While there are those who seek to find Madeleine, others seek also to find justice for this child. Justice I believe is ever closer, it may found before Madeleine. There are many good people who work tirelessly with this aim. Sr.Gonçalo Amaral, without question at the forefront. Others campaign for the case into the disappearance of the child to be re-opened. Joana, Astro and Kazlux, by keeping this site open, keep awareness high, bring us news which those of us here in the U.K. would not otherwise hear of. They allow us to use this site as a platform to express our thoughts and feelings on this case.
It is beyond my comprehension why some out there constantly ask – ‘Why would anyone campaign for justice for a child whom they do not know?’ But for those who are prepared to put their neck on the line Madeleine would be forgotten. The news we would hear would be only that which was authorised by those who control such matters. But for the actions of those amongst us who are prepared to stand up and be counted, Madeleine and all other children like her, all of the children in our world would be failed.
History tells us, the freedom we enjoy in today’s world is because those who have gone before us did not sit back and look the other way. They did not sit on the fence. They fought for what was good, right and just.
At whatever level, it is that simple - Good people fight for the good of others.
by A. Miller
The disappearance of 3 year old Madeleine McCann from the holiday apartment where she was residing with her parents, medical doctors Kate and Gerry McCann, and her two younger siblings in Praia da Luz Portugal has without question shocked and fascinated the world in equal measure.
Her parents it was initially reported had left their three children alone while they dined a short distance away. This ‘distance’ was later to be described by Gerry McCann as being akin to that of dining in their back garden at home. This of course was not true.
They stated, that from where they sat at a tapas restaurant they were able to see the patio/sliding door of the apartment, and that they had checked on their children every 15 minutes or so.
It was possible from the outside seating area of the restaurant to see the extreme top part of the patio door. Shrubbery obscured all else. It was not possible however from the inside covered area of the restaurant in the darkness of the night to see the door clearly at all. It was in this covered area that the McCann party sat for their meal.
It transpired also that Kate McCann made only one check on her children that evening. This check took place 90 minutes after she had left them alone in the apartment to go out to dinner. It was at this time around 10:00 p.m. she discovered that Madeleine was missing.>
Kate McCann said she knew instantly that Madeleine had been abducted.
To date there is not a shred of evidence to prove abduction!
Fiona Payne, who claims Kate McCann, is her closest friend, in her statement to police discounts what Kate McCann has stated with respect to abduction being , Kate’s first thoughts?.
Kate McCann also claimed that the window shutter of her children’s bedroom had been jemmied open.
This proved to be untrue also, and a retraction of this statement was made by the McCann spokesperson, Clarence Mitchell.
Public sympathy for Madeleine and her parents was overwhelming.
Madeleine’s parents, family, and friends I’m sure, shed many tears at the loss of the child.
The public also, took Madeleine into their hearts. They cried for her as though she was their own.
The overwhelming sympathy the public had for the McCann’s soon became tempered with anger and disbelief as the true extent of what these children had been subjected to unfolded.
Night after night their parents, the doctors McCann had left their three very young and vulnerable children to their fate, out of sight and earshot, while they wined and dined in a restaurant with their friends, friends who had also left their children alone and unprotected.
The children were not being checked every 15 minutes or so, but half hourly, if that! The checks did not involve a visual check, i.e. looking in on the children as one would have imagined. It was simply an exercise in listening out for crying.If crying could not be heard, the parents assumed all was well. The McCann parents on the recent Oprah Show stressed this point, as did Oprah – ‘checks were merely to listen out for CRYING!
As parents, we all know that ‘silence’ does not always mean that all is well with our children. Visual checks are clearly necessary, but more importantly, it is something which a caring parent does automatically. As parents we do look in on our children, tuck them in, adjust the bedclothes give them “another” gentle kiss goodnight as they sleep.
Why would the doctors McCann go to their apartment and only listen, not look in on their children?
Why would the other parents, stand outside the building close to the shuttered bedroom windows to listen out for crying?
Were they all just too lazy to bother? Was it keeping them from their ‘get-together? Or did they just not care enough?
The McCann’s claimed that they were mimicking a style of ‘listening service’ which they claim is provided in holiday resorts elsewhere in Europe!
I know of no listening service where staff stand outside shuttered bedroom windows and listen for crying. Nor do I know of any listening service where patio doors are left unlocked for staff to enter apartments, but not make a visual check of the children, simply to stand inside and listen for crying.
It must be made clear at this point that the McCann party knew prior to travelling to Portugal that the Mark Warner Complex, the Ocean Club where they would be staying, did NOT provide a ‘listening service’. As the apartments were not in an enclosed compound, but spread out, some leading onto public streets, and were also a mixture of privately owned properties, Mark Warner had deemed that ‘listening services’ were neither safe nor practical. They did however offer the services of a crèche during daytime, and babysitting services at night.
The McCann’s chose not to avail of the evening child care services provided at this resort, but felt it more appropriate to leave their children unattended in an unlocked apartment.
The Ocean Club Management, experts in their field did not provide listening services for reasons of safety which they laid out – The McCann’s chose to ignore the safety issues believing that they could do the job which the professionals had deemed unsafe.
