3 November 2009

New virtual image of Maddie released


by João Mira Godinho

These are two virtual, almost similar images of Maddie, and they were publicised by British police agency CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre) yesterday. The photos, which have been placed on the internet, simulate the look that the little girl would have now, aged 6, and are part of a worldwide campaign that starts today.

The two photos that were released yesterday merely differ in Madeleine McCann’s skin colour. “In one of them it is darker, in the case that the little girl was very exposed to the sun”, José Vasconcelos, from Lift Consulting, the company that manages the McCann couple’s public relations in Portugal, explained to Correio da Manhã.

“The message is directed at persons who are close to the person or persons that were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann”, explains CEOP in a press release that accompanies the images. “This could be a relative, a friend, a co-worker or a neighbour”, the text adds, appealing to everyone.

Apart from the photos, the campaign includes an appeal to anyone who may know the girl’s whereabouts or has any lead about the disappearance, as well as a short one-minute film, that may be seen on the ceop.police.uk website. The centre asks everyone to pass messages with the film’s online address, per email.

“We want the message to spread in such a way that it is only a click away in any search for Madeleine”, explained Jim Gamble, CEOP’s president.

Details

Support – Interpol, Europol, and the police from Australia, the United States, Canada, United Arab Emirates and Europe support the initiative, says the CEOP in a press release.

Languages – At CEOP’s website, the message can be read in seven languages: English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Arab were the chosen idioms.

Centre – The CEOP was launched in April of 2006 and its purpose is to fight child exploration. It is an official body, which includes policemen and child experts.





source: Correio da Manhã, 03.11.2009


95 comments:

  1. Poor Madeleine, now she is becoming the new Michael Jackson - in reverse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The deep tan Madeleine may now sport, suggests that her abductors take her out in the sunshine often, or for long periods of time - perhaps the beach for outings? Or perhaps they have a sunbed at home for those wet and rainy days, and the child is here in the UK were it is mostly far from sunny and warm.

    It also indicates that her captors are not afraid of being seen when they leave the lair with her, increasing the chance of them being spotted and reported to police authorities.

    Oddly enough, the sun tends to make fair hair more blonde. In the picture of Madeleine with the tan, she has darker hair? Was it dyed? On outings to 'top-up' her tan do her captors give her a hat to wear?

    The most important phrase in the article has to be:

    'The message is directed at persons who are close to the person or persons that were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

    Mind blowing stuff 2 and 1/2 years down the line.

    I would correct it though from 'WERE involved' to 'ARE involved.'

    The child is still missing, so the persons responsible ARE still involved.

    Maybe one of them will now do the decent thing and spill the beans?

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hopefully this appeal will prompt 17465 new sightings, and as this goes through Interpol, Europol, etc, it will reach the Portuguese authorities - AND PROMPT THE REOPENING OF THE CASE!!!

    Fingers crossed, guys, this may well be the break through that this case needed!

    Attorney General of Portugal, are you watching?!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Blond hair exposed to the sun becomes lighter, not darker! What is this all about?!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Which police force released the video?
    And why does every article stipulate the mccanns were cleared.
    Surly no one believes this utter rubish

    ReplyDelete
  6. A teenager already - does`nt time fly

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alert! Alert!
    New sightings in sight....soon....
    We all notice the darker skin and the xenophobic under tone....
    Now lets be serious: if they know/are so sure she is "happy,well looked after" and therefore alive,why dont they ask for the re opening of the case? :D
    We must help them re opening the case.There is no other way to get the people who "did that to her"

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Smith Family sighting might be a place to start.

    Four adults was it, who all saw a man carrying a blonde child fitting Madeleine's description through the streets of PDL?

    So far we have not had a press conference in this regard, for what must be the most credible sighting by a family who have absolutely no reason to lie. It also gives us the most accurate time, as there is a receipt as to the time this family were in a bar/restaurant.

    No local "father and child" have come forward. I cannot imagine that there is any person local to PDL who would not know that Madeleine was missing and come forward and identify themselves.

    That in itself would suggest that this person carrying the child was someone other than a local.

    Why do the McCann's not highlight this sighting? Is it because it throws very much into question, the sighting by J. Tanner, which is afterall on what the McCann's abduction theory is based. The pin which they believe holds it together.

    Oddly enough, on reading the statements by the tapas group. Fiona Payne tells us that Jane told her about seeing a man carrying off a child she believed to be Madeleine. Payne said, Tanner was shaking with fear. What she said was urgent. Payne understood the implication immediately.

    Quoting Payne speaking of J. Tanner:

    " AND THE HORROR AND REALISATIONN I THINK OF WHAT SHE HAD SEEN WAS QUITE EVIDENT AT THAT POINT."

    "the way she said it was URGENT it was, she was FRIGHTENED and she said, you know, ‘I SAW A MAN CARRYING A CHILD AND I THINK IT MIGHT BE MADELEINE"

    "I can’t remember whether she said it was Madeleine but I know the implication was that what she’d seen, in retrospect, was HIGHLY HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT and, and in her mind I DON'T THINK REALLY THERE WAS ANY DOUBT IN HER MIND OF WHAT SHE'S SEEN WAS MADELEINE BEING TAKEN AWAY."

    The police interview with Fiona Payne:

    Fiona Payne interview Leicestershire police.

    1485

    “When you were with Kate in the aftermath, who else was in the apartment, I know you say that Gerry was coming and going, was there any other?”

    Reply

    “Gerry was coming and going. Dave came in and, erm, he came in initially with me, erm, when I went to Kate, I don’t think he went in any of the bedrooms, I think he was just mainly in the living room trying to put together what they should all be doing really, he was talking more to Gerry, so he was in. I didn’t see Russell or any of the other group in, in Kate and Gerry’s apartment.

    Fairly soon after, erm, a girl called Emma, who, I don’t know what her position in MARK WARNER was, she was sort of, erm, tut, I don’t know what you call them, she was mainly working at the reception
    area, just as a, erm, tut, I don’t know what you call her job title, she was sort of looking after everybody”.

    1485

    “Just one of the travel assistants or something, yeah?”

    Reply

    “Yeah. Erm, huh, I mean, I don’t know what time she got there, it seemed quite early on, she was, she was in the room for the most part, it was me, Emma and Kate with Gerry and Dave sort of to’ing and fro’ing until the first lot of Police arrived”.

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  9. cntd

    00.55.20

    1485
    “Did you speak to Jane during that time or was it after that you spoke to Jane?”

    Reply

    “No, it was during that time and I think after I’d been in the apartment, I think the furthest I went away from the apartment at that point was just to go to the stairwell to check, because I thought nobody had checked, you know, up, going up in the building to see if she’d gone up there, and I’d started to go up the stairs and then Jane had come out and said ‘Oh Rachael’s already checked’ or somebody else was up there.

    And, at that point, erm, Jane had sort of rushed out and had said, you know, quietly, sort of almost pulling me away from Kate’s door, erm, ‘I saw a man carrying a child’. AND THE HORROR AND REALISATIONN I THINK OF WHAT SHE HAD SEEN WAS QUITE EVIDENT AT THAT POINT.

    And I took it as SERIOUS AT THAT POINT, at what she was implying, that she thought she might have seen Madeleine.

    Erm, and I, in the panic, I just said at that point, I said, well the Police hadn’t arrived, I said ‘We’ve just GOT to tell the Police. We’ve GOT to tell the Police what you’ve seen’.

    And DIDN'T say anything to Kate or Gerry about what JANE HAD TOLD ME AT THAT POINT.”.

    1485
    “Did you make a conscious decision not to tell them?”

