18 December 2009

Who are the McCanns?


by Catalina Pestana

In times of great promiscuity between the modern State’s powers – legislative, executive and judicial -, once more in Portugal the notion of common sense has been lost in an unbridled way, and the cloak of Justice has been thrown over it.

The book ‘Maddie – The Truth of the Lie’, by Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ inspector who coordinated the ‘Maddie case’ investigation, was removed from the market by a court order, under the pretext of being a crime of defamation against the McCanns.

The author’s assets have been ‘frozen’ in order to cover an eventual compensation to the ‘offended ones’.

Last Friday, Gonçalo’s witnesses were to be heard. For the first time, we were going to hear other PJ agents who investigated Maddie’s disappearance with him. They – according to news reports – were going to testify that their colleague had only written down what was in the archived process, which was no longer covered by judicial secrecy.

Reading the book, I had a sense of déjà-vu. One way or another, the reported facts had already reached public opinion through various forms of communication.

During the ‘Estado Novo’ [dictatorial period in Portugal], it was usual for the State to seize assets – books, records and other items – that belonged to those who disagreed with the epoch’s political practises and dared to write it or to say it out loud.

It was more logical: an authoritarian State that seeks to silence its opposition, regardless of means.

Now, who are the McCanns (or what do the McCanns know, that someone does not want them to reveal) for some elementary questions that are made by the common citizen, to remain unanswered?

Such as:

1 – Why was it that on the night of the 3rd of May 2007, when the little English girl went missing – remember that she was left asleep, alone with her two younger siblings, while her parents dined with their friends -, the McCanns, already in the company of the PJ, felt the need to be also accompanied by the English television channels, that arrived the very next morning?

2 – Why was it that they, supposedly feeling ravaged by the greatest sorrow that can possibly hit a mother and father, yet supported by the authorities and the population of their own country and of the country where the facts took place, immediately nominated a couple of grotesque figures that are called press advisors or spokespeople?

3 – Why did British prime minister Gordon Brown, not satisfied with the perfectly correct gesture of contacting the Portuguese authorities, asking them to give the case special attention, offer his Government spokesman to take over that function with the McCann couple?

4 – Why have the Portuguese missing children’s processes never earned from the authorities one hundredth of the investment in human and material resources to track them down?

5 – Why do the members of the Portuguese Parliament have a regimental figure called ‘defence of the bench’s honour’ at their disposal, while a high-ranking criminal investigation police officer has to request early retirement to defend his honour, and ends up being criminalised for that gesture?

6 – Why do we continue to have two models of Justice in Portugal, one for the powerful from anywhere in the world, and another one for common citizens?

Last Friday, Gonçalo Amaral’s lawyer became ill and the hearing of his witnesses was adjourned. The McCanns, curiously, returned to Portugal on that day. In the late afternoon, Gonçalo Amaral presented another book: ‘The English Gag – The Story of a Forbidden Book’.

In the provoking way of those who think they own God, the McCanns’ illustrious lawyer, who spent many years defending freedom of opinion in a weekly newspaper [Expresso], decided to participate. She took with her a group of English journalists that follow this family’s every step and decided to participate in the book presentation, staging a press conference for Her Majesty’s subjects. The circus goes on.

I do not know Gonçalo Amaral personally, just like I didn’t know Murat, the first arguido that was invented to soothe the spirits.

This story certainly has many chapters left to tell.



source: Sol, 18.12.2009, paper edition


138 comments:

  1. I think a good family history researcher could unravel some hidden links between the participants in this travesty of justice.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For goodness sake Portugal, reopen the case and charge this arrogant pair at the very least with endangering the lives of their kids all week (just how far did they go on their nights out, was Chaplins on the list?), and for serious harm having occurred to their child Madeleine, while she was left alone in an unlocked apartment with no adult supervision.

    That would do for a start.

    What is so bloody hard about that?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that the book still has many chapters to tell. However, the question is which chapters will we be allowed to read and which chapters will be banned. Perhaps we will have a better idea after January 12th.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's about time the Portuguese citizens get heard. Good article. May this be the first of many such searching articles to appear in Portuguese papers. Enough has to be enough!

    ReplyDelete
  5. who are the mccanns? a pair of lying bastards.no more no less

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.kennedydna.com/dna.html

    heres some interesting history?

    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  7. And about time the treatment Murat received at the hands of the McCanns is mentioned!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Catalina Pestana, what a marvellous lady she is, sort of a female version of Gonçalo Amaral. I have an enormous admiration for her, may God keep her in good health for many years to come, Portugal needs people like her.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This show/circus is set to run and run ,I cannot see an end to it ,The only ones who can spring this case wide open will keep quite ,they have too much to lose,I pray 2010 brings justice for an innocent child ,her so called "parents" have gone past even remembering who she was ,from day one it all been about money ,may they rot in hell

    ReplyDelete
  10. Kate McCann was investigated by the PJ as 'Kate Healey'; they refer to her throughout the released records under that name. She was adopted as a child by the Healeys - I do not know more than that.
    Remember, all this circus began under the rule of Tony Blair as the UK Prime Minister - Gordon Brown was merely Chancellor at the time, but has obviously taken on the 'responsibility' ever since, only Heaven knows why...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow! I love this piece of writing. May it bring on more and more support for Goncalo Amaral!
    I especially loved the bit, " a couple of grotesque figures that are called press advisors or spokespeople?"
    I wonder how well the McC's sleep at night now...
    I am moved to donate again a wee bit more to the fund supporting Goncalo Amaral.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Don't you just love the Streisand effect?!
    Banning a book just gets people more interested in why it was written in the first place.
    Censorship is a weapon used by dictatorships. We should know, we've had one of those. Do they expect us to accept the new Mccann dictatorship now?
    Arrogance and his bleating wife do not decide what I can read and think!

    ReplyDelete
  13. agree with anon#1, people at 39 don't just turn evil overnight

    the McCanns may have had a bad history with kids etc.

    ReplyDelete
  14. why have Eurojust not become involved in this cover-up... doesnt anybody know a way of making them become interested...surely there should be some way of involving them with important questions that have been asked.This should be a first very important test of their existance and they should be asked to at least comment on the attempted supression of free speach and if they dont then what the hell are they being paid for with our money

    ReplyDelete
  15. It is very moving to see all these important people speaking out in defense of Gonçalo Amaral and above all in defense of one of the fundamental rights of the Portuguese constitution, the freedom of expression.

    Who do the McCanns have here in Portugal to support, dodgy lawyers and PR bouncers.

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Last Friday, Gonçalo Amaral’s lawyer became ill and the hearing of his witnesses was adjourned. The McCanns, curiously, returned to Portugal on that day. In the late afternoon, Gonçalo Amaral presented another book: ‘The English Gag – The Story of a Forbidden Book’"
    What's strange about McCanns' presence ? Their lawyer told them to come, they came. They were only aware of the adjournment on landing... Curious trend in mentionning facts, leading to unfair suspiscion...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Great article, however the McTwats can't stop, Gizza quid because he is an arrogant psychopath engaged in a game, and calamity Katie, the spoilt narcissistic child.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon 14
    And what unfair suspicion is this leading to?
    I agree with you that there's nothing strange about Mcc presence.They are becoming quite predictable at showing up for PR engagements.

    It is "curious", however, that they have never come before to actually help with the investigation or physically search.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 'In the provoking way of those who think they own God'

    Ah, the final justice the McCanns will face. No money, no litigation, no mealy-mouthed replies or barefaced lies will cut any ice with Him. If I were the McCanns I would be afraid to set foot inside a church, but still they brazen it out!!! One day they will be accountable for their selfish child care arrangements and the rest that followed. One day.

    ReplyDelete
  20. #14 Strange?

    Strange that they wouldn't come to do a reconstruction.
    Strange that they wouldn't come to search for Madeleine (who is near to PdL according to their number one keystone cop)
    Strange that they wouldn't come to ask for the case to be re-opened.
    Strange that they refused to answer questions.
    Strange that they did everything possible to thwart the PJ.

    Not strange that they come back when there is money involved!

    ReplyDelete
  21. And the Christmas campaign has begun, just in time for the weekend editions.
    On my Christmas wish list is the hope that we will find the truth, however horrible it may be.
    In my heart I know that Madeleine doesn't live here anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Bravo Ms. Catalina Pestana, A Great Lady, I know you have an extremly strong spirit and personality , for I have seen you so many times on TV due to the Casa pia mess. This country needs more people like you and Amaral. So
    lets NOT LEAVE ANY STONE UNTURNED. You both have my respect and admiration.
    Jamar

    ReplyDelete
  23. 14,

    I see you are very sensitive to harmless words. Probably Catalina didn't know they were asked by her lawyer to be present. But my guess is that it was the content of the article that prompted you to react. You simply didn't like what you read. CURIOUSLY, you didn't argue with what Catalina wrote.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anon 18, agree with every word. The McCanns went to Portugal twice recently, both times to meet with lawyers and advisors, but have never gone there to answer unanswered police questions, beg for the case to be reopened,ask for a police reconstruction to be set up or search for their missing child. They had their chance to do all these things in the past, but refused to take it. They have had every opportunity to do them over the past 2+ years but haven't bothered themselves to do any of them. They have a chance every single time they go to Portugal to do them, so when are they going to? Surely they don't go to Portugal only to demand Amaral's money and to ban books? Could anyone who insists their child was abducted be so shallow, so transparently interested in money above all else?