The plight of not, just Madeleine, but all of the children, could not fail to touch even the hardest of hearts. Left alone, to cry in their holiday apartment, no one to comfort, care and protect them, ease their fears when they woke in the night, when they needed reassurance, when they needed to be made feel safe.
The question on the lips of some –‘How could the McCann’s, both doctors have treated children in this way?’
I ask – How could the McCann’s, not as medical professionals, but as parents, treat their own flesh and blood in this way? What makes parents, who say they were so desperate to have children, carry out such a cold and callous act against their own, leaving them in a horrifying situation?
An act, which the doctors McCann, have since defended, claiming it was ‘WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF RESPONSIBLE PARENTING.’
An act, which perhaps more disturbingly, more bizarrely, has been condoned by some members of the public, who in their defence of the McCann’s state that leaving the children for all of these nights in an unlocked apartment was a ‘mistake.’
They said it would not bring Madeleine back, to speak of the ‘mistake’.It should be forgotten!.
Travelling by private jet to Rome, to see the Pope in the Vatican City could not bring back Madeleine, but it did not stop the doctors McCann making the journey!
To not speak of the ‘mistake’ is an injustice not only to Madeleine, her brother and sister, the other children in the McCann party, but to every child who has ever been subjected to abuse, those children also who we know will be victims in the future.There are many forms of abuse, and many children who suffer.
By sweeping it under the carpet, the perpetrators are protected.
To those of you who to this day still maintain that it was a mistake, with the knowledge which we now hold - Shame on you!
How could these well educated persons leave their children in such terrifying and dangerous circumstances and boldly claim that it was a ‘responsible act?’
The thought of the children alone in that apartment sends a shiver.
I have asked myself - How do parents walk out on their children, hear the door click behind them and happily go out for an evening knowing that they have left them in a dangerous and vulnerable situation? In my mind I have gone over this scenario many times, tried to act as the McCann parents did. I could not bring myself to go beyond opening that imaginary door to leave my child before turning back. The thought of my child waking, alone frightened, distressed and crying, just too terrifying and upsetting. An unbearable thought that my child would suffer such unnecessary and preventable anguish. How parents can inflict such pain and suffering is beyond my comprehension.
To those who harm a child in any way, manner or form, I feel only repulsion.
So what type of person abuses their children in this way? Don’t fool yourselves that it was not abuse, as it was! It was abuse of the human rights of these children to be cared for and protected as far as is humanly possible. That did not happen, not by a long shot!
What type of person leaves their children, three children under the age of 4 years, alone and unsupervised, to go out to eat drink and be merry with friends simply to satisfy their own selfish needs? The McCann parents did this for 5 successive nights.
What type of person can actually enjoy the evening out knowing that their children are alone in an apartment exposed to every danger imaginable, that their children are able to exit the apartment in the dead of night onto the open road, that anyone who wished to gain access to these children could without hindrance?
Has anyone ever left home and then the horrible thought that you may not have unplugged the iron or any other electrical appliance from the socket? We rush home to be sure, to make things safe.
No one rushed home to the McCann children to see if they were safe. Visual checks were not the order of the day – simply to listen outside bedroom windows or from just inside the apartment was considered sufficient.
‘WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF RESPONSIBLE PARENTING’ - A statement, which would not only come back to haunt the McCann’s, but one which made all responsible parents around the globe, reel in anger!
Clarence Mitchell their spokesperson, attempted to stem the backlash by stating when interviewed, that this was how things were done in the U.K. that parents liked to put their children to bed early so as to have time to themselves. The implication being that thereafter, the parents of British children then left their offspring unattended while they went out for the evening.
It was a sloppy and shameful defence of the neglectful behaviour of the doctors McCann. One of the first of many!
To protect the McCann parents and make light of their appalling neglect of their children, ALL, British parents, were to bear the brunt. We were to accept the ‘veiled’ implication in Clarence Mitchell’s statement. To protect his clients the doctors Kate McCann and Gerry McCann, to pave over their irresponsible and callous actions, British parents were to be hung out to dry!
I believe there is no length, no depth to which these people will stoop to protect themselves.
If we are to accept the ‘implication’ in Clarence Mitchell’s statement, it would not be unreasonable to assume that the McCann’s as British citizens, prior to their holiday in Portugal, may have practiced this same “responsible” fashion of childcare as described by Clarence when at home in England!
Did the McCann parents leave their children alone at home in England?
Mitchell’s statement however served only to further fuel the fire!
More damning still, was the statement given to police by Mrs Fenn who lives in the apartment above that of apartment, 5A, from where Madeleine vanished.
She claims to have heard the cries of a child from the apartment where the doctors McCann had left their children. The child cried for a very lengthy period of time, for over one hour. She heard the child cry out for her daddy.
The McCann’s have stated also that Madeleine woke at night during this holiday.They confirmed that on one occasion Madeleine came to their bedroom to tell them that one of her younger siblings was crying.
The McCann children had woken and cried the night prior to the disappearance of Madeleine also. Madeleine told her parents of this the following morning, asking them why they did not come when they had cried.
The doctors McCann did not answer the cries of these babies. Of course they didn’t! How could they? They were dining much too far away to hear. They were enjoying the adult time together which Clarence Mitchell stated, as British citizens, they considered “normal.”