    Reply

    “It wasn’t a conscious decision, but Kate’s, I was just there with Kate trying to be a support and it was no way APPROPRIATE to be saying, you know, ‘A man’s carried Madeleine off’”.

    1485

    “And did Jane tell you or give you a description of this man?”

    Reply “No, not at, no”.

    1485
    “Exactly what was her words in relation to that?”

    Reply

    “The only time I saw Jane was at that point that night when, and all, as I say, all she said, I can’t remember her exact words, but it, it was, huh, the way she said it was URGENT it was, she was FRIGHTENED and she said, you know, ‘I SAW A MAN CARRYING A CHILD AND I THINK IT MIGHT BE MADELEINE.

    1485
    “And did she say where she saw him?”

    Reply
    “No, not at that point. This was all in immediate panic”.

    1485 “Yeah”.

    Reply
    “So I was running around, Jane, you know, everyone was running around. And I, I went back to Kate.

    And Jane, as I say, what I said to her at THAT POINT was ‘YOU'VE JUST GOT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW, THAT YOU GIVE THAT TO THE POLICE WHEN THEY GET HERE'

    1485
    “Was there just you and Jane at that point?”

    Reply
    “No, Rachael was around, erm, in the stairwell, she’d been up I think looking on the other floors, erm, so she was around. At that point I don’t recall, I don’t know where Matt and Russell were, I didn’t see them really after, you know, our immediate search, until a lot later”. 1485
    “And when Jane told you what she had seen how was her voice and how was her demeanour when she told you?”

    Reply

    “She was SHAKING. I mean, we were all very shaken, I think the fact that by that point no-one had seen, you know, found Madeleine. Erm, tut, you know, as I say, I, huh, I know Jane and I know what she was saying, huh, I can’t remember whether she said it was Madeleine but I know the implication was that what she’d seen, in retrospect, was HIGHLY HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT and, and in her mind I DON'T THINK REALLY THERE WAS ANY DOUBT IN HER MIND OF WHAT SHE'S SEEN WAS MADELEINE BEING TAKEN AWAY.

    But I think the, it was almost, tut, EVERYONE was trying to hope that that wasn’t the case, it sounds stupid now, but despite knowing even what Jane had told me, I was still hopeful Madeleine would be picked up, you know, by one of the MARK WARNER staff or, tut, and I think, you know, even for Jane, that was even despite what she’d seen, she was still hoping it wasn’t Madeleine”.

    1485

    “Okay. What did you do once she had told you what she saw?”


    Reply

    I went back to Kate. I mean, that, that was my main kind of role that night, again, was just, I was the only one really with Kate continuously for that evening and, as I say, at that point she was just in no state to be left alone and that was what I saw as my role really”.

    -----

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  10. cntd

    So we are told:

    The horror and realisation of what J.T had seen was all very evident.

    Fiona Payne took what Tanner said as serious at that point.

    Tanner actually tells Payne that she thinks the child she saw may have been Madeleine.

    Tanner according to Payne is shaking, frightened.

    There was no doubt in Payne's mind that Tanner believed she'd seen Madeleine.

    Payne doesn't ask where Tanner saw the man. Tanner doesn't offer any further information.

    Payne tells us that Tanner spoke with urgency.


    Am I missing something here?

    A child is missing, understandably everyone hopes she has not been taken by an intruder and hope to find that she has wandered out of the apartment.

    That aside.

    We have a friend of the parents who believes she has seen a man carrying their child away into the night. She is frightened, shaking, and confides in another friend of the parents, who takes what she hears very SERIOUSLY, considers it to be HIGHLY HIGHLY significant, speaks of the URGENCY, how important it is to tell the police when they arrive.

    Meanwhile they both stay SCHTUM, DON'T alert anyone as to this information.

    I take it Payne and Tanner had this conversation quite early after the disappearance was discovered? How long did it take them to report it to the police?

    Now, on hearing this information, wouldn't you have asked the person divulging this information where she saw the man, description etc. and rushed to tell the parents of the missing child, or at the very least the males in the group, so that they could search in direction the man carrying the child had headed.

    These people don't. They hang around waiting for the police and allow those others out searching to do so, in perhaps the completely wrong areas.

    Payne doesn't ask where Tanner saw the man. Tanner doesn't offer any further information.

    Payne tells us that Tanner spoke with urgency, yet she, Payne, pops off back to be with Kate, saying nothing to Gerry and David, who are at this point in apartment 5A putting together a plan of what to do.

    So there they are thinking perhaps, 'where will we look next?'

    And Fiona doesn't think to say, 'well Jane has an idea, she saw a man carrying a child who looked like Madeleine, she spoke with urgency was shaking and frightened and I believe she is sure of what she saw, could that be part of our plan, to find out where this man went?'

    Nope, Fiona Payne doesn't think it was in anyway 'APPROPRIATE' to be saying, you know, ‘A man had carried Madeleine off and Jane saw him, she knows which direction he was headed.'

    It blinking well WAS appropriate, if that was what they suspected had happened.


    Kate McCann already had decided that Madeleine had been carried off out through the window (at that point)by a paedophile. Even if she had not believed this to be the case, no matter what any of them, thought may or may not have happened to the child. Any information at all, especially a sighting of a man carrying a child, was I would say, one hell of a lot more than an 'APPROPRIATE' item to be shared and acted upon.

    But hey, they sat on this information for how long, an hour, more?

    What good friends to have!

    The new lead the McCann's are hoping for, from this latest appeal may just come from the Smith Family sighting. Perhaps if they highlighted this sighting, gave it the same attention which they have all others, with a press conference, or if in, the up and coming interviews, the interviewer asks about this sighting it may just have the desired result - information coming to light as to who this person carrying the child was and of course who the child was, perhaps Madeleine.

    It is odd that this sighting is never mentioned!

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  11. A. Miller

    "It is odd this sighting is never mentioned!"
    Yes! the Smiths MUST come forward and be interview by....the mccanns of course! phew! never thought about this earlier!!!
    hey! now in the mccies mind this must be a false sighting of course.
    ONLY their "new leads and sightings" are the correct ones,what do you fink? and this is where they are wrong and we must convinced them to meet with them.
    More than ever I am convinced we must gather all together and HELP them re open the case.The PJ is doing nothing at all and they need new evidence to be able to re open the case.HOW UNFAIR!
    I mean the attorney could simply believe them and say: "Ok,folks I believe you and we are going to do this: re openen the investigation".Are the portuguese so heartless then???
    yeah....This is our duty towards this wonderfu,brave family,dont you think?I mean we know she has been taken away and we know she is "somewhere" not far from PdL and we MUST catch the swarthy b.... who did it,dont we?
    Poor, poor parents.....and me sitting on the fence since the last 2 years! how cruel I am,doubting what they are saying and tryind to transmit....I feel very very ashamed,guys
    Today is a bad day for me...going to the bank.I think a donation will cheer them up.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Still no pleading with the public to look for Madeleine alive or dead then!

    Keep sending in the money for the Fund folks.

    Don't bother to go search in and around PDL for the body of a child whatever you do. After all, the little girl may actually be there for the finding.

    Got to keep the search international after all.

    So how many more false leads is this latest attempt by the McCanns going to generate? Enough for another six months at least.

    Meanwhile let's hope millions of people get to read the books the McCanns would like banned, and request that the case be reopened and Kate McCann answer those 48 questions she has so far refused to answer with regard to the disappearance of her daughter.

    Now that would be a step in the right direction.

