28 November 2009

Private Detectives

by Gonçalo Amaral

In Portugal, as far as criminal investigation is concerned, the activity of private detectives is forbidden. Despite that, in a famous media-exposed case, detectives have passed through here, some British, others Spanish.

At least since the 10th of May 2007, said detectives operated in our country under the silence from our authorities. They were looking for a mysteriously disappeared English child. After two years and several months, they found nothing. Without questioning the investigation methods and their police logics, it was easy to find a scapegoat.

The Book which the author of this column wrote and edited in July 2008 would have questioned the success of the private investigations. The reports from those investigations were kept in secrecy, but bits and pieces become known. The use of communication agencies in order to influence [public opinion], cannot erase, or clean up, the disastrous work done by those illustrious detectives.

It seems that one of them even took a hefty amount, but that is something that will be investigated in England and in the United States, being certain that that investigation will not be carried out by private detectives. As far as I am concerned, I am tranquil and I trust justice, which cannot accuse me of the failure and the mistakes of others. That is something for private detectives to do.



source: Correio da Manhã, 28.11.2009



150 comments:

  1. Of course GA is absolutely right. I wouldn't come to anyone's mind to employ private detectives of dubious reputation to look for a missing child, refusing the services of two national police forces with all the expertise needed in such sensitive cases. UNLESS, IF YOU ADD THE USE OF "COMMUNICATION AGENCIES IN ORDER TO INFLUENCE (PUBLIC OPINION)", THIS IS PART OF A VERY THICK WALL OF SMOKE IN AN DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO SAVE THEIR SKINS. PUBLIC OPINION HAS ALREADY CONDEMNED THEM AND THEIR DISGUSTING DIVERSION TACTICS. THIS THEY CAN'T REVERSE.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, it's another mystery, isn't it? Why, if private detectives are not allowed to operate in Portugal regarding a criminal investigation, have the McCanns' so-called detectives been allowed to do so and even, in the words of one of them, had a close relationship with the Portuguese police (although he may not be telling the truth, of course!)? Thank goodness for Gonçalo Amaral for being the voice of reason and for making such things known - I'm sure many people are unaware that private detectives are prohibited in criminal investigations in Portugal. The pity is, however, that this information is hardly likely to be widespread in the UK. And if it were, it would either be portrayed as the Portuguese trying to block the McCann's own investigation, or how clever the McCanns are in getting their private detectives to avoid the rules. Grrrr!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Let's all email a copy of the article to all the UK newspapers, and let's see how many will publish it in their Sunday editions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So why have the McCanns been allowed to operate above the law in Portugal?

    Why haven't they or their detectives been arrested for that? There has been much interference and intimidation going on and nothing done about it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The problem with the Madeleine case is that it is not an isolated incident.
    The McCanns, well advised and with an endless source of money, simply took advantage of the rot already existing in Portuguese institutions.

    I believe Madeleine has been dead since May 2007 and the McCanns know exactly what happened.
    What were those private detectives employed for? Your guess is as good as mine.
    Money laundering?
    To reinforce the pretence of a search?
    To destroy evidence and intimidate witnesses?
    Who knows.

    Whatever the reason, they should NOT have been allowed on Portuguese soil.
    And the Portuguese authorities should have enforced that.
    Why didn't they?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The UK press will laugh at the pressure from probably 10 emails.

    Amaral quote: The use of communication agencies in order to influence [public opinion], cannot erase, or clean up, the disastrous work done by those illustrious detectives.unquote.

    It's alright to write a book for financial gain based on a conclusion flawed at it's conception that there was a match to Madeleines profile when there wasn't. That is the truth of the mistake. It's alright for a book to influence public opinion which also cannot erase the incompetence of Amaral and his team.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ANON 3

    Now that is worth a try!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lets ALL ask for the re-opening of the case
    Que asco! que asco!

    ReplyDelete
  9. On One Minute for Madeleine we see pictures of hers made by the CEOP.

    If England has the capacity to make such at pictures, why did the McCanns go to Washington asking for it?
    Visiting Halligen's office?

    ReplyDelete
  10. To my mind if the Portuguese authorities really wanted this murky affair cleaned up once and for all it would have been done long ago. As an outsider I despair at what I read about the PT judicial system. Everything appears to secret from Police investigations to hearings, nothing in the open. It reminds me of a type of dictatorial system perhaps left in place from the dictatorship. So clearly, a privileged few have all the say and can in effect do a they like or what others want done. When such a system exists its not justice, fairplay and openess that win, its whoever calls the tune. Its no wonder the whole case was destroyed because the right people made it so. Regardless of the merits or demerits of Amarals case/book about the McCann affair it is his past that is being used to destroy him, effectively tainting him and destroying any credibility he has. The whole thing has Machiavellian tones of political dimensions and natural justice and transparency are
    not on the agenda anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  11. ModNrodder

    How's Rosiepops getting on?

    Bet she's getting a bit green about the gills of late, eh.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The PJ should be tipped off and encouraged by Snr Amaral to liaise with the FBI on the Halligen case. Questioning or a plea bargain could result in all that he knows being revealed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. My apologies for being off topic but please may I urge everyone who supports Gonçalo Amaral to visit the Projecto Justiça Gonçalo Amaral websites (there is a link at the top of this page) and donate whatever you can to support his defence against the McCann’s libel claim. The donation link and details are towards the right-hand bottom of the page.

    D O N A T E N O W !

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  14. ModNrodder.


    The Mc Canns are as Guilty as sin in Madeleines "Disappearence"
    The Truth will come out sooner or later and no amount of small print language from you or your Mc Cann cronies will prevent The Truth from being exposed EVENTUALLY.
    SQEEKY BUM TIME DONT YOU THINK.

    Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Woooooooooooooowwwwwwwww N0. 10 ???????? ( Downing Street perhaps ??????? ) or maybe a hangover from Black Friday ? Lol
    So much co2 in just a few lines, or rather a private detec. out of work ? Anyway I agree with you in that the mcscums are excellent in cover up work. They were just unlucky , they came across a great investigation Portuguese Team of the PJ.
    Jamar.

    ReplyDelete
  16. anon3,good idea ,i wonder how many people who read this with out adding a comment and still send an email.

    ReplyDelete
  17. #10
    dogs do not lie, humans lie.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ok so it's alright to leave very young children alone in an unlocked apartment , then blame the police when one child goes missing ?

    ReplyDelete
  19. ModNrodder,

    Again you with your disgusting arrogance trying to distort the things.
    It is not allright to write a book and tell the truth of the investigation (flawed, as you interpret) and make money. But it is OK to neglect three children night after night, allow one of them to disappear, lie to the police, and in the process establish a fund with money from old pensioners and school children to pay for their cars, mortgage, personal expenses, army of lawyers, public relation companies, useless detectives, million posters and leaflets, you name it.
    And it is not the book that is influencing the public opinion, it is the oficial investigation and its conclusions. And this seems to bother you so much to the point making you belching your fanatic words in defence of this McCann couple. To end, it is not the incompetence of Amaral that troubles you, it is his competence because he knows that Maddie died in Praia da Luz. You can't swallow this, can you?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Correct me if I am wrong on this one but does anybody remember when the Court in Portugal was applied to for the release of the phone calls of the McCanns.