Thus far, I cannot see any evidence of responsible parenting having taken place, not on any night during that holiday. At best the doctors McCann were reckless!
They tell us they discussed what Madeleine had told them and decided that what Madeleine had said was ‘something and nothing.’Madeleine did not appear upset Kate McCann told best friend Fiona Payne. The fact though that the children were awake and alone should have been a sharp ‘wake- up call’ for the McCann’s!
What the child had said about having cried made no difference to their plans to go out and meet up with their friends that evening. They did agree we are told ‘to keep a closer watch over the children!
What plan they had set in motion for this to happen we can only hazard a guess. Increasing the frequency of checks, from that of previous evenings? Was that the plan? If so, it never materialised!
These two parents, medical professionals, we are to believe, discussed the situation and the best idea they could come up with was to once again leave their children alone and unsupervised in an unlocked apartment.
Not much of a concession, nor much of a plan, when the safety and wellbeing of their children was at stake. It did not cross their minds it would seem, despite the children alone awake and crying the previous evening that it would be best for at least one of them to stay and look after them.
The public ever more horrified at the behaviour of the doctors McCann began questioning, voicing their anger at the, abhorrent, treatment of these children.
As revelation after revelation in this case entered the public domain in the form of the police files, it was apparent that there was much awry.>
Cries of sadness turned to cries of anger, cries of ‘JUSTICE FOR MADELEINE.’
Clarence Mitchell once more, in a feeble bid at limiting further damage to the ‘reputation’ of the doctors McCann, “sold out” Madeleine, by stating that what she had said meant nothing!
In absentia too, the cries of this child fell on deaf ears. It would seem that the reputation of her parents was top of the agenda their need to be heard, their need to be PROTECTED clearly considered to be of greater importance than that of the child’s.
The child’s feelings and fears we are told meant nothing! They did! Just not to her parents, the doctors McCann! Had they “listened” Madeleine would be here today!
Both the doctors McCann and their highly paid spokesperson, Clarence Mitchell, had no shame in announcing this to the world – that Madeleine’s words meant nothing! The depths to which these parents would sink to protect, not Madeleine but themselves, clearly had no bounds!
Added to this catalogue of sickening revelations, it emerged that the doctors McCann DELIBERATELY left the patio door of the apartment (where their three young children slept alone) unlocked while they dined out with friends.
Kate McCann it seems spoke of this at the dinner table that evening, asking the opinion of her friend Fiona, if it was better to leave the door unlocked so that, should the child wake she would be able to leave the apartment and come look for them, or was it better for the child to wake and not be able to get out?
From Fiona Payne’s police statement, speaking of what Kate McCann said:
“She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying ‘Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or’, erm,‘or locking it and, you know, finding that we’re not there and the door’s locked if she woke up’,
To leave a door unlocked for a 3 year old child to wander out on the streets, bare footed, wearing only her nightwear, in the dead of night.....?
All of this, the McCann parents considered to be -WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF RESPONSIBLE PARENTING!
There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that the neglectful behaviour by these parents towards their children was an abuse of their basic human rights as minors to be cared for and protected from harm as far as is humanly possible.
They knowingly abandoned their children, deliberately creating circumstances (the unlocked door) for the purpose of their three year old daughter to be able to leave the apartment in the dead of night where any number of dangers could have befallen her, to search for her parents who were wining and dining in a restaurant. Furthermore, the unlocked apartment endangered not only the life of 3 year old Madeleine but also of Sean and Amelie, the two younger children. Anyone, who had the ‘mind to’ being able to gain access and inflict harm on these children.
Madeleine, Sean and Amelie, quite clearly could not defend themselves in the situation in which they were placed. I believe this to be a criminal act!
Portuguese Judicial Code
Exposure or abandonment
1 - Whom endangers the life of another person:
a) By exposing her in a place where the person is subject to a situation which she cannot defend herself from on her own; or
b) By abandoning her in a defenseless state, for motive of age, physical defect or illness,when the agent had the duty to guard, watch or assist to the person;
is punished with a prison term of 1 to 5years.
2 - If the fact is practised by an ascendant ;or descendant, adoptant or adoptee of the victim, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 5 years.
3 - If the fact results in:
a) Serious offense to the physical integrity, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 8 years;
b) Death, the agent is punished with a prison term of 3 to 10 years.
The doctors McCann did not come close to providing a basic level of care for these children.
For those out there, who still consider that the doctors McCann made a mistake? Perhaps it is time to take off the blinkers.
Having now established that on the night of 3rd May 2007 the doctors McCann:
Left the children alone once more, the 5th night in succession, despite knowing that their children had been upset and crying the previous night.
They left the patio door unlocked despite knowing that it allowed any person, paedophile or other, access to their children. It allowed opportunity also for their daughter Madeleine to step outside to obvious known dangers. Kate McCann has stated one of the purposes of leaving the door unlocked was for Madeleine to be able to leave.
They did NOT increase the frequency of checks on this evening, despite having stated that they discussed the safety of their children and had agreed ‘to watch them more closely.’