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://dontletthemhurtourchildren.blogspot.com/search/label/Elizabeth%20Smart


    Two very 'SUSPECT' child abductions...blended with a fact ,Jaycee was abducted...not from her bed but from the street.

    Put them altogether and no one will notice...Well not true, many are asking questions about Elizabeth Smart and her alleged abduction. Many more are asking questions about Madeleine Mccann and her alleged abduction. Both parents have proved to be less than honest when interviewed...Both fathers hog the limelight. Both fathers have political ambitions. Both fathers are using their daughters to stay on the front pages.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ridiculous! These are pictures of a 12 or 14 years old girl, not 6.
    This team is obviously desperate to make such a blunder. Another piece added to the cover-up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I hope the book Faked Abduction came out quick it. I have no stomach to hear these criminal English TV spots anymore. It's important that all the world know about Policia Judiciaria content files. People has to understand the McCanns were about to be in jail, that was an agreement between Portuguese and English police. A big meeting has happened with both polices to draw the way to take them to court. They are safe in England launching tv and outdoor campaigns because there was a very busy diplomatic corridor saving their skin, otherwise Kate McCann would be a Joana mother colleague in jail. Gerry McCann would be in jail as well as all the members that are not clean in this homicide.
    A.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I have just watched the McCanns on TV talking about the latest updated pictures of Madeleine, and the man with them who did a summing up pleading with whoever knows anything to contact the police.

    With what he was saying he could almost have been referring to the McCanns and their Tapas friends. At one point I actually thought he was. Oh to have had a close up of the McCanns then.

    I could almost believe the man knows something he is not saying. I'm left wondering whether he has been reading Dr Amaral's book.

    ReplyDelete
  17. And the bottom line is..........

    PLEASE GIVE GENEROUSLY

    ReplyDelete
  18. Make you complaints here about the, once again, one sided coverage of this case. Why weren't any difficult questions asked relating to the actual facts of the case.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/homepage/

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think that CEOPS should be alerted to details of the Smith sighting in Praia da Luz on May 3 2007. The Smiths gave a good description of a man carrying an imobile child after child's disappearence. An independent witness. "This could be a relative, a friend...," do the decent thing, let CEOPS know.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 'It's never too late to tell the truth'. Do you hear that Gerry, Kate, David, Fiona, Russell, Jane (if she even knows what the truth is anymore)Matthew , Rachel & Diane? They are playing your song. 'It's never too late to tell the truth'.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Having followed this case from the outset and considered all the evidence I have had to conclude that I cannot point the finger at anyone because there is simply not enough evidence to reach a conclusion. However it is totally clear to me that the McCanns have not done everything possible to find their daughter if they are innocent. It is also becoming abundantly clear that commentators are gagged. This morning on sky news someone said (forgot his name) that this video should have been done 2 years ago and he also said if a paedophile takes a child as young as Madeleine it is unlikely she is still alive. He was not allowed to say much more. I also doubt very much that when the McCanns appear on sky news today at 2.30 anybody will question why they expect people to speak out when they themselves, by their own admission, have a pact of silence with their friends. I also doubt if the value of the Smith's sighting will even be mentioned. Even if the Smith's were incorrect in thinking the man they saw was Gerry it has to be the best clue given (if there was an abductor). What the Smith's saw may just have been someone carrying their child home.

    However the bottom line for me now is "is Madeleine the only child missing, why are the McCanns still allowed so much coverage when others appear to get none"

    ReplyDelete
  22. Fencesitter,

    Don't you think that if there really had been an abduction, and the McCanns really wanted to find their daughter, there would have been as much emphasis on the Smith sighting as on the very dubious, ever changing and probably non existant, Tanner sighting. The very fact that they never mention or follow this sighting up proves to me that it is indeed very important, and was almost certainly Gerry McCann on his way somewhere with a body in his arms. It is the lack of interest from the entire McCann team and their superb detectives in this very credible, and accurately timed sighting that makes it so important, and it has not been followed up for a very good reason.........

    The McCanns seek coverage when the fund gets low. All interviews are done to their itinerary, no probing questions, no facts discussed, just Kate's Oscar winning performance and Gerry's nervous ticks. Even this morning on the BBC they still say how important it is to find her, yet they have never, NEVER, actually, physically searched for her.

    A truly disgusting and despicable pair!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sky interview with Mccanns at 14.30. Clarence Mitchell is rocking a new hair do.
    Kate in her trusty pink cardigan again.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The most striking thing for me about these pictures is that 'Madeleine' bears virtually no resemblance to the wonderful Kate and absolutely no resemblance to perfect daddy Gerry...so in that respect it's probably quite accurate!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hi fencesitter 09:33

    I have to agree, whether the man seen by the 4 adult members of the Smith Family was Gerry McCann, a man who looked like Gerry McCann, the bottom line is a man was seen on the night Madeleine disappeared, carrying a blonde child through the streets of PDL, by not one, but 4 adult persons.

    They are clearly not mistaken in what they saw.

    This has to be followed up, highlighted.

    The only reason that I can think that it has not been, is that it would very much put into question the sighting by J. Tanner.

    If Madeleine was abducted, (which I don't believe - I think rather the child wandered outside had an accident..... or had an accident in the apartment) why is it so difficult for the McCann's to even look at the possibility that there were two persons involved, one J. Tanner's man, who then passed the child to the man the Smith's saw.

    It is their apparant reluctance to accept any other possibility, other than their own version of abduction - they don't even accept that Madeleine could have wandered out of the apartment and into the hands of an opportunist abductor, this is what makes me doubt.

    Edgar their PI is now of the opinion that no one left that apartment out through the bedroom window.

    Also, Kate states Madeleine would never leave the apartment alone (read any of her interiews) yet she also told her friend Fiona Payne that this was a reason for leaving the patio door unlocked, for Madeleine to be able to get out of the apartment?

    Nothing sits right, from whichever angle you look at it.

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thanks for the complaint link, I've registered a complaint with the BBC regarding bias in their coverage of the litigious McCanns. As they are funded by the people, they should represent the views of all the people, not just one litigious couple, no matter how well funded and connected.

    I grow tired of the circus, yet it still has the power to fascinate...

    -Trismegistus

    ReplyDelete
  27. Good morning Fencesitter...I think the Smith sighting is important for this reason and this reason only. When Mccann went back to PDL to do his own version of what happened that night. Mr .Smith in his statement said that the man he saw was carrying a very still blonde child. Her head was resting on his left shoulder..I have to then ask when Mccann portrayed Mr.Smith and this sighting was the child crossways in the 'abductors' arms exactly how Tanner had described .? Why did Mccann change Martin Smiths statement???

    ReplyDelete
  28. The images are more from a young teenager then from a child with 6 years old. My sun, with 6 years old, is taller then when he was 4, but still having the same face... no big changes. Virtual Madeleine had a big change, showing that this team still not doing their work properly.
    Wonder, annother picture of a healty and happy Maddie, showing how well keeped she is on the hands of that gang of paedos. At least they don't neglect her, don't leave her night after night alone crying ( no signs of dark circles around her eyes), don't leave her on creches when they enjoy therselves out. She went to beachs and enjoy her time out in the sun to achieve such good tan and of-course, good hairdresser work to tan her hair, and moisturize it avoiding the bad signs of long exposure to the sun. Clear, with that pictures she is not in Africa, or in isolated places. Who take care about her follow fashion tendences on clothes and hair. SO FAKE YOUR CAMPAIGN... POOR MADELEINE!
    Lets jump out of the fantasy and step our feet in reality... They need money to keep the Fund health and ready to fight USA book which according with some news is ready to be released. "MADELEINE MCCANN- THE FAKED ABDUCTION" has no pictures of Maddie on it, only cartoons, then they cannot sue the author or the editors on the grounds of using Maddie images without permission. On the book, the author did not made any difametion. According with Stevo, he based the book on facts and evidences from the PJ files but leave an open end... it is about the public to decide which theory to believe. Hard to sue such author which pass a message but did not express clearly his position. They need top lawyers in USA and a lot of money to pressure and corromp the justice in a country where Freedmon of Expression and justice tend to be a TRANSVERSAL RIGHT IN THE SOCIETY.
    I hope somebody with a good imagination will change this video and use it to make an appeal to the PGR to re-open the investigation. If so, I will spread it trough all my e-mail friends.

