if you had been made to feel untrustworthy by Gerry just a short time earlier?

    Wouldn't Mrs. Oldfield think this unusual, her husband offering/being asked to check on Kate and Gerry's children, children he didn't know?

    If I was her, I think I would be telling him to let them (McCann's)do the check by themselves, not to go into an apartment where he may frighten children who were not accustomed to him (especially when Kate has just told 'one and all' at the table, that the children were awake the previous evening and were crying.)


    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  38. What would Oldfield do in that situation, finding the children awake and crying? He could not comfort them, they didn’t know him. He would have terrified them witless. After scaring the life out of them, he would have to leave them once more alone crying and more upset, and return to tapas bar to alert the parents.

    Nonsense!

    Would any of us allow a person who our children were not familiar with, to check on them in a darkened apartment?

    Oldfield admits he was in fact a stranger to them.

    I'm not so sure that Oldfield did in fact go into that apartment at 9.30.

    But the fact that he said he did, assists the McCann's. Conveniently too, he only saw the twins! Leaving us with, was she, Madeleine there at that time or not!

    If he didn't, go into the apartment, it rather leaves the 'window of opportunity' much wider than the 'tiny' slot that Kate described in one of the early documentaries.

    The McCann's will not entertain the possibility that Madeleine could have been taken at any other time than, just after 9pm. This is due, they say to, J. Tanner's sighting, in which they are confident.

    Funnily enough, Edgar P.I. rather messed up on that one at the press conference.

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  39. What of the Smith family sighting?

    If Madeleine was taken from the apartment, by anyone, be it someone within tapas group or an unknown other, an unknown other, working independently or working for Gerry McCann or working for a member some other member of the tapas group, then it is possible that this happened at a later time, and the person carrying Madeleine was the person the Smith family saw.

    This family saw someone carrying a blonde child.

    We have had no press conference by Team McCann, no news headlines flashed around the world in this regard. Unlike the latest press conference (the Australian connection) where pictures of harbours and streets where nightclubs are located, were flashed on screen by Clarence, we have not had this for the Smith 'sighting.'

    WHY?

    Why not show the public, the route the man carrying the blonde child took, tell us where it led to?

    We were told where the route the Australian woman took, led to, when she walked off. The, docks, of course (so that she could jump on a yacht!!!)

    Maybe the man carrying the child, whom the Smith's seen walked towards a dock? Why are we not hearing about this?

    Maybe he was one of the tapas group. Could this be why we do not hear anything of this most crucial sighing?

    You see, if the tapas group, or some of, are involved. Tanner's sighting may well just be a fabrication. Just as the 'crying' story, the open patio door, and Oldfield's 9.30 pm check etc.

    Why, were all of the above, suddenly mentioned on the evening of the 3rd?

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  40. Kate was 'spouting off' that night at the table about unlocked patio doors, whether she had done right thing to leave a door like this, asking her friends their advice, as to whether it was better for Madeleine, if she woke, to be able to get out to go and look for her mummy and daddy, rather than having the child crying, and locked in.

    We all understand that, don't we? We've all consulted our friends as to whether it best to go out and leave our kids at home with the doors unlocked allowing anyone who happens by, access to our children!

    Beggars belief really eh? Which is EXACTLY why I do not believe that the patio door was unlocked or that she told F. Payne this at the table.

    Are we really to believe that the McCann's thought it best to leave a door unlocked for a three year old child to wander out into the night in bare feet and pyjamas to look for them? I think not!

    What is more unbelievable is that none of the friends said, 'hey Kate that is an awful thing to do, I think you'd better go and lock that door.' (Better still stay with her kids)

    Fiona Payne tells us that this was Gerry's idea, and Kate was not comfortable with it. So uncomfortable with it - then why not stay home and look after the kids? Tell Gerry to 'flip off!'

    What mum, fearful for her child’s safety would just say, ‘okay darling, not happy about leaving the door open, but if you think it’s okay........... piffle!

    A mother’s instinct is to protect!

    ReplyDelete
  41. (It all beggars belief really). She told the group about the crying incident etc.

    She states that her and Gerry had a chat about it and decided to increase the number of checks on evening of 3rd. Yet, she sat on her bahookie for 90 minutes eating and drinking before going to check (this shows how worried a mum she was!)

    She also allowed Oldfield, a man who we now know, the children were not familiar with, and who himself stated that he had not checked on the McCann children earlier in the week as everyone was checking ONLY their own, and that he felt he did not know the McCann children well enough to do so.