    Let's see what they do in January. No matter the outcome of the hearing, the really interesting thing will be what they will do about the 48 questions as yet unanswered, the reconstruction as yet undone, the request for reopening as yet unmade, the search in the 10 mile area around Praia da Luz as yet unstarted (at least by the parents themselves). We'll see then if their chief interest is in finding out what happened to Madeleine or in making money and removing other people's freedom of speech. They can talk till they're blue in the face about Madeleine, but their efforts on HER behalf are strikingly absent, while the efforts on THEIR OWN behalf are strikingly obvious.

    Talk is cheap (or a million pounds), but until they do something about all of the above they needn't bother talking any more. They're beginning to sound false now even to those who might have supported them in the past, as their demands for money are now displayed for all the world to see.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous 5 said...
    "who are the mccanns? a pair of lying bastards.no more no less"

    you forgot to add Thieving, Conniving, Bad Parents to the list

    ReplyDelete
  26. Isn't it about time that the McCanns tell us exactly what they want the money donations for, when they ask for them? It's not good enough to just say "a search". So far their PIs have turned up nothing definite except that Maddy's "within ten miles of PDL." People deserve value for money don't they? Ah, so the money will obviously be used to search that area, won't it? No? well why not re-open the case so that the police can investigate the area free of charge? What's wrong with that?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Perhaps a better question would be "What dirt have the McCanns got on some high ranking people?"

    ReplyDelete
  28. They are figments of their own PR. How can they live up to the image they have created.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Murat was not 'invented' as an arguido.
    That is just nonsense. Has she read the files?

    ReplyDelete
  30. @ post 27, the McCanns may not have been responsible for Murat being made an arguido but they ACTIVELY sought to implicate him. That's an undeniable fact! Read Kate's diary for more!

    ReplyDelete
  31. have you.................woof!

    ReplyDelete
  32. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236858/Fresh-appeal-McCanns-face-Christmas-Madeleine.html

    BEGGING BOWL is out with new picture of Madeleine...

    ReplyDelete
  33. As Francisco Moita Flores recently pointed out, a fact is something that cannot be eradicated or changed. A fact is verifyable; no amount of PR or spin or lies can change a fact. Like bodies, facts can be concealed, but unlike bodies they cannot be destroyed or made to disappear for ever.

    Where I perhaps am at variance with others is that I maintain that forensic evidence, being capable of manipulation and open to interpretation, cannot qualify as an indisputable fact. It should therefore not be relied upon as the sole instrument to reveal the truth, but should be used as supporting evidence for a thesis which has been arrived at based on analysis of the facts.

    We've all come to be somewhat hooked on the forensic evidence, or lack of forensic evidence, or perhaps more acurately, what has been described as a lack of conclusive forensic evidence, in this case.

    There is no doubt that the forensic evidence had been subject to attempts to destroy it before collection. Whether those attempts did in fact render it inconclusive or not we shall probably never know, but allied to that, we've also seen an orchestrated campaign to rubbish the reactions of the dogs. This campaign, of which it should be said, no parents of an abducted child would ever launch, is a campaign which it is impossible to refute with facts or forensic evidence strong enough to withstand negative interpretation.

    Nonetheless it is clear from reading the police files, that the police uncovered a whole raft of, for want of a better description, conventional evidence; 100% verifiable and therefore indisputable and importantly, indestructable: in other words, facts.

    And all the known facts point to the child having died in the apartment and a subsequent effort by the parents and their friends to conceal the truth; not one fact supports the story of abduction.

    This is not Dr. Amaral's personal thesis which he has devised for the purpose of writing a book to make himself a fortune, it is a thesis arrived at by a team of experienced detectives and criminologists after careful study of all the known facts.

    Who are the McCanns? The McCanns are the sole suspects in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in May 2007. All the known facts point to their culpability. I note that in spite of all their PR activities since, not one fact has emerged which indicates anything else.

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  34. http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fronts/ExpressMortgage.JPG

    It seems The Express were the first with the headlines that Mccanns used fund money..

    ReplyDelete
  35. T3two - well said - love your last paragraph.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  36. The Mccanns are a couple of perverts that reside in the UK
    The are part of a very large group which obviously consists of some influential people who shield and protect each other at all cost.

    ReplyDelete
  37. They are 'Malignant Narcissist' with an absence of any conscience.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "As Francisco Moita Flores recently pointed out, a fact is something that cannot be eradicated or changed. A fact is verifyable; no amount of PR or spin or lies can change a fact. Like bodies, facts can be concealed, but unlike bodies they cannot be destroyed or made to disappear for ever."

    I disagree with the above paragraph

    I believe facts can be eradicated and changed over time and would go as far as saying that many have.

    I would in the above context use the word TRUTH !

    sorry if its splitting hairs.

    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  39. 33 T4two...
    If ever there was a way to sum it all up in one simple post that was it, concise and absolutely to the point.... and oh so true!.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I hope the Portugese judicial system will see through the McCanns' mafia like tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Wonderful, wonderful piece of journalism. Such a crime that we have to seek out websites and online blogs to read anything approaching the truth, while the mainstream media trot out the lies and half-truths from Team McMurderer.

    ReplyDelete
  42. In Praia da Luz kids play on the beach
    With mothers and fathers all within reach
    But Gerry dumps them in some kids' club messin'
    While he has another tennis lesson
    When evening comes he puts them to sleep
    To go wining and dining,the selfish creep
    Now he's blaming everyone else
    When the one he should blame is himself
    It's his fault he's lost his daughter
    The arrogant bullying Labour supporter
    Instead of in publicity basking
    Just answer the questions the Police are asking
    We pray that soon the lie will be nailed
    So instead of profiting they both get JAILED

    ReplyDelete
  43. In hindsight, I'm sure many involved in this case regret having the forensic tests done in England. Portugal has capable labs and the tests should have been done in Portugal, but unfortunately the person who made the decision was influenced by the English media and thus feared that the results would be viewed with suspicion. If Portugal had comported itself as a sovereign nation, I'm sure the parents would already be serving their sentence. I cannot see countries such as Spain, Italy, France or Germany bowing down to the interests of a foreign government and allowing the meddling that took place in this case. With two corrupt governments, I guess this case never really had a chance of being resolved.

    I just finished reading an article in the "Sol" concerning Mr. Lopes da Mota who recently quit his post as president of EuroJust and is now facing charges that he threatened investigators of the Freeport case, ordering them to archive the case or risk facing reprisals by Mr.Socrates, Portuguese prime minister, and Mr. Alberto Costa, a justice minister. Of course just because Mr. Lopes da Mota used these person's names is not proof that these people ordered Mr. Lopes da Mota to do this, maybe so but someone must have given him orders. What personal interest does Mr. Lopes da Mota have in having the Freeport case archived? The rogatory letters of the Madeleine case probably went through the hands of Mr. Lopes da Mota, not someone I would trust.

    O governo Portugues e uma cambada de criminosos que protejem-se um ao outro.

    Why is Mr. Amaral bringing in witnesses at this stage, he hasn't even been told what part of his book is considered libel? Isn't the burden of proof on the McCanns to prove libel? Just another warning sign of the inevitable.

    ReplyDelete
  44. 38 Mojo

    Examples of facts:
    The walking distance between the Tapas bar and apartment 5A patio doors. Whatever anyone might say it is, the distance can be verified simply by measuring it. The distance measured will not change. The Tapas bar and the Ocean Club can be demolished as can the apartment block with 5A but a thousand years from now archeologists will still be able to measure that distance.

    The type of shutter on the window of Madeleine's room cannot be jemmied and raised from the outside to gain entry without dammaging it. That is a fact which can be verified, if necessary by an expert witness. Faced with this fact McCann changed his story to entry through the patio doors and exit through the window.

    Just two examples of facts. The distance between the Tapas bar and the apartment and the construction of the shutter rendering access from the outside impossible without extensive damage to the shutter. I'm sure that there are many other facts of this kind in the police files.

    ReplyDelete
  45. http://www.maddiemystery.blogspot.com/


    From the Heart...

    ReplyDelete
  46. They are so special we cannot comment about them in the English papers. We can comment on Tiger and we can comment on the lady who sued her doctor, but we cannot comment on these two. I suppose if the comments were all lovely and fawning they would get printed. The papers value the duo more than they do their readers methinks.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Just exactly, what is the distance from the Tapas bar to the apartment? In the articles that I've read the distance has been described to be as little as 25 yards to as much as 100 metres.

    ReplyDelete
  48. It's about 60 meters walking from the tapas inside the OC to the street and then to the door/window on the balcony. Another 20 meters to the front door located on the same side of the window the McCanns claimed it was jammed/broken in by an 'abductor'(a lie). Much less than 80 meters if you draw a line that starts(visualize the OC from above) at the Tapas restaurant to the back entrance - the balcony entrance that faces the OC pool.

    ReplyDelete
  49. not exactly like having dinner at 'the back garden'...