    Well, I don't know what they contained, but the McCanns wanted them disallowed, and they won the decision in their favour.

    Yet, if I had donated to their Fund and those conversations were plainly alluding to the death of Madeleine then I would be very angry that the judiciary had allowed a fraud against the public to continue.

    If there is something hidden on those tapes indicating the death of Madeleine, it may be that which will bring the McCanns down via their Fund.

    I don't know about the law in Portugal but would it be possible to ask for the McCanns Fund to be investigated as to possible fraud, and the revealing of the phone calls requested once again?

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's a bit rich to slate the private detectives for not finding Maddie when the police didn't either.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dogs dont lie or tell the truth.

    They found what they were trained to find, cadaver scent.

    Exept cadaver scent does not always mean the scent of a dead body and in this case the findings could not determine one way or the other. Zero plus one (the dogs), Obe minus one(the forensics analysis) equals zero.

    Unfortunatly any exitment that the 15 out of 19 markers that matched Madeleines profile that lead to Amaral vindicating his thesis should have been recognised as a misunderstanding when the results were 15 out of 37 and made op of several people.

    The Prosecutor obviously recognised this when he made the lawful summary and discounted Tavares/Amarals conclusion.
    Quote from: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

    Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:

    a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;

    b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

    ReplyDelete
  23. If there is even a sniff of evidence that the McCanns know that Madeleine is dead, no matter how she died or who responsible, they should be charged with fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @11

    I laugh at your exuberance in the death throws of your reduntant opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Please dont feed the trolls! Just ignore them, responding just makes them more active. They will never believe the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anon 22,

    -The police followed the rules , mccanns detectives didn't;
    -The police treated all the witnesses with respect and dignity, the private detectives intimidated and harassed those same witnesses;
    -The private detectives had all the support from the british media, the police were vilified;
    -The private detectives wasted thousands of euros given to the mccanns by kind people all over the world, the police did it for free (at least for the mccann because the portuguese will have to pay it somehow);
    -The police did their best without promissing anything, the mccanns detectives promissed everything and achieved NOTHING;
    -The police were prevented from doing their work by embassadors and prime ministers, the detectives weren't;
    -The british authorities refused to give the police information requested about Madeleine and her parents, the detectives had full acess to all the information they needed....

    So yes, anon 22, the mccanns private detectives deserve to be slated for not finding Madeleine.Some of them even deserve to be put in jail for things they did while "serching" for Madeleine!

    ReplyDelete
  27. anon 22,the pi were not looking for madeliene were they,the police were but unfortunatly the mccanns lied and thats why the police did not find madeleine,but have no fear the mccanns know where madeleine is and hopefully we all will know as well very soon

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anon @ 22

    At least the police tried, but the parents didn't cooperate, as is well known. And they didn't because they know where she is. For the sake of their skins, the deception must continue. As to the private detectives you mean of course Método 3, Halligen and Edgar & Co, a rather impressive bunch....

    ReplyDelete
  29. Poster nº 10 the Rodent....

    Are you a spin master? :))

    ReplyDelete
  30. It's also a bit rich to slate anybody other than the parents for not looking after their children . They expect the whole world to look for Madeleine but haven't looked for her themselves .

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anon. 22. It's a bit rich, but fair play, at least the police dogs found the scent of the body in the apartment.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @ #10 Give us your take on the dogs then or do I "just ask the dogs" myself.
    Oh and those smiley happy faces emerging from the church 3 days after the event.

    To read the files and the witness statements you would have to be seriously stupid to beleive their version of events without questions being asked.
    I could go on but you know the score like everyone else does so whatever your agenda is it certainly is not based on logic.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anon 22
    Not really, if you consider they have Mcc's "help", and fortunes to spend while the PJ had just interference and sabotage. Quite impressive that the PJ actually got so close to solving the mystery that was created, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Off topic, but I used to look forward to reading Dr Martin Roberts' articles and he has been silent for a long time. Has he been gagged,too?

    ReplyDelete
  35. ModNrodder - why don't you make arrangements with a shrink for your mental evaluation? I have the strong feeling that you are seriously mentally disturbed. You seem to be a professional trouble shooter who always likes to blame the others for everything, but not himself. And while you are at it, why don't you invite this pride of a lawyer Aragão to join you? As far as I know there is a request already pending in court to have him evaluated by a psychiatrist. But, you can have it cheaper, simpler and faster - simply stay away from this website. Spare us the questionable honour of your presence and ridiculous comments. Give the McCanns the best regards from all of us and tell them you have been declared «persona non grata». They will possibly understand and realise that with you they had just added another useless aid to their collection of failed «experts».

    ReplyDelete
  36. Apparently Halligen is obsessed by surveillance gadgets.

    Then more fool the McCanns for inviting him into their home several times. Do you think they might have had their place debugged lately?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anonymous 22 says: "It's a bit rich to slate the private detectives for not finding Maddie when the police didn't either."

    Hmmm. Well, what's the rationale behind hiring private detectives if it is not to do what the 'incompetent, bumbling' police are unable to do? So when the private detectives come no closer to finding her, are you not also surprised? But admittedly they do come up smelling of roses and let's say, just a little bit richer....

    ReplyDelete
  38. 22, you're not comparing like with like. It's not about results, it's about motive and tactic. The painstaking police investigation had/has one aim - to discover what really happened to Madeleine McCann. The mercenary and (it's well-reported) incompetent and corupt Dicks? Now what's their game?

    ReplyDelete
  39. At post #22, what did the parents do with her?

    ReplyDelete
  40. The Mail on Sunday has an article on Halligen. They seemed to do a pretty good investigative examination. WHY CAN'T THEY DO A SIMILIAR INVESTIGATION OF THE MADELEINE MYSTERY? It will be interesting to see if they allow comments - I hope they hear plenty from people who donated to the Fund.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Mr. McCann stated in a recent interview "ask the dogs" in my opinion I trust both of these dogs more than any of the McCann team who appear to rely on dodgy private detectives.(ALSO AT A GREAT EXPENSE FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO HAVE DONATED TO THE COMPANY MACANN)

    It is not so long ago that the mother of Sharon Mathews was inspired by public donations to the McCann fund that she arranged for her own daughter to be kidnapped for financial gain.

    My message to the McCann Team ...... (who I am sure read all blogs)

    Dont put other children at risk........ (they are as important as your own children)

    Ask, beg, plead for the case to be re-opened.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "They found what they were trained to find, cadaver scent". Spot on, ModNratter, you are a star.

    ReplyDelete
  43. It goes without saying that Eddie and Keela are more reliable and have more credibility than the McCanns along with their mouthpiece, Clarence Mitchell!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Halligen was found out to have been surveilling his own employees at one time, he loves doing that sort of thing.

    He loves the cloak and dagger thing and finding out secrets.

    It would be no surprise at all if he didn't have surveillance on the McCanns and Clarence. Sounds like this would be right up his street.

    He did manage to get inside the McCanns house to have been able to plant any equipment he wanted. Some of these hearing/listening devices are so tiny it would be hard to see with the naked eye. And who would suspect this friendly charmer to have been doing that anyway?

    What did he find out? I doubt he would miss an opportunity to find out everything he could about everybody, paid or not. You could say it is a kind of hobby of his.

    Is this why the McCanns are not suing him?