Both doctors claim that on their individual checks, they did not intend looking in, making a visual check on the children. Only for the fact they each found the bedroom door to be more open, than when they had left that evening did they do so. As Kate McCann stated, - she stepped inside the patio door, as all was quiet she was just going to go straight back out, but then noticed the position of the bedroom door. This worried anxious mother had no intentions when she entered that apartment to even look at her children.
Despite doctor Kate McCann telling her friend at the dinner table of the ‘crying incident’ which had occurred the previous night, telling her friend that they had left the patio door unlocked, and appearing to her friend to be anxious at this, she did not leave the table for over 90 minutes to check on her children?
Is this the actions of worried, anxious concerned and responsible parents? Was all of this a mistake?
Please do remember those of you who have decided that the McCann’s made a mistake that the McCann’s are NOT with you on this one. They do not consider any mistake was made. They consider their actions to be ‘RESPONSIBLE PARENTING’ and it is this, that they will argue in a Court of Law if need be. They have no intentions of throwing themselves upon the mercy of the Court, pleading for forgiveness for a ‘mistake’.
It is the “checks” of the McCann children which have caused so much speculation, aroused suspicion, have raised eyebrows, so many inconsistencies.
Inconsistencies in times, we all know slight inconsistencies can happen, a couple of minutes out here or there. That I do not dispute. I actually find it quite remarkable that the group have been so accurate, all of the group in agreement with regards the timeline, considering, we are told most of them were not wearing watches nor mobile phones that evening? In some of the police statements certain members of the group could not remember who went to check before whom. So yes, it is truly remarkable that they are all able to be so precise in the timings.
Well done the tapas group, a lot of thought must have been put into this exercise.
It is the persons who performed the checks on the 3rd May 2007, and the reason why the pattern, checking system, and routine which we understand took place on previous evenings changed on this night that intrigues, specifically the introduction of Matthew Oldfield.
Gerry McCann we now know believes that the alleged intruder was in the apartment at the time of his check around 9:05 P.M. He believes the intruder could have been hiding behind the bedroom door in the children’s room.
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 to do so. The McCann’s believed that the alleged intruder gained access by the bedroom window. If this was so Gerry McCann, from his position in the doorway of the children’s bedroom would have seen the open bedroom window.
Matt Oldfield we must not forget checked at this bedroom window, at around 9:00 P.M. So it was closed at this time. A few minutes later Gerry McCann arrived, passing this window and entering the apartment by the front door. If it had been open, Gerry McCann would have seen this from the outside before entering the apartment.
At this juncture, it must be pointed out that in the ‘McCann made’ documentary, Gerry McCann demonstrates how he entered the apartment – he uses the front door, the one which was locked.This is confirmed also in Sr Amaral’s documentary - Gerry McCann entered by the front door!
I think it is therefore safe to say that the bedroom window was NOT open at the time Gerry McCann was in the apartment. This backs up absolutely the finding of the Portuguese police - the window shutter had not been jemmied!
Worth mentioning also, is, if the bedroom door was open further than the McCann’s had left it, and Madeleine was lying sleeping in the exact position as Gerry has stated ‘how he left her’ – Why as a parent did he not explore further how this bedroom door came to be open so wide? Clearly it could not have been the twins who opened it, and Gerry was the first to check. Before leaving the apartment did he satisfy himself as to how the door came to be open more widely?
As a parent who had left his children in an unlocked apartment, surely his trend of thought would have immediately turned to – ‘maybe someone had gained entry?’ It didn’t! He waltzed back to the tapas bar, stopping to chat to an acquaintance for a short time directly outside the apartment.
So this ‘open door’ was not something which caused him concern, not enough to investigate how it came to be more open. That is extraordinary, considering he knew he had left a door unlocked and the safety of his children was at stake here. Why didn't he check out the apartment, and lock that patio door? Better still, stay with his children!
Gerry also states that it was warm in the room he thought it was quite hot and felt ‘no need to cover Madeleine.’ Yet he is later surprised that the child’s bed appeared undisturbed after it was discovered that she was missing. If she had not been covered up, why would the bedclothes be disturbed? Why would this be so strange?
Matt Oldfield has stated that he was annoyed at Gerry McCann for going to check ‘immediately’ on his children after he, Oldfield had listened at the window at 9:00 p.m. He felt Gerry McCann did not trust in his check. Up until this point no other member of the tapas group had ever checked on the McCann children during that week, either by going into the apartment or by listening from outside the shuttered bedroom window.
What made Matt Oldfield decide to do so on that night? To get to his own apartment, did not require him passing the McCann bedroom window. I often wondered at this.
Did Gerry McCann, when Oldfield told him that 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?
Was something about to happen which was not for Oldfield’s eyes? Or was Oldfield himself, up to something?
Someone was! Of that there can be no doubt.
Interestingly, on the Oprah interview, Gerry McCann mentions that Matt Oldfield had gone up to check on the Oldfield children around 9:00 pm. Gerry McCann makes no mention of Oldfield at this same check time, listening at the bedroom window of the McCann children!
Did this check actually happen? One wonders!
Oldfield met the Payne family making their way down to the tapas restaurant, as he went on his 9:00 pm check, and spoke to them as they crossed paths, joking about the Payne’s always being late.