    ReplyDelete
  50. T4two.
    I agree that certain 'facts' must have been withheld. Apart from the prospect of financial gain from Mr Amaral, maybe their desire to destroy him is because of this. The McCanns,according to rumour had someone feeding them information about how the investigation was proceeding and that is why they overstayed their welcome in Portugal, to keep ahead of the game.
    Since then I bet they have paid out a fortune to get their hands on this undisclosed information.

    ReplyDelete
  51. The McCanns had an appeal on BBC News this evening. It took only a few seconds after the main news, almost as if the BBC were apologising for showing it. I have a feeling the media are sick to death of the McCann's continually going on about their missing daughter, as much as they may sympathise with them, They are crying Wolf too often and should keep quiet for a while, but that won't get them donations to the Fund of course.

    ReplyDelete
  52. What I've noticed that's missing from the British press in the past week is the uausl fawning "Poor Kate" articles by the likes of Fiona Philips, Lorraine Kelly, India Knight and Alison Pearson. Why is that? Have they not read Kate's bleeding heart report from Praia da Luz? Are they too fed up of the farce?

    ReplyDelete
  53. The Mccanns have more front than 'Arrods'...Have you seen this years appeal?

    The couple said: "Christmas is a time for children. Please help us bring ours back."

    xxx

    Shame the Mccanns did not think that HOLIDAYS are a time for children.

    ReplyDelete
  54. The crime scene was succesfully trashed, the all important 'abduction' story took off in the UK media despite all the contrary evidence and reservations of the authorities (Portuguese and British) on the scene. Job almost done, all that was needed next was to make sure that a case could never come to court. How about the prime suspect(s) meeting the Pope? That should do it. What potential juror could forget images like that? Gerry's no fool (although the sim card swapping was a schoolboy error) but even he couldn't have wished for such a wonderful gift as this, delivered of course by the one and only Clarence Mitchell. I do hope he's proud of himself.

    The McCann's of course know what happened to Madeleine. They know the truth, but they can't tell the truth, because doing so would result in them losing their other children. What a dilemma. So on and on and on we go.

    "It's never too late to do the right thing"

    Who'd be a policeman, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Madeleine could not have died on May the 1st because cleaning ladies cleaned up the apartment on Wednesday the 2nd.
    They would have seen her body.
    I believe she died on the 3rd.
    Witnesses working at the crèche saw her on that afternoon.
    Kate picked her up at 5.30 pm unless that document is fake(see Amaral's documentary).
    But I don't believe the document is fake. Millions of people would have been involved in this crime.
    And I would make a 3rd appeal:

    "If you don't know anything and you are keeping this secret, remember it is never too late to do the right thing".

    ReplyDelete
  56. No. Far more like going to the pub down the road.

    I once posted on a site asking people to imagine leaving their wallet on a park bench, turning their back and walking 100 yards away from it, only checking it was still there once every thirty minutes. Most said they wouldn't dream of it, which of course is understandable. In leaving them alone in unlocked premises, this couple did the same with their kids. Despicable

    ReplyDelete
  57. I regret to say this:the truth will be known by future generations...
    The next few years deseve to enjoy the pounds!
    BRAVO Gerry you are the most...
    Portuguese Idiots

    ReplyDelete
  58. Dogs that bark but no bite

    ReplyDelete
  59. Number 10, Kate adopted by the Healys?
    Where did you read that?
    I have difficulties to believe it.
    Could you tell us more about this?

    ReplyDelete
  60. The only point of interest to me in how far it was from the Tapas bar to the apartment is this: it was too far for the McCanns to be able to know what was going on in the apartment. They couldn't see what was happening there, they couldn't hear what was happening there. If a child had started vomiting there's no way the parents could have known, therefore the child could have choked on its own vomit as there was no one there to help. If a child had got out of bed, climbed on something (a sofa, maybe) and fallen, hitting its head and being seriously injured, there was no one there to come to its aid. If an intruder entered the room there was no one there to chase him away or apprehend him. If a child got out of bed and walked to the unlocked door, opened it and went out into the darkness and all its dangers, there was no one there to stop it. Even if the very worst had happened and a madman had entered the apartment - possibly through the unlocked door - and cut all 3 children's throats, there'd have been no one there to do anything to stop him. This is the reality of the situation - those children were left to deal with danger of any kind on their own, because their parents had gone out and left them alone. No matter how anyone tries to dress it up, that's the way it was.

    Sending someone back to the apartment at 30 minute intervals would have prevented none of the things mentioned above, so was worse than useless. The sheer uselessness of their 'checking system' is proved by the Matthew Oldfield visit of 9.30 pm, when he was unable to say whether Madeleine was in the bedroom or not - what on earth use was a check that didn't even include checking that all the children were there? Or was it '2 out of 3's not bad'? Crazy ...

    Who are the McCanns? They're the people who didn't stay at home with their little children and didn't do anything sensible to protect them from some very obvious dangers.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Joana 49

    "not exactly like having dinner at 'the back garden'..."

    Precisely. So why say it because it contradicts a fact which is easily verified by physically measuring the distance and therefore the statement can be proven to be a lie?

    Nevertheless in isolation, this does not prove anything more sinister. She could have said it to counter any possible accusation that the children had been neglected. Taken on its own, it doesn't mean that their whole story isn't true.

    McCann's initial statement that the shutter had been jemmied to effect entry into the apartment through the window also contradicts the fact that this type of shutter cannot be jemmied and forced open without seriously damaging it. Again, this is a statement which can be proven to be a lie but which taken on its own does not mean that their whole story isn't true. He may for example have said it to counter any accusation that leaving the patio doors open was an act of gross negligence.

    Taken individually then each lie is not sufficient to prove anything other than that the person concerned was lying in that particular instance; a lie for which they may have a credible explanation.

    But if during the course of an investigation the police can establish a pattern of lying, then that must be seen in a completely different light. A situation has then been reached where individual explanations for each lie are no longer adequate and it becomes necessary to find an explanation for the complete pattern of lies. In other words once a pattern of systematic lying has been revealed, it is not sufficient to say, "There is an innocent explanation for everything the police may or may not have found."

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  62. t4two

    Not a great a example using walking distances ...think of a running track with staggered starts to enable everybody in the race runs the same distance.
    Unless you know the exact path walked footprint to footprint the measurement will be inaccurate...close but nevertheless inaccurate!
    question.
    Does a fact need to be accurate!
    Its splitting hairs because the ballpark distance is close!
    regardless of my point the truth is that it is further than quoted by the mccanns!

    Also your distances are based on Gerry entering patio doors? has this been ascertained as Fact now!
    He may well have entered at front door(carpark side) which would alter the dimensions.


    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  63. I did notice,reading kates diaries she always gave Gordon brown, our then chancelor his full title but when she wrote about calls from tony Blair our then priminister she called him Tony and his wife wasreferd to as Cherie perhaps that SPECIAL relatinshipwas not with Gordon Brown but with the Blairs. Does anyone remember oporation Orr, the high ranking peodaphile ring that was said to involve some very high ranking people in Britain , goverment ministers,judjes,Police and maybe DOCTORS.

    ReplyDelete
  64. When I heard that Madeleine disappeared after being left alone with her even younger siblings, I was completely horrified. They were babies, for God's sake. Babies !

    But when I read the first blog entry - the 'Day in the life of the McCann family' piece they did two weeks after losing their daughter, well, my blood ran cold. It was far and away the most inappropriate thing I had ever read, full of cheery anecdotes and jokey asides, like a Christmas round robin letter.
    Blog entries over the next few weeks made me even more furious, full of name dropping, self-congratulatory crap about the praise they had received from various quarters, the dignitries they had met, seasoned with the occasional incredible rudeness, like the occasion when Gerry griped about the size of the plane that was sent to take them to Morocco.

    This really was a sign of things to come. This pair have no morals at all. They shamelessly self-promote, portraying themselves as grief-stricken heroes, whilst attempting to grub money away from the very people who tried to find their daughter. The daughter THEY lost, the daughter they didn't give a crap about. Could you walk out of your holiday flat and leave your children alone so that you could go and drink with your friends ?????? There is no power on this earth that could get me to do that. Never. And not once in all this time have they ever said sorry; trotting out some soundbite about regreting they were not there at the moment she was taken is frankly insulting to the child. It's the sort of lame excuse one is advised to give in the event of a road accident. If one was to cut Gerry McCann in half - and oh that someone would - the words ''Never admit liability'' would be written right through him. Hateful, detestable pair.

    This latest Christmas campaigh is almost accusatory - implying that someone knows something, and telling them off for not coming forward. Well, when they and their spineless friends can be bothered to get their collective skanky arses back to Portugal and do that reconstruction and answer some questions, then they can ask for help. Until then, I would like to invite them, very sincerely, to piss right off.

    Sorry. I shouldn't read the archives. It makes me so furious.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I hope the public are beginning to realise that it's not MONEY that the McCanns need to find Madeleine. If they were really looking for her and trying to solve the mystery, it's EFFORT and CO-OPERATION that's needed. That's all.

    ReplyDelete
  66. How I wish that the next time the distraught parents make one of their appeals a British newspapers would accompany it with the above photo, without any comment apart from its date.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Since this site is so free-speech oriented. Let's see if my comment remains. The dna evidence was inconclusive. Information has not been followed up on and who knows what's been withheld because the people thought it would all be dismissed.