    Perhaps he may be trying some kind of plea deal in exchange for information or some form of blackmail for help.

    Did somebody say he was in Bath a few days ago, which is where Clarence is from? Now what might Halligen have been doing in Bath!

    ReplyDelete
  45. An interesting read the link provided by comment no.40. The prosecutor also says that the McCanns lied.....referring to Pamela Fenn hearing Madeleine cry for 1 hour 15 mins he says:-

    "This shows that the parents were not persistently worried about their children [and] that they didn’t check on them like they afterwards declared they did, rather neglecting their duty to guard those same children"

    The prosecutor also states twice that it is likely Madeleine is dead:-
    "Despite all of this it was not possible......to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely"
    and
    "due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded"

    Many more interesting quotes appear in the link provided by ModNronner including my favourite:-
    "It is further added that Kate, after noticing that the bedroom’s window and shutters were open and Madeleine was missing, headed for the Tapas Restaurant asking for help, suggesting that an abduction had taken place, it is incomprehensible, or only comprehensible in a state of panic, that she once again abandoned, this time only the twins, while the Tapas was close enough to shout for help"

    "once again abandoned"!! The use of these words rather contradicts the decision not to at least bring charges of neglect, and makes me think the prosecutor may have had his hands tied and he gives a conclusion that the process:-
    "can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation."........so not quite clearing people as much as some would like us to believe.....

    Charlotte

    ReplyDelete
  46. Halligen didn't pay any attention to the Find Madeleine calls, according to The Mail.

    Perhaps he knew it would not be worth the effort.

    Still Clarence is refusing to make a comment. Why? being as how Halligen does not appear to be being sued by the McCanns.

    So why isn't he being sued, if he has done all they say he has?

    Daren't they sue him, but would rather feed the media on the side to blacken him as much as possible?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Perhaps Halligen did not have a prior criminal record, which seems a bit strange that he suddenly starts doing all this stuff at the age he has reached. (If he is really guilty, that is, because we know how somebody can be set up who is connected with the McCanns).

    Just look at the vilification of Robert Murat and his friends and Sr Amaral. All lies.

    Or, did Halligen get to his age without being caught out? If so, why has he suddenly got so foolish to be practically asking to be prosecuted. Or, did he feel very sure he could cover all his misdeeds because he could get money coming in from elsewhere?

    ReplyDelete
  48. What if Halligen is telling the truth about Clarence Mitchell being MI6? Would this tie in with the British consul being told to accompany the McCanns to all meetings with the Portuguese police, with Exton being on the ground so early? Is there something far more sinister than whatever may have happened to Madeleine involved here, something that actually COULD impact British national security? A person present in Praia da Luz whose identity cannot be known to the public? Could there be people who know the truth but can't tell it out of fear for their lives? Whatever it is, it is a cover-up to Madeleine's death at the very least, and probably something much bigger than that.

    ReplyDelete
  49. ModNrodder.

    you can put what ever spin on this case you like.
    In Laymans Terms .Logic tells us the MC Canns are Guilty of Their Beautiful Daughters Demise (Whatever the Circumstances)and We Live in Hope That the Truth Will Come out Sooner or Later and Justice Will Prevail.
    YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW!

    Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  50. What a bunch of low life scum.

    Amaral - the only decent human being in the whole story.

    Why does Gordon Brown UK Prime Minister never utter a word of support or concern for the McCanns these days? He was very keen to do support them in the early days when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer without any ministerial responsibility in this case. What would Unc say? Discretion the better part of valour?

    Surely the poor McCanns, who must be in a living hell with their daughter missing all this time should get even MORE support from the Prime Minister. Can't he be persuaded to utter ONE word in support of this "innocent" couple accused of God knows what. And when I say "God knows what" I do mean that.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Maria Algarve. Anon 29.

    I too was wondering about DR Roberts. He Wrote some great articles a couple of months ago and then nothing since?
    When can we also expect the book "The Faked Abduction" to appear or was this just a Faked Spin.?

    Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  52. ModNrodder, I would take you seriously but how can I when you once suggested that what the cadaver dogs detected could have been perfume. I became interested in this case because I found it unusual on how the media was being used to hinder an investigation. I later became shocked when politicians performed public relations services for suspects in a criminal investigation and then succeeded in archiving the case. What is your interest in this case?
    I have read your comments and it is clear to me that you are more interested in protecting the McCanns, even if it means writing foolishness, than finding out what happened to the child. So why are you being so silly? Are you so hard up for money that you sold your soul to the McCanns or have you become infatuated with the McCanns like a school boy becomes infatuated with a teacher?

    ReplyDelete
  53. http://www.mercurynews.com/jaycee-dugard/ci_13248841?nclick_check=1

    Usually, when a child goes missing, the first people the police start investigating are the parents or guardians.
    That's
    because the distraught parent who goes before the television cameras
    pleading for a child's safe return is all too often the one who killed
    the child and disposed of the body.

    The problem is when police
    investigators lock on to the parents as suspects — blind to any other
    scenarios — and they turn out to be wrong. Valuable time is spent
    sweating the innocent parents that could have been spent finding out
    who really took the child.

    For 18 years, Jaycee Dugard's stepfather, Carl Probyn, swore up and
    down that he had seen a man and a woman grab Jaycee near their home in
    South Lake Tahoe, force

    the 11-year-old child into a car and drive away. Probyn said he had
    tried to catch them. But instead of believing his story, the police
    considered him a prime suspect.

    One of the many morals to this story:

    When a child is reported missing — I don't care how convinced the
    police or the public are of the parents' or guardians' involvement — we
    must pursue all leads aggressively until the child is found.

    The odds might say that the chances of finding a missing child alive
    diminish the longer time goes by. But Jaycee was found after 18 years.

    ReplyDelete
  54. The trustees of the "Fund" bear a heavy resonsibility for handing out these sums of other people's money without checking credentials, CVs, or apparently keeping a close watch on results.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I noticed Clarence Mitchell is not showing up very often.
    I wonder why.
    No payment?
    Or is he running away from the problems?
    It is very much possible that when the couple's financial problems become public,what was the reason to send him so much money,told by Halligen, this will encourage people to come forward with other things they know.
    Talking about the parents has to start with a strong support in court somewhere.
    Then people will see the McCanns are not so powerful like they act.
    If their wrong things start to be shown in court, the snow ball will grow very fast.

    ReplyDelete
  56. ModNrodder,

    You can laugh for all I care. It only reinforces my conviction that you are an arrogant moron. As Guerra #50 said, your are infatuated with the McCanns, and IMO it is reaching the limits of sickness. You are a pathological case, dear boy!

    ReplyDelete
  57. I remember a certain black Rose in the US who once refused to stand up for a white person on a bus and she got arrested.
    There was a huge noise in the US about her and that was the beginning of the emancipation of blacks there.
    Today we have gotten a black family in the White House.
    Halligen in court explaining about the aim of money he received from many people, including from the McCanns,and what did he do with that money, can mean the start of freedom of speech for the British media.
    Imo the money was not for searching for Madeleine.The parents knew she was dead and Halligen knew it too.
    The court in Britain will give strengh to other people who might know things about the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  58. ModNrodent

    What about the re-opening of the case?
    Wouldnt this be the ONLY thing to do for the mccanns to clear their names (because it is obvious they are far from being "clean" are they?) once for ever,although making justice to MADELEINE is the ONLY priority,of course,SHE is the ONLY victim.....isnt she?
    Eargerly waiting for your comment :D

    ReplyDelete
  59. When a child is reported missing — I don't care how convinced the
    police or the public are of the parents' or guardians' involvement — we
    must pursue all leads aggressively until the child is found.