It would seem extremely unlikely that any intruder would have had the opportunity to go into the McCann apartment by any of the accesses during this period of time. Too many of the tapas group going back and forth between the tapas restaurant and the apartments during this period.
We must remember also that this chap Jez, a British holidaymaker was in the area that night, out walking his young child in his pushchair. Other members of the public may also have been walking this street and surrounding ones. Not only the McCann’s and their friends were in PDL that evening!
As for Oldfield carrying out another check on the McCann children that night, this time at around 9:30, and this time entering the apartment? It is this which is quite baffling!
Seems most unusual to say the least! He is annoyed at Gerry McCann for what he feels, is Gerry’s mistrust of his earlier check at the shuttered window at 9:00 pm that night, yet he agrees, to not only listen at a shuttered window this time around but to enter the apartment by the unlocked patio door?
Kate McCann said that Oldfield offered to do this check, which relieved her of her duties, but she stated, that he hesitated in his offer – ‘hesitation’ to me indicates being ASKED to do something but not being entirely comfortable with it. It is not something generally one would do when you are making the offer.
Would you offer to check on the McCann children, children who you do not know, period, let alone when you had been made to feel untrustworthy just a short time earlier by Gerry McCann?
Would you offer to check on these children who you do not know, when their mother Kate McCann had just announced that her children were awake and crying the previous evening? Rachael Oldfield, Matt Oldfield’s wife, was privy to this conversation.
Would common-sense not dictate that the mother of the children should perform this task if this was her scheduled time for doing so?
Wouldn’t Mrs. Rachael Oldfield think this unusual, her husband offering/being asked to check on Kate and Gerry McCann’s children, children he did not know, by entering their unlocked apartment?
We must understand that the Oldfield’s were acquaintances of the McCann’s not close friends. They did not know the McCann’s or their children well at all. The children, basically by sight only!
Fiona Payne in her police statement, speaking of how well the party knew each other:
'Matt and Rachael didn’t know maybe Kate and Gerry quite so well'.
Kate McCann has announced at the table that the children cried the previous evening.She has stated that the patio door has been left unlocked.
I cannot imagine that Mrs. Rachael Oldfield would have thought for an instant that this was a wise route to go down. Would any of us think it wise for our husband on his own, to enter an unlocked apartment, to check on three young children who he did not know, who had been left alone there, by their parents, children, who may be awake and crying, children who on seeing him would be terrified witless.
Madeleine too may have been out of bed, in the front living area looking for her parents. Madeleine did not know Oldfield, and he most certainly would not be who Madeleine or the twins would expect to see when they woke in the night.
The McCann’s clearly thought there was every possibility that Madeleine would wake and come look for them, this is why they say, they left the patio door unlocked. It would not be unreasonable to suggest therefore that there was a chance that this is what Oldfield might find.
What would Oldfield do in that situation, finding the children awake and crying, Madeleine out of bed? He could not go to them, hug and comfort them. He did not know them. They would have been so afraid of him.
After scaring them half to death, he would then have had to leave them once more, alone and crying, more upset than ever, and return to the tapas bar to alert the McCann’s.
What utter nonsense!
I ask, would any of us allow, any individual, who our children was not familiar with, to check on them, in a darkened apartment, or otherwise? I think not!
The McCann’s knew there was every possibility that Madeleine and/or, one or both twins could be awake and crying, yet they thought it okay for Oldfield to enter their apartment?
It does not make an ounce of sense. Oldfield admits he was a stranger to these children.
I’m not so sure that Oldfield did a check at 9:00 pm at the shuttered window, and I am even less convinced that he checked on the McCann children at 9:30 by entering their apartment.
The fact that he has stated he did, assists the McCann’s, in as much as it gives the impression that the children were checked regularly.
It was convenient on one hand, that he could not state that he saw Madeleine. On the other, it rather threw the ‘window of opportunity’ wide open, from the ‘tiny’ one which Kate McCann spoke of, in one of the early McCann documentaries. Something the McCann’s perhaps did not anticipate.
If no one can state categorically that Madeleine was NOT in the apartment at 9:30, then there is every chance that she was!
The doctors McCann will not entertain the possibility that Madeleine, if taken by an intruder, could have been taken at any other time, than just after 9:00 p.m. This is entirely due they say, to Jane Tanner’s ‘sighting’ in which they are confident.
We must ask why this is so? To restrict their now private investigation around this one sighting is most definitely leaving a stone unturned.
But, what of, the Smith family sighting?
If Madeleine was taken from the apartment by anyone, be it someone within the tapas group of friends or an unknown other, an unknown other working independently or working for Gerry McCann or working for 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, consisting of at least four adults, saw someone carrying a blonde child fitting Madeleine’s description. One member of this family is firmly of the opinion that the man he saw was Gerry McCann. The others not so convinced of this. It does not mean that it was Gerry McCann, but it certainly means that someone who looks like him carried a child that evening.
This is no different from other sightings.
Others have been questioned because they looked similar to descriptions given by the public. They were innocent persons, but nevertheless they were sought out, based on the descriptions given, questioned and cleared.
Why have no persons, to our knowledge, been sought, found and interviewed by McCann private detectives, based on the description given by the adult members of the Smith family.