    If it were my child, I would not have left her alone but at the same time, I would be fighting for every avenue of information to remain open and this book slams a few doors.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Bridget @ 64, how I love what you have written. It is the perfect summary of everything that is wrong with this awful pair.

    ReplyDelete
  69. A couple of social climbers who have been unsuccessful. There was a band wagon to be jumped on and people jumped on that band wagon. As time went on people started jumping off the said bandwagon. People talk about Brown and Blair being their friends - fair weather "friends" when they thought it would serve their purpose but closed the door in their face when reality struck. That can be clearly seen when the pink one complained about not getting an audience with the Queen (McBroon).

    No amount of spinning will make them anything other than a pair of no hopers.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Bridget, You have really captured the essence of this sickening pair.

    Vile.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Let's face it. It was more like leaving your kids at home, in the dark, with the door open, while you popped out to the pub's back garden, down the road. The McCanns must think people are stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Whoa, Bridget, no 64. Tell it like it is!! Fab post, could not agree more!!!

    ReplyDelete
  73. To anon 67:

    The book doesn't stop the parents from making a formal missing person's complaint to the British police, which is in their right. It certainly doesn't stop them from asking the case to be reopened in Portugal. Of course, they would have nothing to fear since, as they state, they have been completely "cleared of suspicion" by the PP. Instead, they prefer to rely on dodgy PIs and expect that it is the duty of the rest of the world's population to be out looking for their daughter when they could not even be bothered to get off their backsides on the night of 3 May and the following days.

    They are not good people, they do not hesitate to destroy anyone to save their sorry arses.

    Of course, certain information was not followed up after GA was taken off the case because it would have inevitably led to the parents and the case had to be shelved at all costs.

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  74. Reply to Post 33 - T4two

    You stated - "This is not Dr. Amaral's personal thesis which he has devised for the purpose of writing a book to make himself a fortune, it is a thesis arrived at by a team of experienced detectives and criminologists after careful study of all the known facts"

    Dr. Amaral was indeed one of those experienced detectives who studied the known facts.

    I think some people think he is a 'failed cop', someone who has jumped on the bandwaggon in order to write a book. It may have netted him a fortune, it may have flopped and earned him nothing. He did not know what the outcome would be when he wrote his book. Good luck to him.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Did any of you read already the English Gag?
    What is Amaral telling on it?

    ReplyDelete
  76. The following post I wrote in response to the discussions of the past week on the Sky Life of Crime board relating to the Madeleine case. Apologies in advance as it is lengthy.

    ----

    I see you have all been talking about which crime has been committed against Madeleine.

    If we are to believe that Madeleine woke and wandered out of the apartment, fell down a shaft for instance and has not been found, then the crime committed against this child, is that she, a minor child was left in an unlocked apartment, by her parents, that their reckless and irresponsible behaviour caused harm to come to the child- they neglected Madeleine Sean and Amelie’s right to be cared for and protected, under any Law in any country. They did so for 5 consecutive nights.

    They knowingly left the children in a vulnerable position, further endangering them by leaving a door unlocked so as Madeleine, their three year old daughter would be able to leave the apartment, go out into the night and search for them in a local bar. Clearly not giving a thought to the child’s safety either when she was in the apartment alone, or to what may happen to her as she, a sleepy child negotiated, tiled floors, narrow and steep tiled stairways leading to the street below.

    If indeed the child managed the aforementioned without coming to harm, we then had a little matter of a road with vehicular traffic. There was a chance of the child being taken by someone, especially, if we are to believe the McCann theory of abduction, paedophiles were gathering outside apartment 5a, circling as they dined “nearby!”

    Now isn’t it odd that the McCann’s expected a three year old child to wander the streets of PDL and search for them, to leave no stone unturned perhaps in HER efforts, yet they have not afforded the child this same courtesy-leaving a lot of questions in this case unanswered.

    The tapas group state that Kate McCann discussed at the dinner table, told them of what she and Gerry had done. – LEFT A DOOR UNLOCKED, so as their 3 YEAR old child could wander the streets in the dead of night. None of the tapas thought this odd or did a thing about it.

    That tells us an awful lot about every one of them who knew this. And clearly every one of them did! So did all of them only think of their own enjoyment, the welfare of the children not being a priority? It would take very cold hearted and callous persons to behave as they did.

    Speaking of cold hearted - I read recently for the first time Kate McCann’s diary, or part of. Most of it is with regards HER suffering, HER pain. She continues by speaking of Madeleine, states, IF Madeleine is suffering, IF they (she and Gerry) have caused her harm etc and tells Madeleine to be patient and stay strong, all very much about herself though, and how she is struggling to keep it together, yet she “asks” a three year old child, who she believes to be in the hands of paedophiles to ‘stay strong, be patient’ – words to this effect.

    This really didn’t come as any great surprise to me, but what I thought I may find and did not, was a mother expressing the DEEPEST regret for what she had done to her child, a mother asking FORGIVENESS.

    Cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  77. This week too, you have been speaking about confession.

    A devout catholic, would most certainly have gone to confession after the disappearance of their child in such circumstances. Father Pacheco may not have heard Kate or Gerry’s confession (I’m not speaking of confessing to a crime) but as I said, if they are Roman Catholics they would have ‘gone to confession.’ Devout Roman Catholics would not have spent all of those months in PDL (or anywhere) without having made a confession. To which priest they ‘confessed’ or the content of that confession?
    Back to the night Madeleine vanished, her parents said also that they had INCREASED the frequency of checks on the children that evening to half hourly.

    What was it on other evenings? 45 minutes an hour?

    That would explain why Mrs Fenn heard the child cry for such a long period of time.

    Now Kate and Gerry McCann can whimper and whinge until the cows come home that they ‘never thought an intruder would come into the apartment and commit this heinous crime which they have been peddling since around two minutes after Kate discovered Madeleine to have “vanished”
    or,
    that no one “told” them that there were paedophiles in the world.

    I have never heard so many lame excuses from two educated persons regarding THEIR neglect Of THEIR children.
    Their sickening comments since the disappearance of their daughter, indicate a clear disregard and lack of respect for the seriousness of what has happened to this child. A very lame ‘we’re sorry we were not there at that moment’ is the best they could muster.
    ‘Sorry they were not there at that moment? What in heaven’s name does that mean?

    That if they were there at that moment they could have shooed the intruder off and returned to the pub?

    God help us and save us!
    Ctnd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  78. Like every other parent on the planet what the McCann's DID KNOW was:

    The many dangers which could befall their children in their absence.

    That their children were prone to waking in the night, that when Madeleine did, she would get out of bed to find her parents seeking comfort, as young children do.

    They knew absolutely that this had happened the evening previous to Madeleine’s disappearance, and on other evening during that short holiday. Madeleine told them.

    The McCann’s confirmed on tv interviews that the children had been awake and crying on other evenings also.
    They THEN consciously decided it was BEST to go out dining AGAIN, leaving their children once more alone and very vulnerable to all sorts of dangers.

    They also left the door unlocked so that Madeleine would be able to leave on her own. They expected the child to come search for THEM! An irony in that!

    Many have spoken about the ‘mistake’ the McCann’s made.

    They did not make a mistake.

    Night after night, quite simply they endangered their children’s lives, further doing so on the night Madeleine disappeared, by expecting the child to, on her own step into the night and search for them.

    If you are honest with yourselves – Who in their right state of mind does this to three little ones?

    I know many here don’t like to hear this, but this is what is IN the police files, in their statements.
    It is not good enough to say ‘they made a mistake’ or ‘I don’t condone it but....’

    There should be NO buts!

    They failed their children, and anyone, but anyone who sits and states they just made a mistake, is failing these children also.

    Madeleine poor child has been failed horribly by her mummy and daddy and continues to be when bloggers and others pass off the fact she was not protected by her parents as being a mistake.

    What chance do children have in this world, if those who HARM them are protected? And that is exactly what has happened in this case.

    I quite honestly think those of you who say it was a mistake should hang your heads in shame also.

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  79. IF the McCann’s HAVE been truthful about how they left these children – ALONE IN AN UNLOCKED APARTMENT, unlocked so as their three year old could exit into the night they should, under any Law in any country be behind bars for this crime against these kids. And it is a crime, YOU can bet your boots on that.

    Excuse it if you will, but a crime was committed against all three McCann children. I have many times posted the Article of Abandonment under Portuguese Law which clearly indicates this crime. All the boxes we are able to ‘tick’ in the case of young Madeleine and her brother and sister.
    Now do we really believe that Kate and Gerry McCann left that door unlocked for Madeleine to leave?

    One has to question this, not firstly because it clearly shows a total disregard for the safety of their children and IS a crime if the children were left in this situation, but we have a little matter of the other statements made by them.

    One, that ‘Madeleine would NEVER leave the apartment on her own’

    Why then would the McCann’s say that they had left the door unlocked for Madeleine to leave, when they in fact knew that she would NEVER do this?

    Why spin this tale to ALL at the dining table in the tapas bar that evening?
    Now I personally don’t believe that patio door was unlocked, for any reason, least of all for a three year old child to wander the dark streets.

    Even those who protect the McCann’s surely cannot believe they left the door unlocked for this purpose?