    That is how I feel. nobody has to pay me to feel like that.

    I dont have to belong to any camp to feel like that.

    The only people who are pursuing all leads agressively until the child is found while everyone else chucks dummies at each other on fora, while the PJ decided to focus on one thesis and then realised there was no evidence and shelved the case......are the McCanns!!

    Assisted by the CEOP, the McCanns have started a campaign which uses the positive vehicle of the internet, viral spreading of their campaign.

    The campaign invites information from someone who knows what happened to Madeleine, someone who knows where she is. The campaign is not conditional on which crime may have been committed or if indeed any crime was committed.

    "We urge anyone who knows anything about the whereabouts of Madeleine or has any information regarding her disappearance to do the right thing and to give that information to their local police"

    http://www.ceop.gov.uk/mediacentre/pressreleases/2009/ceop_04112009.asp

    ReplyDelete
  60. #58 i can see where you are coming from but to add to that, why were certain questions not answered or even asked?

    for instance....

    why have you got rid of the hairbrush and toothbrush that madeleine used?

    why do you have to go to england to bring a sample of her dna?

    was she not with you when you came ?

    oy yeah about 48 other questions needed answering!!!

    ReplyDelete
  61. @27
    quote/simply stay away from this website. Spare us the questionable honour of your presence and ridiculous comments./unquote

    I can visit this website and be as ridiculous as I like because I know this site stands for free speech.

    Or am I wrong on that score?

    ReplyDelete
  62. The investigation into Madeleine's disappearance would have continued had it not been for the obstruction by her parents... they refused to co-operate time and time again, they would attend a reconstruction, after promising to the PJ that they would be available when back in the UK and the McCann's began diverting attention away from themselves by setting up their own parallel investigation...

    I'm convinced the PJ would have reached a conclusion had they been allowed to do their job

    ReplyDelete
  63. Sorry, in Jaycee's case there was no cadaverine, blood and DNA, parents and friend's lies, refusal to answer police questions, non matching declarations, interfering with the course of the investigation, abnormal parents behaviour, non compliance with police demands for a re-construction, among others. This post again shows how biased this guy is. It is very convenient he never mentions, the Gaspars or the Smiths. Who the hell is he?

    ReplyDelete
  64. ModNrodder,

    Your hands in a praying position: are you begging for forgiveness?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Post 58.

    But in the McCann case, the parents pushed and pushed and pushed the abduction theory to the exclusion of any other, for no apparent reason, and the police pursued all avenues of that diligently. In all this time there has been no credible sighting, no independent evidence of an abduction. On the other hand there are the police dogs findings, blood found, and the mysteriously cleaned up apartment, and the suspicious conflicting testimonies and behaviour. Nothing changes that evidence and none of that was present in the Dugard case.

    ReplyDelete
  66. ModNrodent
    Dont you find strange the mccanns are not suing Halligen?
    After all,he definitively "hurt the search for Madeleine",didnt he?They"ve been conned,stolen and nothing came out of HIS investigation,isnt it?
    Why aint they suing him instead suing the ONLY man who is trying to find the truth (that is if he already does not know it,of course) to make justice to Madeleine?
    Dont try to derail towards the WRONG direction,ie, Jaycee.The 2 cases are totally different and I mean ABSOLUTELY different

    ReplyDelete
  67. Clarence Mitchell refused to be drawn on the activities of Oakley International claiming that the McCann's were unaware of what was going on. How can these people spend £500,000 on a detective who doesn't keep them informed - that's absolute rubbish. If I spent £500,000 on anything, let alone the location of my lost daughter, I'd make damn sure I was aware of what was going on! Another faux pas to add to CM's list, or is it the truth?

    ReplyDelete
  68. ModnRodder -

    The McCanns themselves admit they never physically searched for Madeleine and that is fact, as seen in their interviews. The people who searched that night and for days afterwards, were the PJ's, people of Praia de Luz and tourists on holiday there. But there is none so blind as those who don't want to see the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  69. @66

    You will have to keep waiting eagerly for my response to you, regarding your comment.

    One cannot reason with the unreasonable.

    ReplyDelete
  70. ModNrotter (or is that you Mitchell?)

    Of Course you are free to voice your opinion on this or any other forum.
    But in the interest of a balanced debate (so to speak) Whats your response to Fernis @anon 62? . Very well put Fernis @62 you summed it all up in a nutshell.

    Sherlock.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The case hasn't been reopened yet but when it is it will be the best way to find what happened to Madeleine. The Portuguese police know a lot already. CEOP are required to liaise with them not with any former police suspects.

    ReplyDelete
  72. @27 =))

    @ModNrodent
    Beware of free speech,it has become a health hazard!!!
    Dont you feel totally at ease here? since you are asking if "you are wrong on that score".... :D
    By the way,you did not answer my 2 questions:
    1.- what do you think about the mccans NOT trompetting they are going to sue Halligen?
    2.- what about the re-openig of the case?
    (3rd.- dont feel obliged to answer: dont you love the smilies? ;;)

    ReplyDelete
  73. It's all about opinions and free speech so Modnrodder is entitled to his opinion even if it differs from what most of us think.
    Difference of opinion makes for healthy debate as long as we stay away from personal attacks.
    At least he comes here and posts his personal views without abusing anyone.
    I don't agree with his views but will always welcome his input, as I would of anyone who's opinion differs from my own.

    ReplyDelete
  74. PeterMac I echo your sentiments. For a couple who have "friends in high places" with, I presume, access to the best advice there is around and then for them to hire such questionable people as Metodo et al it really beggars belief.

    It really does make you wonder who was giving them advice - a certain double glazing salesman perhaps with vested interests?

    ReplyDelete
  75. Apart from the affair with his hotel bill, which is peanuts in comparison, Halligen is not accused of anything in the UK but has been indicted in the USA for defrauding Trafigura of millions.
    As far as the McCann fund is concerned, this fund has apparently never paid one penny to Halligen, but has paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to a company owned at the time by their millionaire benefactor Brian Kennedy and which has since been conveniently liquidated. These transactions need to be investigated by the British authorities, as do the transactions from the British company to Oakley International in the USA.

    Until this has been done, accusations that Halligen defrauded the fund remain the concoctions of certain British tabloids which, along with the rest of the UK media have consistently failed in their duty as a free press to act in the public interest and report all aspects of this case fairly.

    If they are so certain of their stories these tabloids should be asking why neither the Madeleine fund nor the millionaire benefactor, who appears to have been taken for upwards of half a million pounds, have filed a complaint with the UK police.

    But of course they won't, because they'll always go for the party they consider to the weakest,and that just about sums up the role of the McCanns, their millionair friends and the UK media in this affair.

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  76. Mod or Rosiepops or whoever -

    You have not answered the key questions:

    1. Why are the McCanns not suing Halligen when they are happy to sue just about everyone else?

    2. How come was the Fund operated in such a ramshackle way that £500,000 could be spent on someone the papers are now calling a con man? Were receipts not requested and checked out? Were there not regular - say weekly - briefing meetings? Or are the McCanns claiming that Halligen DID do the required work? Come on- which is it?