    MCCANN'S VIDEO, THANKS AND SORRY, if I recieve it I will delete it straight away. I respect Madeleines's rights and Don't participate on the spread of a crime which at least can be resumed in a violation and exploration of a minor image. Exactly what paedos do when they share childs images trough internet.
    We are waiting for the case to be re-openned and freedmon of expression to be restored in portugal and some more countrys in Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anon 9.33 I take the view that although we have read all sorts of things about this case, my mind works in the same way as the police. ie. I have to have enough evidence to prove guilt before I charge someone. I, like the rest of you, take JT's sighting with a pince of salt, too many changes, and her memory improved with time (or coaching). Re the Smith's sighting, I question why they have not insisted on being heard again ( I have several theories on that one btw). I despise the fact that the McCanns are never asked to answer questions and seem to run the show themselves. I think the McCanns themselves are the absolute pits for marketing Madeleine in the way they have, wasting so much fund money on expensive solicitors in order to sue people who have only presented the facts that they have been given, for not co-operating fully with the PJ, for not being prepared to take part in a police reconstruction and then having the cheek to go back to Portugal, put their two fingers up to the police and do their own reconstruction. All of which was staged managed, one sided and of course no mention of the Smith's sighting. So you see, with all their expert advice and public relations bods they have in fact managed to get themselves disliked even by someone who is not actually accusing them.However, those who have not bothered to find out both sides of the story will still think they are sincere and genuine caring parents. I often wonder what the pact of silence is all about, surely your child comes before anything else. Yes I agree with you they are disgusting

    ReplyDelete
  30. I think I shall go and enjoy the sunshine the Mccanns make me feel truly ill. They should come with a Health Warning.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Why do people here not want this child found. Very strange!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Quelques remarques à propos de cette énième campagne de pub:
    -La méthode ne change guère mais elle gagne en force.Il faut inonder les gens sous un flot continu d'informations convoyant toutes le même message central : Maddie a été enlevée. En comptant sur le fait que, focalisés sur cette litanie, les gens oublieront toutes les incohérences qui entourent chaque nouvel épisode de la saga..
    -On est à mi-chemin entre la méthode Coué et l'hypnose collective. Ce qui est certain c'est que les McCann ont été pris en main par des conseillers en communication qui utilisent habilement les ficelles du matraquage publicitaire et du bourrage de crâne.Quelques images force s'adressant aux sentiments, répétées ad nauseatum. Gerry d'ailleurs avait initié cette campagne à la fois incantatoire et subliminale,en voulant graver l'oeil de Maddie dans le logo de Google.
    -Bon timing aussi: on fait taire Amaral juste avant de lancer la campagne.Il pourra toujours essayer, si son appel contre la décision provisoire qui le frappe d'interdit est accepté, de faire entendre sa voix. Les faits qu'il énoncent seront noyés dans le torrent de larmes tsunamiesques provoqué par la vidéo de Maddie avec ses grands yeux innocents implorant une justice improbable. So sweet..."Regardez notre magnifique petite fille, comment pourrait-elle avoir des parents coupables puisqu'ils font tout pour que personne ne l'oublie?"

    (à suivre)

    ReplyDelete
  33. (suite)
    -Ils ont tout misé sur cette stratégie. Pourquoi? Probablement parce qu'ils savent que s'ils laissent glisser Maddie dans l'oubli collectif, ils n'auront plus la précieuse manne des dons qui alimentent leurs finances, le nerf de la guerre qu'ils mènent contre la vérité têtue dont Amaral est la figure de proue. Plus d'argent, plus d'avocats, de conseillers, de médias toujpurs complaisants devant les puissants.Mais diront certains, s'ils étaient coupables, ils préfèreraient l'oubli à cette exposition médiatique permanente à laquelle ils se condamnent à vie, car ils s'obligent par là-même à réinitier sans cesse leur campagne. Sisyphe et son rocher, no stone unturned, et le boulet de l'enlèvement à remonter régulièrement au sommet de l'audimat planétaire. Le problème, c'est qu'ils savent pertinemment que l'opinion publique est fugace, versatile et que sa force si elle n'est pas nourrie, se dissout dans le temps alors que celle de leurs opposants, moindre en nombre mais à la ténacité redoutable, résiste car elle se nourrit non de sentiments mais de faits. Les "anti-McCann" ou les "pro-vérité" si on préfère,ne les lacheront jamais. Ils compilent patiemment tous les documents relatifs à l'affaire et le Net qui est devenu maintenant l'ultime refuge d'une liberté qu'on essaie d'étouffer,est leur instrument de prédilection. Et tout le pouvoir des Mccann s'arrête à la surface des écrans d'ordinateur. L'oeil est dans la toile et contemple McCann, comme aurait dit Hugo,ce radoteur génial.
    -Et oui car les faits ne se dissolvent pas, même dans le plus savant cocktail de sentiments.L'évidence qui émerge plus fort que tout dans cette dernière campagne,c'est encore une fois la contradiction entre ce qui est dit et ce qui est (en l'occurence n'est pas) fait. Maddie, c'est sûr, breveté police privée, est retenue prisonnière dans un rayon de quelques kilomètres autour de PDL. Il y a tellement de petits villages autour et de caves dans lesquelles des indigènes pourraient la retenir prisonnière...
    Tout parent normal, devant une telle certitude affichée depuis plusieurs semaines, serait sur le terrain à chercher, chercher et chercher encore.A s'abimer les mains pour tenter d'ouvrir des portes condamnées, à creuser le sol de ses mains nues pour arracher à la terre le moindre indice. Eux préfèrent envoyer en mission leurs Dupont et Dupont d'opérette. Ils se sont rendus brièvement au Portugal voir...leurs avocats pour ...obtenir encore plus d'argent . Et pas même une petite visite dans la région ou leur fille peut-être, est sequestrée? Bien sûr, ils annoncent une autre visite et on aura de belles images médiatiques de la courageuse Kate, surmontant sa douleur, revenue en pélerinage sur les lieux où elle a vu pour la dernière fois Madeleine. Ils vivent dans la perpétuelle aura d'un passé réécrit et sanctifié.Mais de recherches réelles point, jamais. Les paroles se dépalacent, leurs corps non. Pas plus pour tenter de faire avouer le coupable du moment en Allemagne, que les pédophiles incarcérés en Angleterre ou le témoin soit-disant capital d'un enlèvement sur commande par de riches arabes.
    -Générer une avalanche de signalements dans le monde entier, oui. Dire, à chaque, que c'est une piste vitale, oui. Oublier opportunément la piste, une fois démentie ou lorsque les projecteurs médiatiques se sont détournés, au profit d'une "piste" toute fraiche et encore plus prometteuse, oui. Mais payer de sa personne en allant sur le terrain, non.
    Cette inertie est un fait majeur et constant.Illogique, impensable même, dans une optique d'innocence, elle devient tout à fait compréhensible si on envisage un autre scénario que celui de l'enlèvement. Pourquoi se déplacer si on sait qu'il n'y a pas eu enlèvement et que Maddie est morte?