We have had no press conference by the McCann’s, no news headlines flashed around the world in this regard. Unlike the latest press conference (the Australian connection) where pictures of harbours, streets where nightclubs are located were flashed on screen, commentary supplied by Clarence Mitchell!
Why nothing similar for the Smith family sightings?
Was the man they saw one of the tapas group? Could this be why we do not hear anything of this most crucial sighting?
Is it possible for the man Tanner claims to have seen to have later passed Madeleine to the man the Smith’s saw? If so, why would the McCann’s not follow up this lead?
Without doubt, it has to be the best lead in this entire case. Four adults seeing a man carrying a blonde haired female child, of around three/four years of age, on the night Madeleine disappeared!
If the tapas group, or some off, are involved in some way in Madeleine’s disappearance, Tanner’s sighting may well just be a fabrication, likewise the crying incident, the unlocked patio door and Oldfield’s checks at 9:00 pm and 9:30 pm.
Why on the evening of the 3rd May 2007, did the pattern of checking the children change? Why on this night did the McCann’s decide to leave the patio door unlocked? Why did Kate McCann decide to announce this at the dinner table that evening? And why did none of this group express horror and anger at the thought of these children being left so vulnerable?
Beggar’s belief! Which, is EXACTLY why I do not believe that the patio door, was unlocked or that Kate McCann told Fiona Payne and/or others this at dinner that evening.
Are we really to believe that the doctors McCann thought it best to leave a door unlocked for their three year old daughter to wander out into the night in bare feet, pyjamas to look for them?
Are we to believe that all members of this group took this revelation in their stride?
Fiona Payne tells us that it was Gerry’s idea to leave the patio door unlocked, and that Kate McCann was not comfortable with this!
Why then did Kate McCann not simply stay at home and look after her children? Tell Gerry to go ‘flip off!’ What mum, fearful for her children’s safety would go along with this for the sake of a glass of wine and a bite to eat? ‘Okay darling, not happy about leaving the door unlocked but if you think it’s okay, then it’s okay with me too.....and I suppose Madeleine is almost 4 years old now, she’ll manage to find us quite easily. Not sure if she’ll know to put on warm clothing or shoes before she sets out. She might struggle with her limited Portuguese though if she needs to ask directions to the tapas.............’ Piffle!
What a quandary for these poor medical professionals – what to do eh? A loving caring mother’s instinct is to protect, NOT to put her children AT RISK.
Are we to believe also that the McCann’s left the apartment unlocked with their passports and other valuable documents inside? This would surely invalidate any insurance policy they would have. Sorry, but cannot for a moment believe McCann’s would take that chance with these type of valuables.
To re-cap, Kate and Gerry McCann:
1. Left the patio door to their apartment unlocked allowing ease of access to their three young children by anyone who cared to take advantage of the situation. It also was to serve the purpose of enabling their three year old daughter Madeleine to leave the apartment unsupervised late at night to go out onto the streets in search of her parents. The McCann’s consciously and deliberately created this circumstance. Leaving, the door unlocked was not a mistake. It was not a case of them forgetting to lock-up!
2. They thought it a good idea also, to allow a man, Matthew Oldfield, in essence a stranger to the children to go into their apartment, the purpose being to ‘listen for crying.’ Matt Oldfield has stated that he did not check on these children earlier in the week as he did not know them well enough to do so.
Matt Oldfield 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 crèche all day (allowed out for lunch), then early to bed. At what point exactly did he become acquainted with them? When and how did he get to know them so well, that he became comfortable with going into the unlocked darkened apartment, to check on these children?
The McCann parents themselves spent very little time during that week with their children.
So what changed on the day of Madeleine’s disappearance that made Matt Oldfield, enter the McCann apartment to check on the McCann children?
What prompted him to suddenly decide to check at the shuttered window? He was the only one to do so! Perhaps we will never know.
What changed in general that day? Almost everything!
1.The McCann children were not taken to the tennis courts after tea for their usual ‘playtime.’
2. Kate claimed that they were too tired to play on this night.
3. David Payne claimed he was asked by Gerry McCann to check on Kate McCann and the children. Why? So far, I have not heard a feasible explanation for doing so.
4. David Payne claimed he saw all three McCann children sitting dressed in pyjamas looking like little angels.
5. David Payne ........a man of mystery! His wife Fiona in her police statements found great difficulty in pinpointing exactly when he made his visit to Kate McCann. His wife said he was on the tennis courts at 6:30pm? Could not decide whether he visited Kate before or after tennis. If after, what would be the point, by that time it should have been obvious to Gerry that the children were not coming to watch daddy ‘play!’
6. Matt Oldfield takes it upon himself to do an impromptu check at the shuttered window of the bedroom where the McCann children slept.
7. Matt Oldfield later enters the McCann apartment to check on the children.
8. The McCann’s decide to leave a patio door unlocked.
9. Kate McCann decides to mention this to the group at dinner that evening.
10. Kate McCann further decides to tell the group that Madeleine and Sean, one of her twin children were crying the previous night while they, the parents, were out dining.