    They, the McCann's would be the lowest of the low, scumbags, if they had expected their child to wander in the night alone.

    This is what they have stated.

    This is what they the McCann’s want us to believe. This is what they told ALL of their friends. This is what the friends have stated in their police statements.

    Those who protect them, if they believe this story, would have to then concede that the McCann’s committed a crime under Portuguese Law against these children.

    There is probably also a law which the rest of the group have broken, on the basis that they too KNEW, were fully aware of the vulnerable and dangerous environment the McCann children had been placed by their parents, and took no action to ensure the safety of the children..not forgetting their own.

    So definitely not a MISTAKE!

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  80. One has to ask then, if this door was not unlocked, but secured? If so, why would they tell us it was? More to the point, why would they state this at the dining table, BEFORE Madeleine’s “disappearance” had been “discovered.”

    There would have to have been a reason for this “lie?” Just as there had to be a reason for the lie told re the jemmied shutters and window. Just as there is a reason for any lie.

    One would have to ask also-

    HOW any caring parent knowing their children had been awake and crying on the night of 2nd May 2007 could possibly walk out that door again, leaving them as they did?

    HOW this worried and anxious mother (as we are told in the police files) could sit for 90 minutes and not check on her children, knowing she had left them in an unlocked apartment. Yet she allowed a stranger to her children (Oldfield) to access them.

    If Oldfield found them upset and crying what was he to do? Similarly, what was David Payne to do, if he had found Kate McCann in a muddle unable to cope with bathing her children and getting them ready for bed?


    You see it is the simple questions, those which take us right back to the beginning of that day which are crucial.

    This is where the clues as to what happened to this child lie.

    People have not been honest, that is evident from police statements and tv documentaries where the spoken word of ‘witnesses’ within this group have been heard by the public.

    One would be very naieve to not see this, or so hell bent on protecting the McCann reputation with regard child neglect that they choose not to see what is before their very eyes.

    Their statements don’t add up, that is for sure! Something is being covered up, that is for sure also.

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  81. As for the point made that the McCann’s have been cleared?

    Their arguida status was removed. This is a situation which could revert at any time depending on information gathered.

    Cleared of suspicion?

    They remain under suspicion, I have no doubt about that, and rightly so. Until what happened to Madeleine has been determined they will always remain ‘under suspicion’ any parents would face the same.

    The bizarre behaviour by this couple, on all counts, has greatly contributed to the public, and all else involved in this case being suspicious.

    Cleared of committing a crime against Madeleine, her brother, her sister?

    They have not, to date been charged with a crime against any of their three children, therefore cannot possibly have been cleared of any crime against them.

    Again, a situation which could change at any time based on information gathered.

    This is exactly why the public fail to understand why they did not do all in their power to keep the case open.

    If, I understand correctly before the case was shelved the McCann’s had the opportunity to request that it remain open before the ‘deadline.’ They did not make an attempt to do so.

    They failed to attend a police reconstruction.

    Kate McCann failed to answer many questions put to her by the police authority investigating the disappearance of her daughter.

    Of course it was within her right to do so.

    More importantly, it was Madeleine’s RIGHT to not have the investigation into her disappearance hindered by anyone, by anyone at all.

    For her own mummy to put a spoke in the wheels of justice, to allow a chance of the perpetrators being caught and her daughter being found to slip away, and to blatantly state when asked by police if she realised that she may be hindering the investigation –"‘if that is what the investigation thinks"

    What kind of mother is she? Monstrous in my opinion!

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  82. What were Kate’s words on the steps of the Court in Lisbon last week?

    ‘Madeleine is entitled to a PROPER search’

    Pity Kate did not think this when she refused to answer the questions put to her by the police in Portugal.

    Would it not have been PROPER for her to do so?

    A PROPER SEARCH included A criminal police reconstruction which each and everyone one of their friends said they found pointless.

    I ask you again, what type of people would find it POINTLESS exercise when a child was missing?

    It is enough to make you throw up.

    And before all of you who refuse to see what is in front of your nose begin to bleat - 'The PJ were setting them up’ spare the rest of us this drivel.

    As for saying that we would not know until we were in the same position if we would have answered the questions.

    I KNOW exactly what I would do for my son. I knew from the moment I saw him, held him in my arms.

    If in the same position as Kate McCann I would have done everything, gone to jail if that is what it took for people to take notice, I love my child more than life itself.

    So maybe some of you don't know what you would do in that position, but I have absolutely no doubt if my son was missing what I would do.

    The fact also. that this case has not been re-opened also shows us that the PI’s have never come close to finding any worthwhile information, and all of the snippets they throw the public are hype.

    As for Kate McCann being ‘justified’ in believing that abduction took place?

    There is absolutely no evidence, not a shred to justify that Madeleine was abducted. In fact, this theory is quite far- fetched to put it mildly.

    If Kate and Gerry McCann want to state this every day of their lives they can, no one to stop them.

    Others cannot be stopped from questioning the McCann theory, for questioning the events of 3rd May 2007, for questioning the lies and inconsistencies, of which there are many. Madeleine in owed this at the very least.

    Stop questioning, and the mystery of how Madeleine came to be missing will remain a mystery.

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  83. Her parent’s apparent reluctance to accept that anything other than their own ‘home grown’ abduction theory could have taken place is more than a little worrying. They base this on a ‘sighting’ by a friend, who states she saw a man carrying a child. No more than that. This same friend, along with others, knowing that Madeleine had disappeared, continued to withhold this crucial information for several hours after the child disappeared.

    WHY?

    More worrying still, a family of 4 adults, independent of the group of friends saw a man carrying a child of Madeleine’s description, the man resembled Gerry McCann, yet this is ignored.

    WHY?

    Something is very wrong in this case, people can make all the excuses in the world for the McCann’s and their friends, they can come on this board and make ridiculous statements in reference to those who wish to discuss and proffer opinion (on a board set up for this very purpose) accuse those who question as having no sympathy etc.

    This, only shows that these persons will go to any length to protect people who have shown such appalling treatment towards minor children, the McCann children and all of the children who holidayed with them in Portugal.

    To not question, fails not only Madeleine but all children like her, and there are many.

    Continue in this vein and there will be many more.

    What does that say about the society in which we live, when our children’s welfare and protection is not given priority over the protection afforded adults who commit crimes against our young?


    cntd

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  84. I don’t believe for an instant the McCann’s deliberately harmed Madeleine (Kate in her diary-speaking to Madeleine tells her that she and Gerry would not INTENTIONALLY harm her) but I don’t believe for an instant either that they left that door unlocked. I don’t believe Kate sat at that dinner table and announced to the group that Madeleine had cried the evening before, and further informed them that she and Gerry had left the door open for Madeleine to wander the streets of PDL in search of them. I don’t believe the shutter and window were open having been jemmied or otherwise.

    I believe that child woke as she normally did, and came to harm through an accident most likely.

    I go along with the ex police officer Stalker, when he said that they the McCann’s are hiding something.

    I go along with Ian also, when he said it may be ‘mundane,’ as in nothing dramatic in terms of crimes committed.

    We are at times on this blog accused of dramatising. I don't think that questioning is dramatising.

    The drama in this case has sadly been created by the McCann’s and all who are in their employ.

    We have PI’s telling us of lairs, which will take ten years to reach.

    We have ridiculous sightings, photofits of suspects, outrageous press conferences, statements made by Clarence Mitchell, which could be considered laughable if a missing child was not at the heart of this.

    We have McIntyre telling is about dry runs having taken place in the McCann apartment.

    On the day leading up to the disappearance, Kate telling us of Madeleine crying and that this could be due to the alleged abductor having been in the apartment the evening before. ( If Madeleine had cried the abductor would have silenced her with the chloroform we are to believe he carried)

    We are to believe windows were jemmied, then not, doors were locked, unlocked, and then locked maybe, unlocked but not used by McCann’s to enter apartment, then they were used for this purpose, changing once more to Gerry using the front door and Kate now not at the front door but the open patio door.

    We have tasteless online gift store in the name of Madeleine.

    We have a Fund which is continually running out of money, according to these people.

    Millions of GBP have been spent to no avail, all in the name of Madeleine. They tell us once more that the Fund ONLY has £500,000.00 left and this amount will see them through to the spring of 2010. Ah bless!

    Half a million pounds will be gone in a period of three or four months? Before asking for more of the public’s hard earned cash, perhaps they should give an absolute account of every single penny of where this ½ million is headed.

    If they know it will be gone by spring, they know where it is going.

    From what I can see so far in this case, it takes £1million pounds per year to fund the FUND!

    It would not be unreasonable to make available immediately to the public an account of what the £500,000.00 has been allocated to.

    If they hope for public donations, and when monies are being spent at such a rate, this should be made absolutely clear.

    If the McCann’s were to approach a bank and ask for a loan, they would be expected to detail the reason/purpose for the request of same. This is no different.

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  85. I was sad to read the snippet from the press article whic Sandra posted this morning re the McCann’s stating
    :
    ‘The couple said: “There is only one thing Madeleine wants this Christmas and that’s to be back home.”

    “There will be a spare place at the Christmas table again this year.

    If you know anything, do the right thing and help us fill it.”’
    ----

    Honestly, who writes this stuff for them? Clarence?