    Une fois séchées les larmes qui noyaint leurs contours, l'encre des faits resurgit, tenace, pugnace, innefaçable. Ad vitam internetam.

    Signé : Voltaire

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hello Ironside and A Miller

    Of course the Smiths sighting is very important but it is of no value unless it is part of an impartial enquiry ie the police seeking the truth. All information that has been given to to PI's etc. should be passed on, the case should be re-opened and the McCanns should welcome that if they are innocent. However as the McCanns have ridiculed the PJ I would not blame them if they did not bother to re-open the case, and I doubt the McCanns will answer the outstanding questions or explain why they wiped their phones. The McCanns said their were innocent explanations for everything. I presume they were referring to the blood, cadaverine etc. so I question why they do not allow interviewers to ask them for their innocent explanations, surely that would at least have everyone then accepting there was an abduction. The whole thing is an absolute farse IMO and they should be totally ashamed of themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Just watched the McCann ITV interview...... using a pendulum as they all spoke: it registered NEGATIVE as soon as Gerry, Kate and the police fellow spoke. Once Holly and Philip spoke the pendulum went back to POSITIVE!!! I have used the pendulum all along and had the same NEGATIVE result with this lying couple!! Interesting.

    Beth

    ReplyDelete
  36. Good morning FENCESITTER, agree 100%...The Mccanns should never have been allowed to leave Portugal once made arguidos. Martin Smith was due to arrive in PDL that week to make a statement. Mccanns were due for more questioning on the Monday. Instead they ran away after saying they would never leave Portugal without their daughter.Innocent people do not run away. I am following the Casey Anthony case...evidence of her child also having been in the trunk of her car. She also had innocent explanations for the 'smell' two dead squirrels and a rotting Pizza.

    ReplyDelete
  37. They really want the girl to look much older, 10-15 yrs old, why ?
    so that there is less chance to find her?

    ReplyDelete
  38. New blog by Martin Brunt.

    Of the Portuguese Police he asks:

    "But.

    Any information that emerges will be given to the Portuguese police for them to pursue.

    As they have already failed the McCanns can they be relied on to do the right thing next time?"

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ironside " She also had innocent explanations for the 'smell' two dead squirrels and a rotting Pizza."

    I have every confidence the McCanns will be able to come up with something better than than - How about the cadavarine was due to them walking through the graveyard in the church - Oh, I should not give them any ideas should I :-)

    ReplyDelete
  40. My goodness, they`ve even got CEOPS and Jim Gamble under their spell as if Jim Gamble is part of `the Team`. I thought CEOPS were a reputable organisation - well, they certainly haven`t done their homework on this one, have they? Read the files Jim.

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  41. All the interviews given by the McCanns to the media at present are based on the SPIN given out by the McCanns that they have been found innocent of all charges.

    That is not true, there never have been any charges.

    Because they have had the arguido status removed does not mean it cannot be given them again.

    The case has been shelved and the McCanns can still be charged if reopened. With another Prosecutor that is perfectly possible according to Dr Amaral.

    That is what they don't want to happen as they themselves may have to request the arguido status so that they don't have to answer the questions they don't want to face.

    It is pure ignorance on the part of the media that the McCanns are allowed to go around making out that some verdict of innocent has been proclaimed on them.

    They were not charged with neglect only, this was because the Prosecutor felt sorry for them and thought they had suffed enough because of the loss of their daughter.

    What happened to Madeleine and who has removed her from the apartment is still left hanging in the air.

    The books are very dangerous for them because they are true accounts of the what the official investigators discovered, and that does not included any sign of abduction.

    Remember what the PJ said about Clarence Mitchell their spokesperson, that he lies through every tooth in his head. They should know.

    Therefore as he is representing the McCanns how much of what they are saying can be relied on.

    ReplyDelete
  42. THIS NEW IMAGE LOOKS ABSOLUTELY UNNATURAL. BLOND HAIR ON THE SUN NEVER GOES DARKER! WHO CREATES THIS IMAGES OF 6 YEAR OLDS?! DAVID PAYNE WITH GM? MAKING LITTLE KID LOOK SEXIER? DISGUSTING LIES AGAIN AND AGAIN!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anon 11.25..I have heard that Mitchel has a Dental appointment, a new set of dentures are now required . A reliable source tells me this is due to 'Repetitive lie Syndrome'The new teeth will contain a spring mechanism whereby the teeth 'SPRING' into action when a lie is required.The teeth have been made to measure for the lying mouth and come with a 10 year guarantee. They are fully lined and should not cause any 'Hurtful or Unhelpful Problems'

    FENCESITTER....You be careful up there I thought I sensed a wobble.lol

    ReplyDelete
  44. The McCanns yet again are milking their daughter's name for all it's worth, but of course they have to try to convert those living in a fool's paradis into believing every word they say to keep their Fund intact. Who do they think they are kidding? If they were really trying to find Madeleine, they would be offering a huge reward, but not one mention of that of course in the tabloids.

    The pictures are, to quote Clarence, quite ludicrous and make a six year old look like a 12-13 year old. And, as a few have pointed out, if Maddie had been living in a hot country, her hair would be white blonde by now.

    IF YOU ARE SINCERE IN WANTING TO FIND MADELEINE, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS KATE. TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST. ASK FOR THE CASE TO BE REOPENED. DO A RECONSTRUCTION FOR THE PJ'S WITH YOUR TAPAS PALS. GO BACK TO PDELUZ AND LOOK FOR MADDIE, AS IT SEEMS YOUR HIRED TECS THINK SHE IS IN THAT AREA? SO WHY ARE YOU NOT THERE LOOKING YOURSELVES?

    How I wish those interviewing this couple would have the guts to ask pertinent questions instead of sucking up to them. Jeremy Paxman is the only one so far who has dared to tread the water. Good on him.

    ReplyDelete
  45. So we are now supposed to be looking for a teenage Madeleine with a distinctly Indian/Latina look, even though a sun-exposed fair-haired six year old girl would have a golden tan (if any) and lighter, not darker, hair.

    If I were Madeleine McCann's mother I would be doing my nut at whoever compiled those pictures, since they would only confuse people and ensure that my child was never found.

    This is TM, not me, however, and smoke and mirrors is the order of the day. Same as it ever was.


    Angela

    ReplyDelete
  46. Fancy, I know a little girl that just looks like Madeleine, oops her eyes are brown, ohhhhhh well, never mind.

    ReplyDelete
  47. The ULSTER Connection....Jim Gamble and Dave Edgar...both Ulster men and both worked for RUC...

    ReplyDelete
  48. Joana, who was heading the Investigation in Leicester and has now been sent to Ireland..? Thanks..

    ReplyDelete
  49. Fencesitter - regarding explanations for cadaverine, as I recall the good doctors came up with the following:

    For the smell of cadaverine on Kate's clothes, it was due to her being in close contact with dead bodies in her capacity as GP (pronouncing people dead). 6 corpses in the runup to the holiday, I believe. It goes without saying, of course, that one would wear the same clothes on holiday as one does when working in the morgue.

    For the smell of cadaverine on the cuddle cat toy - this could be explained by the fact that Kate took her daughter's favourite toy to work with her, and carried it around while working with corpses. (Like you do.)

    For the smell of cadaverine in the boot and other parts of the hire car - they had to transport their rubbish in the car, and the rubbish included dirty nappies and rotting meat. I think the dirty nappies were also supposed to explain DNA evidence found in the car.