    3. Why have the McCanns not issued a clear call for the Portugese authorities to reopen the investigation or for the UK authorities to launch a full inquiry led by New Scotland Yard?

    The fact you can't or won't answer those questions exposes you as a McCann partisan.

    ReplyDelete
  77. ModNrodder @ 67

    Yes, I believe you can BUT

    "We urge anyone who knows anything about the whereabouts of Madeleine or has any information regarding her disappearance to do the right thing and to give that information to their local police"

    this doesn't wash two and a half years down the line. I maintain that the only people who would have witheld information are criminals who are not likely to give it now when nothing has changed. Frankly, its too late for this type of appeal.

    ReplyDelete
  78. ModNrodder,

    You are always avoiding debating the controversial behaviour, and all the significant findings in the files that discredit the McCanns' claim of innocence. Why so? What drives you to defend so fiercely a couple that is so obviously guilty of foul play? In substance, you so badly want us all to believe that finding Maddie alive is a possibility (a diversion tactic as we all know) when everything points out to Maddie being dead, that I already think you know more than you tell us. Some of us already asked you if you are paid for this job. Now I ask you: are you one of them? Of course, I don't expect you to tell us.

    ReplyDelete
  79. ModNrodder:

    The first 3 months of the investigation were exclusively devoted to the hypothesis of an abduction and practically excluded all other possibilities. When nothing came of that, the crime scene expert Mark Harrison was called in, on the advice of the English police, and he was the first one to openly raise the possibility or rather the probability that Madeleine was dead and that they should be looking for a cadaver. Therefore, time was lost looking for a non existent abductor not the other way around, as you state.

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  80. ModnRodder

    Nobody is objecting if you are posting honestly, but if you are going to bring along other trolls so that it gets quite tedious trying to post a comment, then I hope you would all be banned.

    That is usually the beginning of the end for a site when the pro McCanns start taking over, with one poster posting with many names, all with the intention of distraction, and often intimidating other posters.

    At the moment this is a lovely site where we, who are the majority pro Sr Amaral and unbelieving of the McCanns, can keep informed and comment in peace. I don't think we would like to see it turned into a battle to be heard above the trolls.

    ReplyDelete
  81. I’ve just heard a Portuguese lawyer is suing an English woman for 50,000 Euros as she made a written complaint to the Portuguese equivalent of the law society about him. The 50,000 euro’s was for deformation. Reporting on BBC News.

    Apparently the McCanns can say what they like for the world and their mother to hear about Amaral et al but no such charges are brought against them. Hmm…..

    ReplyDelete
  82. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  83. @75, Thank you.

    @76

    1.- what do you think about the mccans NOT trompetting they are going to sue Halligen?
    2.- what about the re-openig of the case?

    Answers
    1. I have no thoughts on this. I trust the McCanns will evaluate what to do in every situation as they arise.

    2. I would love to see the case re opened and with all cards on the table.

    @72
    You have not answered the key questions:

    1. Why are the McCanns not suing Halligen when they are happy to sue just about everyone else?

    You will have to ask the McCanns that. I dont believe that they have sued just about everyone else. Only those that they feel have damaged the search for information that may lead to what happened to Madeleine.

    2. How come was the Fund operated in such a ramshackle way that £500,000 could be spent on someone the papers are now calling a con man? Were receipts not requested and checked out? Were there not regular - say weekly - briefing meetings? Or are the McCanns claiming that Halligen DID do the required work? Come on- which is it?

    When a loved one goes missing you have to rely on a level of trust. It is shocking if the McCanns have been conned and that Madeleine has been exploited by fraudsters once again. I think the fact you feel lacking about what the McCanns are doing is a reflection of their dignity and attempt to not get derailed from their search campaign.

    3. Why have the McCanns not issued a clear call for the Portuguese authorities to reopen the investigation or for the UK authorities to launch a full inquiry led by New Scotland Yard?

    Personally I believe that they would welcome the case re opened if the search for an alive Madeleine is not sacrificed. If they are working to persuade those in control to re open the case, I doubt that they would be announcing it for the benefit of fora.

    The fact you can't or won't answer those questions exposes you as a McCann partisan.

    Really? If you say so.

    @81, trolls? bring along?
    Grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  84. When posters like ModnRodder become more vociferous, I take it as a sign that the issues being raised here are really touching raw nerves. It leads me to believe more strongly that McC sceptics are on the right track. Let whoever it is continue, but I personally can't be bothered replying to this blather.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Trafigura are also a company with questionable business practices. One has to wonder why they thought Halligen would be able to bail them out. They eventually sorted out the issue by paying the Ivorians a reported 152 millions euros to secure the release of their employees held captive for the illegal dumping of waste in their country. What exactly did they pay Halligen £1.3M to do?

    ReplyDelete
  86. @81,
    Oh I see the qualification for being banned are:

    1. Support the search for Madeleine, the truth about what happened to her, unconditionally and without prejudice in the absence of evidence.

    2. This one is out of my control. Be accused and judged to be a troll.

    3. This one is also out of my control. Be accused and judged of taking over the board multi posting.

    I take it a Troll is someone with a different opinion to those in the majority on a given site? In that case I am a troll so all you have to do now is persuade people I am multiposting and wham BAN.

    ReplyDelete
  87. ShuBob

    Have you any idea at as to what is going on? What to make of any of this Halligen business?

    Surely somebody is feeding the information to the media. I can't see any of those so called journalist getting off their backsides to go do a bit of research when they can sit back and be fed a story.

    I also find it hard to believe that there has been 'no comment' from Clarence knowing how Team McCann like to be in control of everything.

    ReplyDelete
  88. When the trolls come to this site it tells me team Mcann know things don't look good for them.

    ReplyDelete
  89. @ post # 87, I have no idea what's going on but I suspect a blackmail plot involving the McCanns and Halligen. Who is blackmailing who, I can't tell!

    ReplyDelete
  90. Again this ModNrodder does not debate the issues. He simply continues his meek defence of the McCann's actions, without directly answering the questions asked. He can't answer because he doesn't have the arguments. As far as I'm concerned this troublemaker is no more.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Why is the British media writing article after article stating that Mr. Halligen defrauded the McCanns? The charges that have been brought against Mr. Halligen have nothing to do with the McCanns and team McCann has not implemented a legal process against Mr. Halligen, so what is going on? It could be that telling the public that the McCanns were swindled would make them more sympathetic to making donations to the fund, but I think it's more than this. I believe that team McCann is still in control of the British media, so what is written in the papers is for the most part being dictated by team McCann. As somebody already mentioned there is an attempt by the British media to portray Mr. Halligen as a loon. This tells me that team McCann fears what Mr. Haligen might reveal. If Mr. Halligen is extradited to the States he will probably have to explain the flow of money to and from his hands and even though he is not charged with defrauding the McCanns his business transactions with team McCann will come up. I believe if this avenue is explored, it will reveal that the McCanns are involved in money laundering. Therefore many will try to discredit this man before he says anything and I don't think the extradition will be allowed.