11. No one in the group express concern for the children on hearing Kate McCann’s revelations?
12. Matt Oldfield, Gerry McCann, Russell O’Brien, Jane Tanner and of course our Kate are the only ones to leave the table that evening. The Payne’s, Dianne Webster and Rachael Oldfield did not.
13. Kate McCann a worried and anxious mum (according to her friend Fiona Payne) does NOT carry out her scheduled 9:30 check of her children, preferring to allow a stranger to carry out this task?
Did some tragic accident happen to Madeleine in apartment 5A? Something which required to be covered up? Something which entailed them having to accept being thought of as caring cold and callous parents who neglect their children, having too much to lose if the truth was to be known?
I think this is closer to the mark!
IF the McCann’s left the patio door open that night, I can only assume it was for a purpose other than those they have stated.
Was Matt Oldfield duped/used by the McCann’s to do this 9:30 check, but messed up by not DISCOVERING (as was their intention) that Madeleine was not there? Was Oldfield the one who was supposed to report her disappearance?
Or was he conned into stating that he had carried out checks on these children which he had not, out of some misguided sense of loyalty, so that the group as a whole did not appear to be as neglectful as they quite clearly had been.
Whatever really happened that night, only this group of people know! I don’t believe the complete truth will ever be found.
At this point in time, I’ll stick with Oldfield not having made any checks whatsoever on the McCann children.
The tapas group, have, I believe deliberately muddied the waters by issuing conflicting statements, contradicting themselves time after time, all to their own good. Causing confusion, being evasive helps those with something to hide. It does not help any official investigation.
This group of people, all highly intelligent, well educated persons, medical professionals in the main, articulate sharp and alert, yet their memories fail them when interviewed by police. They become babbling baboons, stuttering, stammering, uttering strange sounds in answer to questions put to them. Idiotic answers are given.
Do we honestly believe that this is how they are?
I think too, that the timeline they have given, all hinging on Tanner’s sighting, which of course we know, both Gerry and Jez ‘missed’ despite the alleged abductor passing under their nose, is what really has ‘thrown matters’ and intentionally so.
Read through the police statements and you will see that no one really knows who left the table, or at what time, and for how long. They speak of a timeline, not out of their recall of that night, but from when they got together to piece a timeline together.
As far as I can see, the McCann’s need the world to concentrate on the Tanner sighting, and the Tanner sighting alone, without any other possible scenario, being given credence.
The Smith family sighting it would seem has come as more of a ‘blow’ to them than a God send!
According to Tanner she did not see a blonde child, only legs and bare feet.
The Smith’s, all of the adults in this family witnessed a blonde female child being carried by a man. One of the family members also stated, that the man was Gerry McCann!
The silence on this sighting by the McCann’s is deafening. Surely this is one gigantic stone left unturned?
Whatever the truth, in this tragic case, one thing I am certain of, that each and every one of the members of this party, know more than they are telling. I believe also that most of what they have stated, has been tailored to suit the needs of the McCann’s/neglect issue.
It is my opinion they have all lied to some degree, and are, all now living a lie to protect the truth of what happened to this child becoming known/neglect issue.
I believe they have created a situation whereby it is now almost impossible to distinguish truth from lies. It is quite possible they now believe any lie, white or otherwise which they may have told.
I am firmly of the opinion that certain members of the tapas group were involved in the disappearance of this wee girl, and that those others who are totally innocent of any involvement, perhaps told lies to cover the groups neglect as a whole, of ALL children who were left alone in the various apartments on that holiday.
I also believe that as time has passed and information come to the fore, that those innocent members of the group, must now, at the very least have suspicions as to what happened to Madeleine on that fateful night.
If this is so, how they live with themselves, sleep at night, is beyond understanding.
I believe too, that if all were completely innocent, and knew nothing of what happened to Madeleine, if they thought for a moment that there was a chance she could be found alive – that they would have, without hesitation taken part in a reconstruction of events as requested by the Portuguese police.
They would have put in the same effort in assisting the police as they did in 'constructing' the timeline on Madeleine’s colouring book!
If they were completely innocent they would have put to one side any ridiculous notion that they were being set up by the Portuguese police and thought only of Madeleine. Their refusal to me suggests that they knew Madeleine was not alive, and the reason for this being so.
There is not a reason in the world which could keep me, if in the same position from taking part in a reconstruction which could possibly help discover the whereabouts, or what happened to my friends missing child. How could one not?
The McCann party have argued that the reconstruction would have been a pointless exercise, hidden agendas. If these people are innocent, what did they fear, what did it matter if the reconstruction came to nothing? Surely it was worth a try.
Five private detective agencies down the line and still they have come up with nothing – didn’t stop the McCann’s from continually hiring these hopeless, incompetent and useless detectives paying phenomenal amounts in fees to boot!
Is it not interesting that the McCann’s came up with the best criminal lawyers for their own defence – Why shouldn’t they, you may ask, wouldn’t we all? Of course we would, but what is confusing here is that whilst they are able to do this, two years down the line, they are still struggling to find a detective agency who specialise in missing persons!
It is an appalling arrogance of the McCann party, to deem an official police reconstruction into the disappearance of a missing child as pointless! To reduce the chance of discovering the whereabouts of Madeleine, dead or alive – is beyond sickening.