    Surely all this deserves a B for effort and creativity, no?

    ReplyDelete
  50. its really great posting. thanks for sharing this with us.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Angel said...

    Why do people here not want this child found. Very strange!


    What are you talking about? The people here most certainly want this child found, they and the others who refuse to let this case drop are determined that the riddle of Madeleine's disappearance will be solved, which is why they are working towards having the case reopened. Do the parents want the case reopened? Are they petitioning the Portuguese authorities to have it reopened? Or did Kate McCann say recently, when asked about this, that it doesn't matter if it's reopened or not? Yes, believe it or not, that's exactly what the mother of the missing child said. Does she want her child to be found?

    As for these pictures, they're just ridiculous. Who has ever seen a 6-year-old child who looks about 12? Why in the name of sanity would anyone authorise pictures of a near-teenager if they were truly looking for a little girl of 6? There's something most peculiar about using pictures like that, just as there's something really odd about showing a dark-skinned 'Madeleine' - how in the name of heaven would any fair-skinned English child ever end up looking like that? It doesn't even look like a tanned child, it looks like the skin is dyed. Looks like we're back in the 'someone took her to Morocco' days, which will come as a bit of a surprise to the McCanns' chief PI who insists that Madeleine's being held in a cellar within 10 miles of Praia da Luz.

    God help any pre-teen girls who just happen to resemble these pictures, as they will now be subject to the scrutiny of anyone who can claim to be just 'looking for Madeleine'. When is this sick circus going to end?

    The case needs to be reopened, a full reconstruction needs to be done, everyone involved in the holiday needs to cooperate fully with the investigation, all questions must be answered. There is no way this case will be allowed to disappear.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Is Halloween today???
    Is Maddie 10 years old now?
    Is David Edgar the Algerian drug lord?
    Is David Edgar her father?

    Beata Germany

    ReplyDelete
  53. Maddie is now a black skin girl but hopefully not very fat like aunty Philomena Mccann

    ReplyDelete
  54. Those new pics could be almost any pretty girl in the world.
    Await the latest sighting in Afghanistan.
    Or India, or Pakistan, or Riyadh.
    What a mockery!
    I hope Jim Gamble is ashamed of himself. He should be.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Just think of the number of new sightings there will be now that these two oh-so-different pictures of Madeleine have been issued! We are not even restricted to one skin colour now! Oh, and these photos of Madeleine as she could look now are different to the one of Madeleine as she could look now which was produced on Oprah. Every time we walk down the street we are going to spot someone who looks like Madeleine is supposed to look now! And the McCanns will make a big fuss about the number of new 'sightings' which have resulted from this campaign, will say how successful the campaign is being, and will want more money in the Fund to keep up the good work! Somebody somewhere is taking the p**s. How can the McCanns or anyone else keep a straight face about this nonsense? Are there seriously people out there who believe it?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Is it a question of blaming everyone else - first the fake 'abductor' and now the 'person out there' who knows and doesn't come forward and who is now worse than the fake abductor?

    The lengths which these people are prepared to go to perpetuate their charade does not leave me thinking that they must be innocent, but wondering what horrendous secret they are hiding.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Far from posters NOT wanting Madeleine found we do want to find out what happened to her, that's why we are all still here over two years on.

    You do have to ask yourself, however, if Drs Gerald and Kate McCann want their child found. If they did then why are they closing down discussion about her disappearance. To get to the bottom of any argument you have to hear both sides of the argument. No matter how difficult it is it may be the only way that the child is found.

    To keep insisting on an abduction without any real evidence of an abduction is quite incredulous. To ignore the dogs and the Smith sighting is also incredulous. Why should they spend their time and money gagging people who hold a different view?

    Surely they should be listening to everyone. Apart from anything else it would enable them to answer those who don't believe the abduction theory. They would be in a position, or should be in a position, to answer their critics and maybe, just maybe people would better understand them.

    ReplyDelete
  58. So why are they not coming out and say, we made a mistake(or a few) 1. about the abduction made by a stranger, 2. trusting their friends.

    ReplyDelete
  59. And who is going to follow up the plethora of multicoloured sightings that are bound to ensue?
    Two private investigators? The PJ, squandering public money when they know it´s all a waste of time and they will only get insulted anyway? Perhaps it will be the Leicestershire force, but they are apparently so overstretched they had to ignore the cries for help from a poor woman so tormented by hooligans that she ended up taking her own life and that of her child.
    This is all really shameful and beyond the endurance of any decent person with half a brain.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Why have they depicted her as a teenager ( or at least into double figures)? Are they trying to make it even harder to find her? Most 6 year olds still have less well defined features; some are still at the chubby stage.

    I want this wee soul to get justice but it seems every time her parents come out with something new, it merely contradicts everything that they have released before. I thought the investigators were saying it all happened within 10 miles of PdL and that was where the answer lay? Do they no longer agree with their investigators? How many red herrings are folk prepared to tolerate?

    More to the point, I wish that every missing child got this amount of attention and air time.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I think that there are now almost as many different likenesses of Madeleine as there are of the "abductor" that Jane Tanner saw(allegedly!)

    Almost any child in the world will compare to a likeness if there are enough of them, and we're getting close. Soon we shall have a likeness of her in case she has had cosmetic surgery to look like a .....(insert just about anything possible here)

    ReplyDelete
  62. I AM WATCHING THE NEWS AT THE MOMENT. AND HAVE VERY STRONG FEELING THAT THIS SMART PARENTS ARE ON THE EDGE OF THE GREAT DISCLOSURE. AND IT IS VERY VISIBLE THAT THEY KNOW IT! THEY FEEL "THE END". THEY LOOK TERRIFYING.
    JUST TRY TO IMAGINE HOW WOULD THEY LOOK IN FRONT OF PUBLIC WHEN THIS SAD STORY GOT TO ITS LOGICAL END, HOW WOULD THEY TURN BACK AND SEE ALL THEIR STUPID THEATRICALS ... .
    CLOWNS! IT IS TIME TO TELL THE TRUTH! TAKE PITY OF YOURSELVES! STOP LIVING IN SUCH A HELL!
    YOU LOOK JUST REALLY CURSEDLY.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Perhaps Jim Gamble should be sent a copy of Stevo's book when it comes out.

    If he doesn't know them already, the FACTS of the Official Investigation so far should be an eye opener to him.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Elizabeth Smart's father, hummm, wasn't he the one who had the cheek to acuse or insinuate that the cadaver smell in the car was planted there by the portuguese police??? That shady, despicable character makes such a serious accusation implying that the Pj were nothing but a bunch of swindlers, cottupt third wordly cops and gets away with it! No action against him was taken by our Public Ministry or the head of the PJ. They swalled the insult and defamation and acted as if it never happened! DISGUSTING!

    Jim Gamble..., another chip of the same block, heh? If I recall correctly, when tourists, that were also at the time of the events in Praia da Luz, were asked to send in their holiday photos to the british police because they could be significant, show some clues, etc., he made a promise to swiftly pass them on to the portuguese police...well, guess what? as far as we know none reached the PJ to this day! Maybe they were lost in the Mancha Channel turbulent waters...

    ReplyDelete
  65. Ironside "FENCESITTER....You be careful up there I thought I sensed a wobble.lol

    I am sure you have worked out by now who I am and you will know that I stay firm and never wobble lol. On a serious note, the thing that puzzles me is why if they are guilty they have kept up this charade for so long, and why if they are innocent they do not demand the case to be re-opened. One would have thought for the twins sake, who are now of an age to understand more they would want to keep out of the limelight. Maybe once they have sued everybody they can and banked the proceeds they will fade away, PLEASE!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  66. Just watched the McCann interview on sky news and as expected questions about Mr. Amarals book and the PJ were swept aside. Kate hung onto Gerry's knees again and said the same old stuff. BTW she is not interested in bloggers comments who think that M was not abducted, it is unhelpful in the search for Madeleine!!