    ReplyDelete
  92. ModNrodder -

    1. Yes, so you haven't asnwered that one. And the McCanns ain't gonna answer that one for a while until they've dipped into their "Excuses for Everything" box. This is money donated by well meaning members of the public. The McCanns shoudl be outraged and indicate that they will do everything possible to get the money back if it has not been used properly.

    2. The McCanns don't have to take a detailed day-to-day role in administering the fund. To the extent that they do, that's their (peculiar) choice. They only have themselves to blame if these things divert them from the much touted "search" (which these days doesn't even involve them going round European capitals to highlight the case - why?).

    3. They don't have to "work" to reopen the case. They have a legal right to request the Portugese authorities to reopen the case. They claim to have new eveidence of her being held within 10 kms of PDL. So they can confidently expect that the case will be reopened - especially if they now decide to co-operate with the PJ by (a) answering questions and (b) taking part in a reconstruction. Also there is nothing to stop them demanding that New Scotland Yard open a full missing child inquiry. The Sunday Express has made that call. They would have all the media behind them if they made the call - and do you think for one minute that Gordon Brown would say no.

    Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  93. PlodNnoddy,

    You can't possibly have been following this case from the beginning, nor can you have read the PJ case files or you would not have formed these bizarre opinions that you advocate.

    I strongly recommend that you research the case thoroughly before attacking the views of intelligent, literate posters on this forum or elsewhere. It is pointless trying to argue against facts!

    ReplyDelete
  94. ModNrodder I think you are missing the point somewhat.
    The whole reason for this blog is that it is based on the fact that none of us are gullible enough to believe the Mcscam story.
    Anyone wishing to support and sing the Mcscam praises should log on the Mc website, buy good quality wristbands, donate and post comments on there.

    ReplyDelete
  95. If anyone is interested, writing style indicates ModNodder is female. Continuing to reply to her posts is a waste of time and space. She is set in her views, a cul-de-sac, the party line, and offers nothing new. May I suggest getting back to the topic, a fruitful discussion of the choice of private detectives and other issues which are so revealing about what really happened to Madeleine, which everyone is so interested to know.

    ReplyDelete
  96. ModNrodder said @ # 40

    "Dogs dont lie or tell the truth.

    They found what they were trained to find, cadaver scent.

    Exept cadaver scent does not always mean the scent of a dead body and in this case the findings could not determine one way or the other".


    ???????? You are getting me very confused here..

    Cadaver scent does not always mean the scent of a dead body? So what ELSE does it mean? Can you explain? Please. I'm interested to know.

    Did they get mixed up with the smell of sardines? Olive oil perhaps? Nah.. Garlic. It was the smell of garlic they detected.. That must be it!
    Stupid little doggies! They shouldn't have been sent to Portugal without previous training in Continental smells!..

    Joke aside.. Seriously now.

    So WHAT is it the dogs detected? What do you think? I'm serious about it, I'm really very interested to know. I have an open mind. So much has been said about the cadaver dogs that it would be interesting to see this under a different point of view..

    Clare

    ReplyDelete
  97. Well Joana, I apologise if my posting here is not welcome as I didn't realise the blog was conditional on what ones view is on any of your given subjects.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Is is possible to find out if any person went to the police telling what he knows or suspects?
    I think this is a job for journalists.
    There is always a police man willing to tell,in secrecy.
    Because if a person goes to the police to share his secret, it will be not be a secret anymore.
    And why should the police man bother?

    ReplyDelete
  99. A glance through ModNrodder's blog and where it links (including Chaos Raptors and Hounding of the McCanns) told me all I needed to know. Obviously, the person is not cloaking their identity - clicking on their name I arrived at:

    http://thedeucecoupe.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html

    In my opinion there is NO point in debating people who associate with Chaos Raptors and others like him. This comment section should not fall into the baiting by people who indulge in "forum wars" and attack posters with whom they disagree.

    Best ignored, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  100. well christoper,why dont you investigate the mccanns,you never know you might be able to find out what happened to madeleine,and bring the truth to the public,because as sure eggs is eggs the jorno,s of today dont seem to be able to

    ReplyDelete
  101. Yesterday at 83 ModNrodder replied "You will have to ask the McCanns that" about 2 years ago Gerry replied "You will have to ask the dogs that" hi! Gerry!

    ReplyDelete
  102. Isn’t it strange, the Mail on Sunday’s article (and I think others that have reported this story) says
    The UD Department of Justice issued an indictment for Halligen, from Surry, earlier this month alleging that he tried to defraud a London law firm

    It is quite quaint isn’t it how the MOS are coy about mentioning the name of the London law firm? We know it is Carter-Ruck, surely that ought to be a nice link for a journalist to make but I think because it has not been made we must assume that C-R have an injunction in place, again, preventing them from being named. It would not be right would it, for the unwashed masses, to realise that the all conquering C-R have been duped in the same way as the McCanns have.

    For those who have not read the Mail on Sunday article ‘Madeliene McCann investigator didn’t listen to ANY tip-offs given to hotline – and squandered £5000,000’:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231757/Madeleine-McCann-investigator-didnt-listen-ANY-tip-offs-given-hotline--squandered-500-000.html

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  103. ModNrodder - I am open minded and still undecided about what really happened. However I do not blame anyone but the McCanns for Madeleine's disappearance, they left the kids unattended and that was wrong so accept it. Accept they are not perfect and then you may be able to see this from both points of view and also accept they have made loads of errors of judgement (that is putting it mildly and being kind towards them). It is Madeleine who matters and finding the truth no matter what.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I`d just like to say that this forum is supposed to encourage freedom of speech and as long as Nodrodder isn`t rude, its good to have alternative views just to play devil`s advocate if nothing else. It presents a counter balance and prevents a tidal wave of one way thinking, which can expand into unrealistic dramatisations at times. It keeps things in balance.

    I like to see intelligent discussions here where each respects the others opinions. It only degrades to troll level when rudeness and belittling of each others` opinions takes over.

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  105. ModNrodder, are you a politician. You seem to have acquired their ability to side step answering direct and sensible questions and only want to debate the issues you think relevant. Maybe you should just stay on the site where you all pat each other on the back and agree with everything each of you say. Leave the "getting to the truth" to those who really care about Madeleine, Leave the trying to get the case re-opened to those same people because your lot and Madeleine's parents seem to have no interest in doing this. The only people qualified to deal with this are the police and all information and support should be given to them, something again the McCanns failed to do.

    ReplyDelete
  106. @96

    STOP provocking posters trying to derail this thread and posing as a victim and leave Joana ALONE x(
    Instead YOU should be campaining for the RE-opening of this filthy case

    ReplyDelete
  107. can any private detective make any sense of this ?

    THURSDAY, MAY 3: Milk and biscuits for the kids. I left them with this and books and games and went to have a quick shower/wash my hair. M (Madeleine) tired—sitting on my lap—I read the story of Mog (favourite children's book).

    Brush teeth. To the bedroom with the kids. M pulls away and puts her head on pillow. Kisses goodnight for M. Pulled the door to as far as possible without shutting it. Silence.

    Dry hair. Put make-up on. Glass of wine. Restaurant.

    ....................................................................

    theres more...theres more ...roll up roll up.