If this child Madeleine Beth McCann was alive at that time, being held in horrific circumstances, with horrific things happening to her – Madeleine would not have thought it pointless!
If tragically the child was not of this world – it was not pointless!
It was NOT for this group of people to decide what chances of survival Madeleine should be afforded. Yet they did!
Fiona Payne stated:
“And I still don’t see, erm, I think, emotionally, it would be hideous to go back and have to do a re-enactment, I really do, and I don’t see how, erm, emotions couldn’t affect the way it was done, because it would just be horrific, I mean imagine, you know, Jane having to relive that, Kate having to relive that, any of us having to relive that, you, you couldn’t do it without it being an emotional thing.”
In my eyes they are a snivelling bunch of cowards. Did ever once these people put Madeleine’s welfare before their own? This child, if not dead at best was/is being held by a paedophile. What this group of people would have experienced by doing a reconstruction, could never come close to what Madeleine may have been suffering.
The McCann’s we often hear accusing this person or that one of hindering their investigation, threatening legal action in this regard.
The McCann accusations rather pale into insignificance when you consider the following:
NEITHER McCann parent, complied with a request to take part in a reconstruction into the disappearance of their daughter, and Kate McCann did NOT answer 40+ questions put to her by the investigating police authority, answering but one:
Q. Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are JEOPARDISING the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
A. YES, if that’s what the investigation thinks!
Poor Madeleine! What chance did this child have, before or after her disappearance?
As for the McCann’s - It is my opinion that they were interested in their own enjoyment only during that holiday, no more, no less. 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. That is, time, ‘out-with’ lunch and bedtime routines/stories. The McCann children did not join the other families for breakfast, for lunches in the Payne family 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, she was stuck in a crèche, not allowed to go to the beach with the other kids in their holiday group, not allowed to have tea and ice-creams with the other kids at the beach cafe, not allowed her usual playtime at the tennis courts that evening. Bathed and put to bed early.
The last day of her holiday, not spent with her parents, her brother and sister, or their friends and their children – but in a crèche with strangers!
Fiona Payne states that the McCann’s were asked to join them, but couldn’t as they had booked tennis lessons. Can bookings not be cancelled? This was clearly an adult’s only holiday.
If this was the best day the child had ever had...........?
What else happened that day? What was different about 3rd May 2007 from the other nights of that holiday?
There were a number of “Firsts.”
1. It was the day that Gerry McCann decided he was a lucky man to have such a lovely daughter.
2. It was the day which Kate McCann spoke of as being just lovely sitting reading the children bedtime stories.
3. It was the day that the McCann children were not taken to the tennis courts to have their usual short playtime at the side of the courts while their parents played tennis.
4. It was the first evening David Payne went down to the tapas restaurant together with his wife and mother-in law. He generally did not join them until a little later.
5. It was the first time that on the way to the tapas restaurant the Payne family saw/met anyone. This night they saw Matt Oldfield.
6. It was the day Gerry McCann asked David Payne to look in on his wife and children as he thought she may be struggling to bathe their three children? (If she had been, was David to assist with this task, or was he to rush back to the tennis courts to alert Gerry, for him to rush home to assist?)
7. It was the day which David Payne looked in on the McCann children and thought how they looked like little angels, all sitting in their pyjamas bathed and ready for bed. It made him wonder why Gerry had asked him to go. (we have all wondered at this!)
8. It was the day that the doctors McCann decided to LEAVE their children alone once more.
9. It was the day the doctors McCann decided that they would ‘watch their children more closely.’
10. It was the day for the first time that Matt Oldfield listened at the shuttered windows of the McCann children’s bedroom.
11. It was the day Matt Oldfield for the first time entered the McCann apartment through an unlocked door to check on the children.
12. It was the day that Kate McCann confided in Fiona Payne, that she had left the patio door unlocked so that Madeleine could get out to come and look for her and Gerry McCann.(Can anyone imagine for a moment planning that, for your three year old daughter to go onto the streets?)
13. It was the day that Kate McCann told Fiona Payne of the ‘crying incident.’
14. It was the day Kate McCann asked Fiona Payne’s opinion on leaving the children in an unlocked apartment.
15. It was the day Fiona Payne replied: ‘Oh, I’m sure they’ll be fine.”
16. It was the day that a conversation regarding this unlocked door took place between adults at this table and not one took notice, not one showed concern for Madeleine, her brother or sister, each of them failing these children. Fiona Payne states: “this was conversation just between, erm, me and Kate, although I know Jane and Rachael joined in a bit, they were sitting sort of the other side of Kate, so it was sort of a conversation amongst the girls really”.
17. It was the day a vulnerable 3 year old child Madeleine Beth McCann and her younger twin siblings were abandoned by their parents in an unlocked apartment.
18. It was the day, another day, Madeleine’s cries once again went unheard.
19. It was the day we can be SURE Madeleine cried.
20. It was the day we can be SURE her cries were not ‘something and nothing!’
21. It was the day Madeleine disappeared without trace.
Let us not forget that in many cases, the investigating officers know exactly who the perpetrator is, they have solved the crime, just not proved it! Sometimes this takes a little more time and patience.