    ReplyDelete
  67. Fencesitter, are you seriously posing those questions?


    Why if guilty, have they kept up the charade for so long?

    Obviously, because to look to have given up would look like they don't think it is worth searching because they know she is dead.


    Why, if innocent, do they not demand the case be reopened.

    Er, maybe because they are not? Besides which, they could find themselves with the arguido status again, and the Fund frozen.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anon 15.02 Yes I am seriously posing those questions and to me there is nothing obvious about any of it.

    Innocent or guilty surely no one would expect them to continue this high profile campaign for ever. No parent would give up hope or continue to search by whatever means available, but they must know they cannot expect the public to focus continually on one child. Someone might start a campaign about that, and that person may well be me.

    Regarding re-opening the case, from the interview I just watched they seem to think it would be a waste of time now and this video is the new way forward. I do not necessarily agree with that however and I also feel that now they are going to sue Amaral they know that they have shot themselves in the foot with the PJ.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Given what Dr Amaral knows, they have really shot themselves in the foot if he is allowed to call his witnesses.

    The Official Investigation will back him up in everything he has said.

    There has been no libel or defamation on his part.

    ReplyDelete
  70. what i would like to know who is the brain behind all of this.yes i understand that after the Rothly leaflet drop and Goncalos book that they have to fight to get to get their name and abduction back
    on front page hoping people will believe them.I feel its like they are being told what to do and say.Who is the Brain that needs needs this abduction to be believed and the truth to be hidden at all costs.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Anon 14.41 I agree that there has been no libel or defamation on Amarals part and I personally would like to see this ironed out in a court of law over the disappearance of Madeleine, rather than him having to call witnesses in a libel case. However, it is unlikely that this will ever happen because although the information he has lead him to believe the McCanns were responsible, he clearly did not have enough to charge them, if he had they would have been charged. Sorry if I am annoying being so black and white about things.

    ReplyDelete
  72. que historia mais ridicula,acho k ta na hora destes pais admitirem o crime k fizeram e dar um funeral decente a esta crianca.k ja morreu a 2 anos.um ditado velho e,a mentira so vale enquanto a verdade nao chega.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Mosanto might now be involved in genetically modifying the poor child. All those white South Africans and Australians have never altered with exposure to the sun unless it was their genetic dispostion, ie Italians Portoguese etc

    ReplyDelete
  74. Voltaire,
    Je suis très d'accord avec vous comme beaucoup sans nul doute ! Toutefois je ne crois pas qu'il s'agisse pour les McCs d'alimenter le fonds, je crois qu'ils n'ont qu'un objectif : tenir bon jusqu'à ce que les jumeaux aient grandi et, face aux efforts déployés, ne mettent pas en doute leur version de la disparition (la famille, les amis proches sont importants aussi à cet égard). Je crois que les jumeaux sont l'origine et la fin de cette mise du cadavre dans le placard. Quand le fonds sera totalement épuisé, les pauvres n'auront d'autre recours que de mendier ici et là un rappel (à l'ordre...) lancé au public. Celui-ci, de son côté, finira par oublier et par se taire, d'autres affaires sollicitant son attention. GA, qui leur a fait un sacré cadeau en tirant une conclusion dont il aurait mieux fait de laisser le soin à ses lecteurs, commence à faire figure de flic obsessionnel, tel celui de la série des années 60 qui poursuivait un faux coupable.

    ReplyDelete
  75. A. Miller, it is certainly remarkable that 4 grown ups spotted a man carrying a little blond one vs only one of 3 grown ups (in Jane's statement) spotted a man carrying some kind of offer towards some kind of altar.

    I think that Jane saw Gerry (or someone looking very much like him) and that this sighting disturbed her so much that she changed the timing in order not as much to give him an alibi (the mere idea of his guilt was more than she could stand) as to avoid PJ's erroneous leads.

    Kate affirmed immediately that Madeleine would never leave the apartment, but at this point she was selling the shutters/window story and both doors were supposed to be locked.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Fencesitter, the police in Portugal are not the ones who bring the charges. The Prosecutor decides that. Clearly the cops and Mr Amaral do think there is enough, but thinks some kind of political intervention stopped that.

    The Prosecutor wanted the body found first. Perhaps not sure what to charge with, murder? manslaughter?

    Dr Amaral sure Madeleine died in apartment, as PJ say also when recently contacted by a journalist, they are not searching because Madeleine is dead.

    Perhaps 'stand alone' evidence, whatever that is, convinced them of that??

    Case shelved, not closed.

    The court case may reopen it.

    Perhaps the McCanns will wish they never went there in pursuit of Dr Amaral and his money.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Hi Anon 17.30 Yes, sorry I stand corrected, of course it is the Prosecutor that decides, but one presumes his decision is based on what is presented to him by the police. However I have learned one thing about this case, if nothing else, it is not wise to presume anything to be fact, but it is wise to presume anything is possible :-)

    ReplyDelete
  78. aacg,
    je suis assez d'accord que les jumeaux jouent un rôle important dans l'histoire. Du moins, à mon avis, ils l'ont joué au départ. Ensuite ils ont été utilisés plutôt pour permettre aux Mccann de sauver leur peau dans le futur . Le retour en arrière n'est plus possible pour eux surtout parce que s'ils sont reconnus coupables,la colère de tous les gens sera à la mesure de la publicité qu'ils ont choisi de donner à l'affaire: planétaire.Une apocalypse en perpective qui les détruirait eux plus sûrement que les jumeaux qui dans ce cas seraient l'objet de la pitié et de la sollicitude de tous et pourraient reconstruire leur vie.Ils préparent à leurs enfants une vie bâtie sur le mensonge, ils les programment pour vivre dans l'ombre de leur soeur qu'ils espèreront retrouver vainement.Hypothéquer ainsi l'avenir des êtres qui devraient vous être les plus chers,ce n'est pas une preuve d'amour. C'est de l'égoïsme impur et simple.


    Voltaire

    ReplyDelete
  79. Voltaire,certes ils n'ont pas d'autre choix que la fuite en avant. Ils n'avaient sûrement pas prévu ces déferlantes que seules les technologies de l'information permettent. Ils ont aussi mal jugé la PJ portugaise : forts de leur supériorité britannique ils ont pensé que berner serait facile.
    Sauver leur peau, c'est quand même non seulement conserver la garde des jumeaux, mais aussi et surtout sauvegarder leur image auprès de ces enfants (sans parler de la famille qui, je pense, a étouffé tout doute dans l'oeuf inconscient).

    ReplyDelete
  80. I watched the McCann's and Jim Gamble (CEOP guy) on sky news today, and I agree with the poster who said 'the appeal for the person/s close to the abductor/s to speak up now,(even if they kept the secret through fear or loyalty to their friend/colleague/family member/s) and it is never too late to tell the truth'....it could well have been aimed at the Tapas 9 imho.

    Maybe they should go right back to their (checking Timeline), did they actually do all that checking on children? If so, then there was only a 3 minute opportunity for an abductor/s to do the deed and also to clean the appartment, whilst being undedected by Gerry who had just left the premises.....Or was their Timeline all LIES? Donal from the Express did his own investigation in PDL, and going by their Timeline, he tallied it down to a 3 minute window of oppertunity.....whoever the abductor/s were, he/she/they must have super-powers.