    He did not know them any better at the end of this holiday than he did at the beginning. He did not spend time with the McCann children. The McCann children were in a creche all day, then to bed early.

    The McCann parents didn't even spend time much time during that week with their kids.

    So what changed to make Oldfield, the only one in the group, to go into the McCann apartment?

    What changed in general?

    Well actually on the 3rd May 2007, everything, changed, routine wise. From, Gerry asking Payne to check on his family (as if) to Oldfield taking it upon himself to listen at windows, to Oldfield entering an apartment which he had never previoulsy done, to the McCann children not turning up at the tennis courts for their usual little 'play-time.' (these children were not ‘too tired’ to play) to open patio doors, crying children stories.

    It all changed that's for sure!

    This very worried mum, Kate McCann, who has told all at the dinner table of her fears and concerns for her children, their crying, open patio doors, DOESN'T increase the checks, DOESN'T even perform the scheduled check, which she was due to, at 9:30, but allows a man, who has stated that he did not know these children, other than by sight, in essence a stranger, to enter her apartment to check the kids.

    Was Oldfield 'used' by McCann's for the 9.30 check, but he messed up by not DISCOVERING (as they intended him to) that Madeleine wasn't there? Was he supposed to be the one reporting her disappearance?

    Or was he conned (part of the group pact) into stating later that he done a check at this time, when he had not?

    One of the lists containing check times, I believe did NOT include Oldfield's check at 9.30.

    Whatever really happened that night, only this group of people know! I don’t believe the full truth will ever be found.

    They have, I believe, deliberately muddied the waters, by issuing conflicting statements, contradicting themselves time after time, all to their own good.

    These people, most of whom are medical professionals, are highly intelligent, well educated persons, articulate, sharp, alert. Yet, their memories fail them when interviewed by police, they become babbling baboons. Idiotic answers are given.

    Do we honestly believe that this is how they are?

    Causing confusion helps THEM, it does not help any official investigation.

    They all speak of Gerry and Kate’s distress, kneeling on floors banging their fists etc. They tell us it was genuine, that they deserve an Oscar if it was not.

    CNTD

    ReplyDelete
  42. Interestingly, all of the group mention an ‘Oscar’

    I think perhaps they are all deserving of one!

    I think too, that the timeline they have given, all hinging on Tanner's 'sighting' which of course we know Gerry and Jez "missed" is what has really ‘thrown matters’ and intentionally so.

    McCann's, need the world to concentrate on the Tanner sighting and the Tanner sighting alone, without a thought to any other possible scenario.

    Tanner did not see a blonde child, only a set of legs and bare feet.

    The, Smith’s, 4 adults (?) ALL witnessed a blonde child of around 3/4 years old being carried by a man who resembled Gerry McCann.

    The silence by Team McCann, on this sighting is deafening!


    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  43. Whatever the truth is, in this tragic case, one thing is for sure, that each and every one of the members of the party, know more than they are telling, and most of what has been stated by them has been tailored to suit the needs of the McCann's.

    In my opinion they have all lied to some degree, and are, all now living a lie, (Clarence included) to protect the truth of what happened to this child, becoming known.

    They have made it, so that it is now almost impossible to distinguish truth from lies.

    It is quite possible that they now believe their own lies!

    I do believe that, some of the tapas group are involved in the disappearance of this wee girl, and that those others who are totally innocent of any involvement, told lies to cover what the groups neglect of ALL of the children who were left alone in apartments on that holiday.

    I also believe that as time has passed and information come to the fore, they must now, know or at least have suspicions as to what really happened to Madeleine.

    If this is so, how they live with themselves is beyond understanding.

    I believe if they were all innocent, and knew nothing of what happened to Madeleine, thought there was any chance that Madeleine was alive, that they would have done the reconstruction as requested by Portuguese Police.

    Their refusal, to me, indicated that they knew she was not, and also knew the reason as to how this came about.


    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  44. Dr Suusi Watson ..Blog The Bastards sent me a post saying....


    Still an official spokes person cant sue, as they are a professional liar..... But Clarence could well be helping perpetuate a massive fraud... Now that is a criminal offence...



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  45. The McCann’s in my opinion were only interested in their own enjoyment during that holiday.

    The other families at least, spent afternoons with their children, only placing them in a crèche for part of a day.

    The McCann children were not afforded family time.

    The McCann children did not join the other families for breakfast, for lunches in Payne apartment, for visits to the beach.