    If that wee mite is alive she won’t know the time of day, let alone that it is Christmas. She most likely by now will have forgotten them.

    So NO I don’t think she is sitting somewhere nice and cosy with a bunch of paedophiles, thinking that she would like to be home for Christmas!

    If alive and with paedophiles she will not be able to think past the next time she is to be tortured.

    As, for a “spare” place at their table? They truly beggar belief.

    It is time this pair ‘cut the cr-p, especially at Christmas!

    Who Are the McCann's........?

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  86. Joana and Astro,

    I must thank you for providing a board where discussion can take place free of the threats which those of us on the Sky board are subjected to on an almost daily basis. We appear to have a self appointed moderator. The following is one of the milder examples of this behaviour. Sky do remove these threatening comments.

    'Posted by: june on December 19, 2009 9:47 AM


    Hi Mod,

    The 11.32 reference is the post I considered libelous and wondered if the McCann legal team agreed, I have sent it away for perusal, I have screenshot , will let you see elsewhere.

    Putting it at bottom of the post merely shows contempt, true colours mod

    Like Ian , I wont partake in the gossip that is pick pick picking at the this family or the legal team, or their fund,

    It is entertainment for some on my opinion, if it were down to me, I would let it become totally anti and venomous, a matter then for Sky and the Mccann legal team, should opinion become dangerous....

    -----

    I thank you for allowing us the freedom to speak our minds, voice our opinions, and thank you also for the many interesting articles, bringing us news on this case which we otherwise, here in the UK would not hear.

    Have a Happy and healthy Christmastime one and all.

    Best Wishes
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  87. The thing I'm curious about is why Mrs M wrote in her diary about a drunk in the middle of the road who recognised Mr M. Mr M kindly took him back to some apartment, apparently. What was the reason for writing about this.

    ReplyDelete
  88. To Gerry McCann a new sports bag for Christmas

    ReplyDelete
  89. To the McCs their very own colouring book for Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Thank you AM for a very interesting post, as usual very readable and making complete sense! I too think Madeleine had an accident in the apartment, or on those outside steps whilst going to look for them. They found her when they arrived back from the tapas bar a bit worse for wear from drinks etc, tried to revive her as any doctors would (hence the evidence found by the sniffer dogs) and they straight away hatched a plot to get rid of her body so they wouldn't lose their twins and their reputation. After all, if she had died nothing was going to bring her back, so why should the other children suffer is what they felt I'm sure. The tapas pals agreed to go along with it to save their reputations and children too. They were all guilty of abandonment of minors and should have been arrested and their children put into care, or sent back to family in the UK until their cases were heard. The PJ's were guilty of letting them all board planes back to the UK, possibly due to pressure from the Blair government. They have had to continue to keep up a pretence of looking for her to cover themselves and make themselves look the victims instead of Madeleine!

    The Madeleine Fund and sales of wrist bands, tee shirts etc, and photos handed out all over the world, and numerous sightings, have made them appear victims of a paedophile abduction in the eyes of many, because that is what they want us to believe, but I think people are beginning to see the whole charade for what it is now.

    I believe it explains just why the Tapas pals have been as silent as the proverbial lambs!

    ReplyDelete
  91. "Who are the McCanns" - The McCanns are the C.E.O's of the McCann Corporation.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Nr. 16, at the beginning everybody trusted the McCanns.
    Nowadays everybody mistrusts them, even when they go to the loo.
    None of us in Portugal can believe they are acting honestly, whatever they do.
    They make me think of the story of the little boy screaming for help,making up that he was being attacked by a wolf.

    To lie and to cheat on are the McCanns second nature.
    Can you understand that we all lost our confidence on them and that
    we even see their visit to the church of Luz as a performance?
    We can't help it and it is not our fault.

    ReplyDelete
  93. nr.87, the McCanns wanted to show us how human they are.
    You wrote "a drunk" and I think you meant "a drunk man".

    To tell you the truth, I believe they made up this story.
    Nobody will ever find this drunk person, to witness he ever saw the McCanns.

    They are compulsive liers, 87, they are compulsive liers.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Shame on you, Clarence Mitchell. Are your kids proud of you? How much money have you personally made from this tragedy? Imagine buying your kids Christmas presents with money made from a missing child who made be dead. You will have to answer for the things you've done one day, Clarence. You can be sure of that!

    ReplyDelete
  95. IMO Jim Gamble also has a lot to answer for. If he is not willing to say what he knows willingly he should be FORCED to do so!

    ReplyDelete
  96. A Miller.... Probably the single most honest, sincere and intelligent post I have ever read on this subject.
    Excellent analogy.

    ReplyDelete
  97. I don't beleive they would have caused any harm intentionally to Madeleine, but I do beleive they know what happend and just panicked to save their own skins.
    Their strange behaviour and conflicting statements did nothing but arouse suspicion.
    They have brought it all on themselves and are on a merry-go-round they can't get off.

    ReplyDelete
  98. The episode with the drunk man they took back to his apartment is to justify their being seen going into a block of apartments in Praia da Luz. Unfortunately, this was one of the strange occurrences that was not investigated by Paulo Rebelo.

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  99. The McCanns would do well to remember the old saying:

    "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time"

    ReplyDelete
  100. Who are the Mccann's?
    The Mccann's are a couple which start on the same point, as arguidos, if the case will be re-openned. This justify why they runaway from re-opening the case.
    More then 2 years after the disapearence of their daughter, they still and remain the only suspects - THIS IS A FACT!!!

    ReplyDelete
  101. A late answer to no 59 above ; I personally have no proof. But I remember it being mentioned on the 'old' the3arguidos site. Sorry to have such paltry information, but it has stayed in my mind as something unusual.

    ReplyDelete
  102. The Mccann's are a couple which I saw, one day in July 2007, in an Albufeira hotel, leaving a professional Box ( Beautifull Fund " Findmadeleine" Box), looking for donnations, in the hall entrance.
    I did not notice pain or sadness. I saw happy faces and I heard from the people working at the hotel that this is a common atittude from that couple and they get angry and show it to the workers, if the donnations were not as good as they aspected.
    People watched that behaviour with a great shock and a question flying in our minds... What make a couple of doctors act like that, if they believe their daughter was abducted and a huge team of polices, which include the british police sended by G. Brown, were working on their case? THE DEBTS OR A WELL PLANNED PROGRAME OF POLICE DESCREDIBILIZATION, if for some reason they find the truth? I think BOTH!!!
    On that day, July 2007, I start not paying attention anymore to the little girls, I stop helping the search for Madeleine, I start not believing on that couple which invited the Media in well planned press conferences to show green and yellow bracelets, to pretend to show a pain which we did not saw when they were out of the Tv spotlights. In private, they just want and look for money. Will be a good exercise to compare Mccann's debts before May 3, 2007 and now, since we know... the quality of the hotels changed from night to day.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Anon 102 - I`m shocked to read that the McCanns placed a donation box in a hotel - I wonder how many other places they put these? There is no end to their arrogance.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  104. The McCanns have posted a new clearly deluded message on their website.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Dear Kate and Gerry, as you have 'been cleared of all suspicion' by the Portuguese police and as you say "we played no part in the disappearance of our beautiful daughter Madeleine" you must be delighted that both the PJ and you agree on the case so far. Therefore as they have reached the correct assumption and are in agreement with you so far I am puzzled why you don't ask for the case to be reopened? What a shame when it is quite clear, don't you agree, that they were coming to the correct conclusions, that the case has been archived...doesn't make sense does it Kate & Gerry? You simply must insist it is reopened as it is so unfair, particularly at this seasonal time, to expect me, a mother, with young children to have to help your PI's do the work that, I think you and I now agree, the PJ were doing admirably and for free...now you really must insist...after all you and the twins really would like her at the table in time for Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  106. A Millar, an excellent post - bravo! One thing in particular I agree with is your assertion that the abduction theory is quite far-fetched, also that we mustn't stop questioning as to do so would let down not only Madeleine but possibly other children too.

    The abduction theory is just that - a theory. There's no proof for it, which is why the official summing-up mentioned the other theories, any of which could turn out to be true. Jane Tanner's account of seeing someone carrying a child is proof of nothing, certainly not of abduction - how could it be? Jane Tanner, according to Gerry McCann, couldn't even tell which side of the road he and Jez Wilkins were standing on as she walked past them - what does that say about JT's powers of observation?

    The other theories about what might have happened to Madeleine need to be discussed and questions need to be asked until the truth is uncovered. We have to say we don't know what happened to her, the PJ say they don't know what happened to her, the Portuguese prosecutor says he doesn't know what happened to her, the McCanns say they do know - but how could they? To know what happened to Madeleine you'd have had to be there in the apartment when she was taken out of it, simple as that, otherwise how could you know? The McCanns say they weren't there, so there is no way they can possibly know.

    The discussion about this case will continue until Madeleine's fate is known for certain and justice achieved for her. Her parents should be glad that so many people are determined to make sure that happens, that they won't forget her or give up trying to find out exactly what happened to her. Too many times children have disappeared and after a while are forgotten about, but this is one case that has attracted so much attention that Madeleine's parents can rest assured we won't forget, not ever, about her. I'd like to think they're grateful for this and also for the petition where so many people are calling for the PJ to reopen the case. I hope they and their friends all add their names to the petition, so that the case can be reopened asap.