    I also thought the Tanned picture of Madeleine looked like a much older child than a 6 year old. The Sky interviewer did ask some questions that the McCann's didn't like imho, but they managed to get right back to the campaigne and the new appeal to the public...Gerry also made sure he mentioned the wrist bands...ect, saying that Shawn and Amilie responded when they saw people wearing them, saying 'they are helping to search for Madeleine', that is sure to melt some hearts and get the money rolling in for more wrist bands...Gerry was definately thinking of the wider agenda today imho.

    I live in hope that the LIARS that were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine will find their conscience and tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Fencesitter you surley have some kind of ailment in your backside by now since you have been sitting on your fence far too long now.
    Why is it unwise to presume anything is a fact?
    I Think your just pretending to be a fencesitter and know full well the facts .
    The Smiths testemony,The Dogs,No forced entry to 5a,no reconstuction,no lie detector test,washing the closest toy or garment which Madeleine was attached to the list goes on but if you still want to keep those piles you surely have for another while then take some time out and read the files of the case to have it clear in your head rather than feeling unwise to presume any facts.
    yours Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Good Morning Sherlock, Firstly my backside is fine despite having it kicked by both pros and antis on several occasions because I will not fall in line totally.

    I have read all the information you mentioned and it is clear that lies have been told but by whom is the big question. As I have said before JT's memory improved as time past, very odd. However have you ever wondered why the Smith's have not insisted that they are re-interviewed. I would if I thought my evidence was vital. All the other things you mentioned are highly suspicious, I agree, but the police realised it was not enough to charge anyone so why do you expect me to say that I know better than they.

    As you know the pros have defended every action of the McCanns, they would not even accept there was anything wrong with them leaving their kids. Now when it comes to me forming an opinion on what I have witnessed for myself and I know to be true, I am totally off the fence.
    1. The McCanns have never accepted leaving the kids was wrong

    2. Madeleine fell up the plane steps, they did not go see if she was
    ok, they just carried on filming

    3. They did not search for their child the night she went missing

    4. They did not co-operate with the police in many many ways

    5. They insulted the Portugese people & police by going back to do
    their own reconstruction, etc. etc.

    6. They ignored police advice not to mention the eye
    defect despite being told it was dangerous to do so.

    7. They wasted vast amounts of fund money on things it was not
    intended for. Who needs a PR man for this, is one example

    8. They have no regard for all the lives of other innocent people
    who have been dragged into this because of their obsession with
    keeping the media circus they created going.

    9. They have marketed their daughter in a very tacky manner

    10.They want people to help and speak out but they themselves have
    a pact of silence with their friends, and moreover they could not
    care less about other people's opinions of them because they know
    they are in control of what is said about them now.

    I think you are getting the picture, no need for me to go on - I have never felt this way about any parents of a missing child, but I think these two are the pits.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Well said "Fencesitter" i would say you only have one quarter of your cheeks sitting on the fence at this stage!!.
    Mr Amaral has told us the Smiths made a full statement including a RECONSTRUCTION of how they saw it that night and months later one of the Smiths whilst watching g mccann carrying one of the twins off the plane on their return from Portugal was sick to his stomach when he realized it was gerry mc cann he had seen that night carrying the child towards the beach area.
    Mr Smith was so sure and so sick he rang his LOCAL POLICE STATION
    (does that sound familiar gerry?)straight away with his new information.this information was passed on firstly to the police in Leicester and then on to the P.J.
    Inspector Amaral thought that this was the breakthrough the case was looking for and put in place arrangements to have the smiths return to PdeL flights accomadation etc but alas Inspector Amaral was taken off the case and the new Politicaly appointed investigator
    pushed the Smiths statements and willingness to return to P de L Aside. And Mr Amaral wanted and still wants to know Why the Smiths vital information was pushed aside.
    The Smiths are a level headed respectable family who keep to themselves and dont court with the media according to their Local Police chief.
    The Smiths have given their statements to the P.J and their Local Police (are you listening MR Gamble)and im sure dont want to get involved in the circus that this has become, hopefully they will get their chances to speak in the appropriate place i.e. THE COURTS.

    Yours Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  84. The parents need a good kicking...all the way to PDL and prison,we know what you did G and K.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Hi Sherlock,

    Thank you for the information regarding the Smith's but I was already aware of all of this. I, like inspector Amaral would also like to know why this information has been pushed to one side and I just wished there was a way to make everyone involved in this case answer questions that need to be answered and clarified.

    ReplyDelete
  86. It is strange that we haven'r heard more from the Smith family. have they been pushing the police to investigate their sighting? have they asked what the police have done with that information? Have the Smith family gone to live on Mars?

    ReplyDelete
  87. They cannot be serious. Madeleine, if she were alive, would now be six years old, isn't it? This virtual image is of a much older child.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Is it a coincidence that Gerrys bedtime reading, (according to Amaral)included two publications from the CEOP that investigators found suspicious as they weren't widely available to the public?

    The same CEOP that have launched this unprecidented campaign on the internet, that seems to support the idea that Madeleine has been abducted.

    ReplyDelete
  89. i think jim gambles message was directed at the tapas 7,also the dark skinned picture looks nothing like a 6 year old

    ReplyDelete
  90. Some people here seem to think all of the Smiths thought they had seen Gerry McCann. They need to actually read the statements instead of commenting without the facts.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Anonymous 12:40

    Mr. Martin Smith Snr on seeing Gerry McCann coming down the plane steps carrying one of the twins on their arrival back in the UK, realised that person he saw on the night Madeleine disappeared could have been Gerry McCann. He based this on not only facial features, but the way in which carried the child from the plane.

    Personally I think most adults would carry a child in this way, but that said it triggered something important with Mr. Martin Smith.

    He was not absolutely certain it was Gerry he had seen on the night of 3rd May 2007, but was sure that the man he had seen greatly resembled Gerry McCann. His wife agreed with him.

    The other adult members gave their descriptions, but were not as sure as the elder couple that it was Gerry McCann.

    Bottom line is, four adults saw a man carrying a child of Madeleine's description walking through the streets of PDL on the night she disappeared. Whether this guy was, or looked like Gerry McCann, point is, it is a crucial sighting by not one adult person, but four.

    Now why the McCann's don't investigate this, and why the Smith family are not out shouting about it,is as much a mystery as the disappearance of Madeleine.

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  92. Hi A.Miller,
    The reason the mccanns dont investigate this is surely because Mr Martin Smith snr is 80% certain it was GERRY MCCANN that he saw carrying the child that night so that doesnt fit in with the TAPAS GANG stories, so therefore ignore the SMITHS testimonies as much as they can.

    We dont know at this stage whether the Smiths have made anymore contact with investigators behind the scenes or not since Mr Amaral
    left the p.j.

    The MC CANNS team have prevented almost all the facts that dismiss the abduction FAIRYTALE from being discussed in the media in the u.k and elsewhere.
    My Guess is the Smiths have to bear all this in mind and are waiting for the day they can voice there opinions in court or in public without the fear of being Carter Rucked .

    Did any other man ever come forward to the p.j to say it was he who was carrying a child at similar times and places the Smiths and J Tanner witnessed,I DONT THINK SO?
    Inspector Amaral didnt and still doesnt buy Jane Tanners "account"
    but believes the totally impartial Smiths account and he should know because he was the chief investigator at the time.

    The Smiths eye witness account only digs a deeper hole for the MC CANNS.
    Theres no Mystery surrounding the Smiths.

    Yours Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  93. methinks a lot of people have been paid off

    ReplyDelete