    Thursday 03.05.2007 - The day of the disappearance

    Breakfast - Apartment
    Comment Madeleine "Where were you (was I) when me and S cried?"
    Kids club, time - check registration
    09.00-09.30 → 12:30
    Sailing (beach)
    Wash M top of pyjamas - big stain
    Lunch? apartment? tea
    Tennis lesson 09.15-10.15
    conversation on the grass w / Russell and Nigel (the video camera)
    [?] Minutes of tennis
    K
    ? get Madeleine
    J and Fiona (Scarlett)
    Then pick up S and A
    (? Meeting there with G)
    Breakfast - apartment -? balcony
    ? recreational area - ok
    Afternoon / Kids club - a bit later
    K Ella already there
    Swimming - indoors pool
    K and G - practice tennis then lesson and coach Dan
    15.30 - 16.30
    Julian appeared - continued to play with Gerry
    I went to run → beach
    (rest of the group on the beach)
    Gerry went to meet the kids for high tea at Tapas. I joined them after running.
    + / - 17.20-17.30
    [Strikethrough text illegible]
    M very tired and quiet
    Since Ella was taken from the KC → beach. I was a little worried that she was sad to have been alone. (Not realised that the group had gone to the beach.)
    She said she was fine.
    She asked me to pick her up and said she was tired.
    I picked her up and carried her to the apartment with G and S and A
    Prepared bath as kids tired and men's tennis night at 18.00.
    I considered returning to the recreation area with the kids but decided to stay in the apartment after bath and hair wash.

    G men's tennis night
    B pyjamas
    Biscuits and milk for the kids - left them with this and books and games and went to take a quick bath / wash my hair.
    I got out of the bath and David was knocking on the patio doors.
    I wrapped myself in a towel and went into the living room.
    He asked if we wanted to go to the recreational area, since he could help me take the kids.
    Refused - since kids ready for bed.
    I dressed myself.
    Ate some snacks with the kids
    M tired - sitting on my lap - read story of MOG
    Brush teeth
    To bedroom with kids
    G there too - I think.
    [Children's music] - M telling story
    M removes and lowers head on pillow

    S + A good-night kisses for M
    From S and A → cots x2
    K gave a good-night kiss to M
    Leaned the door as much as possible without closing it.
    Silence
    ? dry hair
    Make-up
    Glass of wine
    20:35 → rest. First to arrive
    21:00 → G, Conversation with Steve
    21:30 → Matt, Carolyn (Note: Carolyn is a witness who says she heard someone calling Madeleine's name, around 21:30, as she walked back to her apartment)
    22:00 → Myself, 20:40 Jane next
    20:45 Matt and Rachael
    Russell?
    Detained
    Evie feeling sick
    R went for a long time
    Jane replaced him

    [Three pages with drawings]



    ???????
    one question who's Steve gerry was talking to at 9?? thought that was jez?

    o dear!!
    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  108. Mr B it isn't Carter Ruck it's the law firm for Trafigura who gave Halligen £1.2m to lobby the US Govt to get involved in the kidnap of two execs on the Ivory Coast.

    I don't know if this bit will get posted, but I'm quite shocked at the level of venom on here. ModNrodder might have an opposing view to the rest on here but s/he gets ripped apart on a personal level with name calling added in for good measure. This is like a form of bullying. I'm sure many of you can put your salient points across without reverting to this kind of playground behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  109. @post #109, is Kate suggesting that Gerry joined the kids for high tea at the tapas bar on May 3rd because that's an absolute lie?

    How have these people got away with so many lies ~x(

    ReplyDelete
  110. The lawyer suing isn't Carter Ruck this time. The lawyer is Mark Aspinall of Waterson and Hicks,East London.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Mojo, what is all that you have written, where did it come from. Is this Kate's diary because if it is who would actually bother to write "milk & biscuits" etc etc, in a diary especially when on holiday. None of it makes any sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  112. What is the current role of Penny Rose, assessor of the Madeleine Fund? Who is she and how is/was she linked to the fund?

    ReplyDelete
  113. Anon 109 - I may be wrong, but I believe KM was encouraged to write a diary after M went missing - she back dated it to the 3rd so that diary was written days after the event.

    "Leaned the door as much as possible without closing it" isn`t something you`d write in a diary unless you thought your actions were going to have to be explained at a later date as if justifying something.

    Don`t know who Steve is - just someone in the restaurant i suppose.

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  114. What I can't understand is why Halligen is not being sued under the civil contract law, as he had a contract with the ones who are complaining he took money without doing what he said he would do.

    So, he didn't fulfil the contract. It happens all the time between people.

    Why are they contacting the FBI and making it into a criminal case?

    He has assets which they could claim money back on. So why didn't they go the way of the civil courts?

    Even with the McCanns, I would say that he had a case to sue them for not completing the contract and handing over the money.

    The McCanns via CM are saying he handed over reports or whatever, and he had employed people to do the job. At the end of the day, he did not have the money to pay these employees when the McCanns refused to pay up.

    It looks like somebody wants Halligen put inside and out out of the way.

    Something is not ringing true about all this.

    ReplyDelete
  115. @post #114, I'm unconvinced that it was Aspinall and Exton who reported Halligen to the FBI. Why are their names missing from the indictment as plaintiffs? Also, Aspinall may have breached professional rules by personally getting involved with Halligen if he was still looking after Trafigura at the same time!

    ReplyDelete
  116. Thank you for posting that Anon at 109. Very interesting.

    So how long after did KM write this diary?

    It is hard to believe that anybody can remember all these little details or would even bother to mention them!

    Where is the mention of the row she was supposed to have had with Gerry that led to her sleeping in the kid's bedroom? If there was a row, when did they make up?

    What was the big stain on Madeleine's top that she washed out? Did she mention this because somebody had seen it and they might have mentioned it first.

    As to the last day at the creche for Madeleine, did the children really go on a boat trip as was mentioned somewhere previously.

    If so, where are the pictures of the kids in that boat?

    It is hard to believe that someone didn't take a photo that day of the children, either in the creche or out on a trip.

    If Madeleine was there on a photo with the rest of the children in her class, then that would lay to rest the suspicion that Madeleine was already dead by then.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Fencesitter

    I think the 'milk and biscuits' is in there to shore up the image of the cozy world Kate and the kids are supposed to have lived in, and those children who go to sleep on cue after bedtime stories, etc.

    All sounds rather in contrast to her 'other' diary which was left open for the cops to read, which paints a rather different picture saying that she found it hard to cope, especially with Madeleine.

    And she never did answer the question about whether Madeleine was going to be adopted.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Anom 109
    The 'Steve' Gerry was speaking to was Stephen Carpenter. He was dining at the Tapas with his wife and children. They left for their apartment between 9:15 and 9:30pm. Steve left the restaurant carrying his 3 year old daughter. It is quite possible, Steve was the man Jane Tanner saw crossing the road.

    ReplyDelete
  119. I was under the impression that Aspinall had written the money off as a bad investment.

    ReplyDelete
  120. It would be very interesting if there were any Court Reports available online about the future Halligen case. We can't always trust what the press tells us can we? Anybody, any ideas?