    ReplyDelete
  107. My parents,84 and 83, searched for Madeleine a horrible amount of times during the first month. They live outside Lagos and they went to Luz and Praia da Luz every day till the day they were warned by employés of a super market, who told them they were suspecting the parents as being involved in Madeleine's disappearence.
    And that the Mccanns themselves and their families and friends did nothing to search for her.
    This story was already known in Luz and Praia da Luz and it soon reached Lagos and Portimão.
    People were even commenting in the Luz church when they went to the Sunday service.
    The fund and the trip to the Pope were enough for all those people to conclude it was a very odd story.
    And they stopped searching for the girl.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Anon at 102

    Interesting first hand account of this couple.

    The Portuguese and everybody else this pair solicit money from for their so called search, should tell them to get lost until they can prove there ever was an abduction.

    They really have been taking liberties.

    Liberties they don't want extended to other people, but to silence those to disagree with their abduction fair story.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I applaud you A MILLER ,what excellent posts ,each and every word EXACTLY as I myself see it ...Its just such a crime that the powers that be do not choose to see it ,until they do Maddie can never rest in peace

    ReplyDelete
  110. Wonder how much Gerry's brother gets paid from the Fund?

    If the McCanns are able to get access to Sr Amaral's financial affairs, are we allowed to know that?

    And would it be a shock or a surprise.

    ReplyDelete
  111. A.Miller,

    You are a gem. Keep writing, please.

    F. Finland

    ReplyDelete
  112. Thank you Joana and Astro for such a lot of work helping finding the truth.
    We follow everything you publicise.
    We wish you a Happy Christmas and success in this case.

    Greetings from a group people from the
    VU hospital in Amsterdam.

    ReplyDelete
  113. I hope people which for a moment saw that pair and got surprised with their strange attitudes, will share that feelings and facts with the world, via Internet. The world should know that in the Algarve and almost in all portugal, people did not believe on any abduction, since early days after Maddie went missing. Even before the PJ made them arguidos and much, much before any book was written, people start not looking anymore to the little girls and stop searching Maddie or her supposed abductor.
    If you went to Algarve on your holidays and ask or talk with locals about that case, the sentiment it is generalised- Their is NO ANY POSSIBILITY OF A LITTLE GIRL BEING TAKED FROM A ROOM IN PDL, by a strange. the town is very quite, with a good reputation and May is a calm month with few tourists. Nobody will take a risk of targeting a girl in a so small town where every strange will be noticed. On top of that, some parents attitudes were so strange that made all their story unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
  114. There's a book titled vanished by an author named Danny collins,he believes that Madeleine woke up sometime during that fateful evening and wandered out of apartment 5a and fell down some shaft/drain,i wondered why the dreadful Mccanns aren't suing him for disagreeing with their version of events like they are suing Amaral,then i read the foreword by the said author and he is/has donating/ed 15% of the proceeds from the sale of the book to the McCanns lifestyle fund,sorry i mean 'Find madeleine Fund',i believe the McCanns are protected because they and people on high have something on each other,what's puzzling to me is why the press and media are not doing their job when it comes to these pair and their tapas pals,i remember the Express was quite hard on the McCanns at the beginning,but like the other papers now toe the 'Abduction'line.

    ReplyDelete
  115. It's outrageous that anyone should be allowed to try to force their own views about a crime down the throats of everyone else. What sort of dictatorship do the McCanns think they live in? When there is proof Madeleine was abducted I'm sure both they and the PJ will inform us all of the fact, but until then no one can be forced to believe it. If the McCanns can't see this for themselves then they're not intelligent people, because that's the way it is.

    We were all asked by Shannon Matthews' mother to believe Shannon had been abducted, when in actual fact her mother knew all along where she was. The American people were asked recently to believe a little boy had sailed off in a balloon when in fact his family knew he was safely in their own house. Do the McCanns really think the public should have been forced to believe these two stories, just because they're what the parents themselves said? How utterly ridiculous! When a child has disappeared and there are various theories about what might have happened to him/her, the public must be allowed to have their own views on the matter. How on earth would the police ever catch criminals if they have to believe everything they're told?

    ReplyDelete
  116. This Danny Collins must be mad thinking that there unprotected shafts and drains all over Praia da Luz. And what a bad luck that only Maddie fell in one of them. Give me a break!!!

    ReplyDelete
  117. Just a question - someone may know the answer to this.

    The Tapas restaurant had a take-away service. Did anyone ever question the McCanns as to why they didn't take advantage of this ? They could have eaten in their own apartment.

    ReplyDelete
  118. 115.
    I have written to several newspapers saying that it is unfair to readers if only the McC side of the story is printed and comments are not allowed from readers with a different point of view. I have not received any replies so far.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Louise, 103, if I am not mistaken even Amaral speaks about the box for money, in hotels.
    I don't remember if he tells it on his first book or during an interview.
    I think the book.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Let's say that the child died from a fall and the parents reported the accident to the police. If this was the case would the parent's career really be affected, would they serve jail time in Portugal? I say no. The same people that intervened to get them out of the mess they were in when they reported their daughter being abducted, would do the same if they had reported the child's death to the police. If they had to they would concoct some story to explain her death and off to England they go. The reason I believe they disposed of the child's body was because the autopsy would probably reveal some kind of abuse, perhaps chronic use of sedatives, or physical trauma.

    Whatever one thinks you must admit they immediately had a plan in place. They immediately turned their daughter's death into a business venture. They portrayed themselves as devout catholics, their own parents were surprised by their sudden religiosity, and as victims of incompetent police thugs. What their behaviour tells me is that they really didn't care about their daughter.

    ReplyDelete
  121. To add to A Miller's list...

    Isn't it extremely odd that although their closest friend is said to have seen the abduction take place, and all of the Tapas 9 give that sighting great credence, that no concerted search was organised by the McCanns or their friends along the route allegedly taken by the abductor. Surely these intelligent doctors and professionals would have organised a search in that direction, knowing time was of the essence. They would be looking in hedgerows, unoccupied buildings, banging on vans, calling out her name asking people if they'd seen the man carrying the child.

    But,despite the fact that Jane Tanner immediately told people in the Tapas 9 group at 10pm what she had seen and how she now immediately realised it must have been Madeleine being carried away, no such concerted search was organised. All we have is people hanging around the apartment, going down to the beach, going here and there.

    Can anyone make sense of that? I can't.

    ReplyDelete
  122. They could not have done that Bridget at 117, because they were 'so into each other' as Kate put it.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Interesting that the CEOP appeal says "increases the anguish of Madeleine's family and friends and increases the risk to other children".
    The text does not refer at all to the increasing Madeleine's suffering,fear, lonesomeness.
    As a matter of fact, it does not show any believe the child is still alive. It does not say they believe they will find her .It is not even trying to find her.
    They know she is dead and everything is concentrate on the person who knows or strongly suspect who the offender is.
    The goal of the appeal is to protect other children and to catch the offender because there is no hope for the little girl.
    At no second Jim Gamble talks about finding Madeleine, during his interviews, sitting beside the Mccanns.
    For him, for the CEOP and for us all Madeleine is past tense.
    No word about protecting Madeleine because the CEOP knows there is no Maddie anymore and we all got to concentrate ourselves on getting a confession out of the offenders, saving other children's lives.
    Citing Martin Brunt, Skynews: "Whoever took Madeleine could strike again".
    I wish we would know how many percent possibilities a child sex offender could strike again, in 2,5 years.
    From the beginning the Mccanns were convinced Maddie was taken by paedophiles and they could be right.
    Joana, the CEOP must know an answer for this question.
    I believe they have a very good administration about this.
    Maybe you could ask them for us. As ownor of a blog, they will be happy to inform you.
    The person(s) who is close to the offender got to know it.

    ReplyDelete
  124. McCann Blog -18th December 2009

    They state:

    “The FACTS AND EVIDENCE say: Madeleine is still missing and there is a very real likelihood that she is alive.”

    ----

    Well it most certainly is FACT that Madeleine is missing. Where is the EVIDENCE to say that she is likely to be alive?

    They continue:

    “We can ASSURE you that we will never stop looking for Madeleine and our resolve will not weaken, no matter what challenges are put in our way. We are prepared to pursue ALL avenues IF it is felt to be of BENEFIT to Madeleine.”

    ----

    An interesting statement to make.

    They appear to have dropped the ‘no stone unturned’ phrase in favour of ‘pursuing ALL avenues.’

    Unfortunately, in both cases, the ‘stones’ and the ‘avenues’ they turn or go down, only will happen, ‘IF’ they feel it is of BENEFIT to Madeleine.

    They didn’t feel that to do the Criminal reconstruction as requested by the Portuguese Police was of benefit to Madeleine -'pointless' in their estimation! Nor did they feel to answer all questions put to them by police was of benefit to Madeleine. Nor did they themselves feel it necessary to physically search for their missing child in those first early days, when local Portuguese people, holidaymakers from all over the world searched.

    So no, they can attempt to "assure" us ‘til their hearts content, but in the present cirucumstances with only Private Investigators on the case, and based on their past decisions and judgements as to what IS of ‘benefit’ to Madeleine, I don’t find it re-assuring at all when there is no official police authority investigating.