    Kate McCann stated, that Madeleine told her that the 3rd May 2007, was her best day ever (on that day, stuck in a crèche- not allowed to go to the beach with the other families, not allowed, to have tea and ice-creams with the other children at the beach cafe, not allowed her usual playtime at the tennis courts that evening? Bathed and put to bed early.

    Sounds like a bundle of laughs that day for Madeleine eh?

    If this was the BEST day the child had had.................?

    This was the day too, that Gerry decided he was a lucky man to have such lovely children.

    It was the day too that Kate said, it was lovely just sitting reading them bedtime stories.

    It was the day too, that D. Payne said the children looked like angels, all washed and clean, dressed in white!

    It was the day the McCann’s decided to LEAVE their children alone once more.

    It was the day that the McCann’s decided that they would take MORE(?) care of their children by increasing the number of times they checked on them.

    It was the day a vulnerable child Madeleine Beth McCann, was abandoned by her parents, in an un-locked apartment.

    It was the day she disappeared without trace!

    It was the day we can be SURE Madeleine cried.

    It was the day her cries went unheard.

    Perhaps they still do!

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  46. This has wider audience.
    I know English people who read this blog and prefer not to comment here or on other blogs pro Madeleine.
    It has to do with the kind of jobs they have.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Joana, Astro, congratulations and thank you very much for all your work.
    You are precious young ladies.

    And I still did not find out if that church has got or not a cryp, cript, uma cripta.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Maybe Jane Tanner saw so much that night because, she was the abductor?
    Maybe she took Maddy and handed her out through the window to an accoomplice who had paid her for her help.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Let's say, for argument sake, that Madeleine did say something like "Mommy why didn't you come last night when we were crying?" How can this make them look good in any way? Having failed on the previous night, they ignore the alarm and leave the children alone behind again? Only someone twisted could do that. Someone like the person who came here merely to insult those who dare think differently and have a free opinion.
    Regards,
    Portugal ain't bad, just misguided.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Why did we never see holiday photos of the 3 children together in Praia da Luz?
    Or the 5 of them, somewhere?

    Where was Amelie when the swimming pool photo was taken?

    She must have being around at that moment and not alone somewhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Dear A. Miller what a fantastic analysis you made, could we use it in full for a post with you as a Guest Author? Mail me at Joanamorais@gmail.com

    Hugs from Lisbon

    Jo

    ReplyDelete
  52. Top urgent on BBC News
    do not miss this one


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/8202418.stm

    is getting hotter!

    good night,


    Maria

    ReplyDelete
  53. The McCanns say the group distributing the leaflets haven't got Madeleine's best interests at heart?
    How does, not reopening the case help Madeleine then?
    Seems to me the McCanns would like the investigation to remain shelved and their reasons are obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Maria from Brazil,

    I found the article through Google.
    It was easier, just calling BBC news.
    Thank you.
    Yes, good that this happens.

    ReplyDelete
  55. whats the problem the Maccanns have with the leaflets in Leciester they only went woosh woosh in the mail boxes.

    Kate Maccann loves things that go woosh woosh in the night.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Every UK newspaper backs the Maccanns they have started on Tony Bennett now The Maccann are intending to sue him, (Thats a Joke) its just like the mafia I have never know such a sacred Pair I am writing to the Holy Father to start the cannonization process pronto. Venerable Kate and Gerry of Portugal. how about starting a fund to have statues complete with cuddle cat in hand any donations.

    ReplyDelete
  57. The all crying episode was a fabrication: HOW CAN A CHILD WITH MAELEINE'S AGE COMMENT ABOUT THE NIGHT BEFORE USING THE WORDS AND THE SENTENCES WHICH HER PARENTS WANT TO STICK AT HER MOUTH? NO WAY.... small childs don't have that raciocine and don't use this sentences, even because being alone at night was not something casual. She was used with situation... according to the all group, the childs use to be alone during all nights on this holidays and peraphs in Rothley every night the parents went out, this is why Gerry comment on TVs that they are feeling that they are having a barbecue on their garden. A HUGE LIE IT IS ALL THAT STORY TO TRY TO FOOL THE PUBLIC WITH AN ABDUCTION.


    Small childs don't remember and don't talk about the pass on that way, even if an adult ask them and help them to remember facts. ANOTHER MISTAKE MR. MITCHEL, for the all team.

    The all saga will end-up one day with you all, having no face to face the public and the sunlight after so many lies. You will live in your own prison....poor twins being rised inside that group.

    ReplyDelete