    ReplyDelete
  121. To ShuBob post 116
    Mark Hollingsworth Investigates the Mccann Files-article on this site-"Mark Aspinall, a respected lawyer....invested £500k in Oakley and lost the lot.Earlier this year, he filed a lawsuit in Washington DC against Halligen, claiming 1.4 million USD in damages."
    FBI press release on Nov. 12th Washington DC - KH indicted today on charges of wire fraud and money laundering by a grand jury.... from Nov. 2006 to Jan.2007, Halligen engaged in a scheme to defraud a London-based law firm of 2.1k USD."
    This was meant to be used in work to secure the release of the Trafigura executives. You may well be correct in your final assertion.
    Off topic, but has anyone any information on why Aparthotel Sol e Mar, Burgau was searched by the PJ as early as 19.30. May 5th 2007 and hairs found at apt.C sent for analysis at Portuguese Forensics. See PJ files for possible link with Jane Tanner's "maternal bloodline."

    ReplyDelete
  122. Why is it taking so long for a decision on the extradition of Halligen.

    It sounds like he is fighting it and is not going back willingly.

    ReplyDelete
  123. @ post # 121, Trafigura have a bad reputation internationally IMO what with their illegal dumping of chemical waste and attempts at censorship so I expect there'll be many international reporters covering the case ;)

    ReplyDelete
  124. Joana,

    I really think your moderators should be tough on abusive comments, such as are attached to this article.

    If you don't eliminate them, your site will go downhill in the way that the others did. Abusive comments will devalue the integrity of the admirable work you are doing, and will do nothing to bring justice for Madeleine.

    Respect!

    ReplyDelete
  125. Anon 119
    Steve Carpenter's statement is in the PJ files. He says he was at the Tapas restaurant at 8.30. and that the MCc's and the rest of the group were ALL present. SC and family left around 9.30.

    ReplyDelete
  126. In the DM it said that no one bothered to listen to the calls that came in to the hotline. Perhaps Team M were not contacted, but surely they would like to listen to the calls now they know there were a lot of calls that came through. I hope also the McCs help out in any way they can with this case even though they appeared to be satisfied with the work that was done. I would like to know what work cost all that money and if the hotline was included in the fee.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Anon at 119

    You make a good point there.

    How many of us who go out walking can then relate back every single moment of that trip minute by minute accurately.

    JT may remember seeing a flash of a man carrying a child somewhere or other, and her imagination did the rest, until we now have her latest statement which has evolved with the telling.

    Unlike the Smith party statement, when they had to move out of the way for the man carrying the child to pass, and Mr Smith actually spoke to the man who turned his head a way and ignored him.

    That sighting is much more credible.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Interesting connections- have a look at The Mccann Lobby-Who's outside the box- includes Baroness Hogg (sister of Justice Hogg) who has invested in Brian Kennedy and Control Risks Group, the first (?) of the ubnsuccessful searchers for Madeleine. I believe she is also involved with the US Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Anon 118, Thanks for your reply. I tend to agree with your views, it is all a bit unnatural IMO. If this was written after the event as someone suggested then it still seems to me odd to bother with such recalls such as what was given to the kids for tea etc etc. If I give them the benefit of the doubt it looks like someone who knows should have taken better care of their kids and who is now trying to paint the text book image of the perfect parent. The recall should have been about remembering facts that matter that would help the police so I must admit, it does make me wonder about many things. I may be unsure about many things, but I am convinced that they are not normal and they think it is everyone else who has questionned their actions to be abnormal.

    ReplyDelete
  130. What made the stain on the pyjama top?

    Did an independent person see that top with the stain on it?

    Where is the top now?

    There is a child missing, cadaver scent and blood was found behind the settee. All of this is relevant.

    ReplyDelete
  131. off the subject not heard from Ironside or T4two miss them .

    ReplyDelete
  132. Anon 120 - Off hand I don`t know where I read that the diaries were written after the event. I`ll have a search round and try and find it.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  133. About that cosy bedtime scene painted in the diary - Has anyone ever considered what the pattern of parenting would have been (because, obviously we don't know...) before this fateful holiday?
    No normal parent who looks after their child by leaving doors open to hear them,
    or has a child-monitor to hear them ,
    or who engages babysitters when they want to go out
    or who take it in turns to stay at home,
    - no normal parent like this suddenly changes their pattern so completely if they are on holiday. If anything, they would take even better care, in strange surroundings for the children.They would also object/ remark on any friends who just left children alone at night, in whatever circumstances.

    ReplyDelete
  134. fencesitter.
    its all in at the Mccann Files......look under the section Kates diary!

    shubob.....they have got away with the lies so far!!
    with the help of the British Government,Police, media, courts, this country needs a revolution and quick.

    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  135. Will Halligen show up in court this week?
    Who knows about it?
    Stevo is not at all Gerry.

    ReplyDelete
  136. The Mccann need to attract the attention to themselves.
    They try to impress people with their important friends.
    They lie, they are unreliable, they cheat on people, they manipulate.
    They are sociopaths.
    Their colleagues must be throwing them up, many of their relatives are throwing them up too.
    I believe they lost many friends and I don't believe they made new ones.
    The fact they continue trying to cheat on society shows they know they did something terrible.
    Do they care about what happened?
    I don't think so. They only care about themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  137. I MISS IRONSIDE AND ANNA MILLER.
    JOANA, BE STRONG. GOD HELP YOU GIRL! THIS CLOWNS ATTACK YOU JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID OF THE TRUTH ON YOUR BLOG! WE ALL ARE CLOSER TO THIS FINAL DAY WHEN THE TRUTH OF THE LIES WILL BE OPENED TO EVERYONE.

    ReplyDelete
  138. The McCanns seem like they can walk on water, yet there has to be something they haven't covered, something that can still jump up and bite them.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Some people here wonder if Clarence Mitchell is writing on this blog.
    Not at all imo.
    By now he must be fed up of this story.
    He wants to think about something else.
    He must be so fed up of it that he is not showing up anymore.
    What we hear now is..."a source in the family"..."a source in the family..."
    Within a few weeks..."the milkman..."..."the milkman..."

    ReplyDelete
  140. Off topic, but about her diary, Kate wrote that Madeleine was afraid of pain. Could that have been Payne? When I read that, as a parent, it waved a big red flag.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Thanks for all those who corrected my error regarding Halligen and Carter-Ruck.

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  142. your site is very nice, very useful for me , i bookmarked your blog

    ReplyDelete
  143. Interesting point, Ingrid, @ post 140. What Kate writes defies logic! If Maddie is in pain, what does she do in that case?

    ReplyDelete
  144. you have been a constant source of information where others have feared to tread!!!

    my hats off to you joanna

    i wish you all the success you will ever need and would like to send a heartfelt thank you from myself ( seeing as your the only journalist on the planet who seems to have some balls )

    fight on

    justice for madeleine

    ReplyDelete
  145. anon 145, thank you for your support, but I'm not a journalist I'm a just a citizen. :) cheers

    ReplyDelete
  146. Talking of journalists, does anybody remember there was a guy who was/is pro McCann, who was some sort of professor(journalism?), who was said to be doing some sort of experiment in manipulating the people who were posting on the McCann sites.

    Well, if he had a hand in the closing down of some of them he must be giving himself a pat on the back.

    No doubt he is still around posting as somebody or other/others!

    ReplyDelete
  147. By one of the names he used, it is more than likely he is Irish as it would not be easily known to English or Scots, but would slip off the tongue of an Irishman.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Professor of journalism -Roy Greenslade is the only one I know of connected in some way.Does he have a company based in Cheshire?

    ReplyDelete