    I would find it more re-assuring if I knew that they were doing all in their power to have the case re-opened.

    That said, it is not the public who have to be re-assured of anything, it is Madeleine, IF alive, who needs assurances and it was Madeleine who needed assurances on that holiday in Portugal that her mummy and daddy would be there at all times to keep her, Sean and Amelie safe. To comfort them when they need to be comforted.

    They finish by saying:

    "Merry Christmas to all of Madeleine's supporters and our best wishes for a very good and peaceful 2010."

    --

    Another, to me, odd statement to make.

    'Merry Christmas to Madeleine SUPPORTERS? '

    Make of it what you will, I know what I think of it

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  125. Guerra, I'm not sure they will got the same support from British government if they report the dead to the police. I think, when the mccann's arrived to portugal they were just a normal and ordinary pair of doctors in England, same as thousand of others. It was their plan which made them powerful. They foolish and ludybriate the British government and the British authorities by involving the British Ambassador, the Portuguese Minister of justice and the head of PJ on the minute one. After that, even the top in the governments get confused because they don't know exactly who they are and don't want to do something which can be used by the public as a lake of support to parents which just lost a child in mysterious circumstances. When they realize the mistake and the error, it was already too late to avoid a naive stamp on their foreheads. Then.... the only way is to feed the farce and let it go with the British government slowly and carefully jumping out. This is what happened late in September. When the Mccann's arrived in England, they try a meeting with G. Brown, which was frontally refused. Every step done by the mccann's to contact somebody, was strongly denied and if we look back, even the more active members of Mccann's family, like ant Phill, step back and hibernate. WHY? BECAUSE THE MCCANN'S WERE JUST ORDINNARY DOCTORS WHICH MADE A WELL PLANNED CRIME AND LIVE ON FRAGILLE BALLOON OF FAME AND POPULARITY. EVERYTHING CAN BLOW-UP IMMEDIATLY WHEN THE MONNEY FINNISH IN THE FUND AND THAT VIP LAWYERS HAVE TO MAKE A HUGE DECISION- Still defending two criminous in a crime which involve a child, for free, or jump out before the giant wave reach the cost, even because their is no more money to compensate fabulously, the risk.
    Now, in Portugal, Mccann's case is not anymore Maddie case. It is a vehicle used by Socrates and the PS on their own profits, to intimidate and frame judges and PJ on cases where their names were involved. It is used as an example to try to punish who wants to bring troubles and touch the supposed untouchable Boys of PS.
    If you can, read "Contos Proibidos: Memórias de um PS desconhecido", de Rui Mateus, – fundador e ex-responsável pelas relações internacionais do PS, até 1986 – faz-nos perceber como é diferente a justiça em Portugal e noutros países da Europa.

    ReplyDelete
  126. 121, it is me,121.
    I had forgotten the word statistics.
    Statistics about how often a child abuser strikes and if he definitely strikes after or even in less than 2.5 years, after he abused a child.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Socrates is showing a desperate behaviour on his strategy to frame and involve the President in polemical situations. The PM is loosing the sense and day after day, even the most fanatic supporters from the public, start knowing who he is.... and start feeling disappointed with his prepotential behaviour.
    The Mccann's should be careful on their tentative to discredit and target Amaral. Portugal, today, is faraway from what had been Portugal on may 2007 or September 2007, or even on the last elections. People HATE all PORTUGUESE MCCANN'S LAWYERS and show that on all free and open comments on all NEWSPAPER SITES. People don't buy Mccann's stories anymore.... They will need GOD AS ADVISER TO CONVINCE THE SCEPTICS AND INTELLIGENT PORTUGUESES ABOUT THEIR FABULOUS AND FANTASTIC FAIRYTALES. Off-Course, God will be not available to still feeding the farce. YOUR STORY MCCANN'S WILL SHUT DOWN, TOGHETER WITH THE UNQUALIFIED STORIES SURROUNDING PORTUGUESE PM AND HIS BOYS. The time is coming... dark, to give a voice to all the silences.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Anon 110
    NOW THAT WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING
    Why has the "clever media" never picked up on the Fund or why haven't they questioned John Mccann packing in his well paid job to work full time for the "Fund" this to me was the first sign Maddy was never going to come back.
    You dont have to be a rocket scientist to work that out do you.

    Why are the Mccanns sat at home waiting for Maddy to walk in the door to spend the Christmas with them, when they know she is within 10 miles of PDL as they believe, why are they not crawling the streets of PDL trying to find her...............says it all really.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Good morning, Fernis #116,
    I believe there were road works going on in Luz at that time, there were lots of open holes to do some repair work in drains or other underground structures. It was said that most of those holes were filled up the next day or so, maybe that's what the author means. Well, for me it is a bit far fetched too, I believe the workers would have noticed anything unusual there, before starting to fill up the holes, but one never knows, anything is possible. If he really meant storm drains or sewage drains, it is a possibility, I'm not sure those were properly searched, just think of that poor child in New Zealand.


    And good morning to youn too, Bridget #117,

    Good point! I think it was what they did after May 4th, they had their meals inside. I watched a video of a worker of the Ocean Club saying just that, that they and whoever was staying with them, from that day on, ordered in their meals, FREE OF CHARGE, courtesy of
    Mark Warner. Oh, and what lavish meals those were, seafood washed down with fine red wine.

    ReplyDelete
  130. "There´s only one thing Madeleine wants this Christmas - and that´s to be back home." It isn´t just sick, I´m beginning to feel embarrassed for them! How can the media publish such garbage?

    ReplyDelete
  131. In the apartment all Hell has broke loose,
    But to call the Police would be of no use.
    Gerry McCann is heard to mutter
    "Some bastard must have jemmied the shutter"
    Jane saw a geezer who had no face
    Carry Madeleine away from the place.
    Their reaction therefore might seem funny
    Let's ring Sky News and make some money.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Anon 129,

    Even if there were any repair works, they would have been duly protected (as the law requires) to prevent accidents. IMO an hypothesis highly improbable. As you said, the workers would have noticed any anomaly. And again, the author forgets the dogs (unless he doesn't believe them).

    ReplyDelete
  133. There on the first page of their site are the immortal words ''There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Madeleine has been harmed''

    Have you ever heard parents of a missing child make an appeal like that? If she hasn't been harmed, leave her where she is then. She's clearly safer than she would be with her parents.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Witnessess in this case were interfered with by PIs. Look at Jeremy Wilkins, Paul Gordon and the Smith family. I'm sure there are more examples.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Post 118 and others writing about the British media.
    If this is the effect that super-injunctions have had on media reporting, Jack Straw needs to get a move-on with his bid to alter the libel laws of this country.

    ReplyDelete
  136. When the McCs graciously decline to take the money for interviews, saying it will go the the Find Madeleine fund, they should be forced to explain that this is not a charity and to declare who the directors are.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Anonymous 125, you are fooling yourself when you say the McCanns are just ordinary doctors. They were well connected to influential people in England before this incident occurred. A person on this blog once commented that he saw Gerry McCann's brother say with a wry smile that Mr. McCann was owed many favours and that it was time to cash in on those favours. Given the accusations throughout the internet that Gordon Brown was pulling the strings for the McCanns, it was no wonder that articles were written saying that he was refusing to meet with them. These articles were written to distance Gordon Brown from the McCanns but in reality he remains a staunch supporter be it of his liking or necessity. Do you not remember that when Mr. Rebelo showed up in England to question the Tapas group that the McCanns went to the European parliament accompanied by British politicians, which included Mr. Miliband? If Mr. Brown was not supporting them would he have allowed this? Do you not remember how justice Hogg proclaimed the innocence of the McCanns, who were still "arguidos" at the time, in a court setting? Would she have risked disbarment for ordinary doctors that had no political support? Of course not. In my opinion Mr. Socrates finds himself between a rock and a hard place, to save his neck he must do the bidding of the British. When the Freeport case is mentioned in the news lately they say it is in limbo in England, why? Well let me venture a guess. I say that once the McCanns get a favourable verdict in the case against Mr. Amaral, you will hear in the news that the Freeport case is officially closed.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Fernis, #132, with all due respect, for discussion sake, and for my great shame as a portuguese person, those kind of works, and most of the construction works that are done all over Portugal, break the law when it comes to obeying and enforcing security measures. Making sure all is done by the book is not our "forte",we go with the "desenrascanço" and the "deixa-andar", if you understand portuguese, sorry, I have no idea how to translate that.
    Some years ago we had a terrible case of a little boy who fell down one of those drain shafts while he and his parents were walking by the river side in Barreiro or Alcochete, it was on the Tagus south bank, I can't remember exactly. There had been works going on, but that shaft was left open, someone forgot to put the lid on and seal it. I remember there was a long battle in the courts to establish responsibilities. So, there you have it, in a perfect world all the rules would be followed and nothing would be left to chance, but Portugal is far from being perfect and a lot is left to chance, people don't take pride in their low pay, long hour jobs, they are fed up witht heir lives and are not willing to go the extra mile to ensure all is done right.
    But, make no mistake about it, I DO BELIEVE 100% in the dogs findings, but I accept that the above could have happened, if it weren't for the dogs and the forensics.

    ReplyDelete