21 January 2010

Euro Weekly News: Gaspars on David Payne odd Behaviour



Section: British Press

McCanns defend their action against detective

Gerry McCann defended his legal action against a detective who led the investigation into his daughter's disappearence, saying his book had damaged the search for Madeleine. He spoke to reporters as he left a court in Lisbon on the second day of a hearing at which former police chief Gonçalo Amaral is attempting to overturn a ban on his book, which questions the McCanns' account of what happened to Madeleine.

Gerry flew home after the second day of the trial and Kate was joined by Fiona Payne, a member of the so-called Tapas seven group of friends.

However there have been worrying reports regarding her husband, David, who was also amongst the group. Dr. Katherine Zacharias Gaspar told Leicestershire Police on May, 16, 2007, [report was only sent to the PJ on 24 October 2007] that she and her husband were friends of the McCanns and went on holiday with them and the Paynes in September 2005. During this holiday an incident stuck in her mind.

"I was sitting between Gerry and David and I think both were talking about Madeleine (...). I remember David saying something to Gerry about "she", meaning Madeleine 'would do this'. While he mentioned the word 'this', David was doing the action of sucking one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, while with his other hand he was doing a circle around his nipple (...). I remember being shocked by that."

Gerry also told reporters outside the court that there is 'absolutely no evidence' that Maddie is dead, after the testimonies of three members of the Portuguese Police expressed their suspicions of her death during the hearing.


in Euro Weekly News, 21st to 27 January 2009, Costa Blanca - Edition 1281 (page 10) & Mallorca [where the odd events took place in 2005] - Edition 1281 (page 16)


Congratulations to the first British newspaper [even though it's a Spanish edition] for the editorial decision of mentioning the Gaspar's statements.


237 comments:

  1. Have just sent this to Sky News..money says they won't touch it. But they at least now know its out there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This being printed could be a very significant development.
    I wonder what Carter Ruck's stance will be?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just noticed in the middle of Perverts and a sick game...

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/

    Time to go a step further..'H' needs our help....I think his timing could not be better...Everything comes to those that wait....MITCHELL

    ReplyDelete
  5. Alleluya!!! Alleluya!!! It happened! Well, it was just a question of time. and the opportunity is just perfect! As we have said before, the genie is out of the bottle and it is now going wild. OK, as Joana says it's a Spanish edition, but let us see which is the first newspaper in Britain to publish the Gaspar's declarations. I think this is a huge step forward!

    ReplyDelete
  6. @ post #3, you couldn't ask for better positioning, could you ;))

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think I should tell the Express also..they like to be first with the news..

    ReplyDelete
  8. If the Payne statement becomes knowledge there is little point in going forward with the libel case...This information that was held back could have been vital to the case..Or maybe it was nothing ..a misunderstanding...the fact that it was held back makes one think otherwise..What will Payne do now sue the Gaspars will Mccann?..Joana can you TWITTER this...????I can think of no other way to get this out there.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ludicrous!

    Bem, brincadeiras à parte, já é um começo.Não me parece que isto se consiga esconder do grande público por muito mais tempo...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dr. Katherine Zacharias Gaspar told Leicestershire Police on May, 16, 2007, [report was only sent to the PJ on 24 October 2007]

    ------

    I cannot imagine that Dr Katherine Gaspar (unless she has an axe to grind)would have taken lightly, the decision to make such a statement to the police against fellow medical professionals and acquaintances.

    Two questions:

    Why did it take so long for this information to be sent by police here in the UK to the Portuguese?

    Was there, to anyone's knowledge, in the police files details of these "allegations" by Dr Katherine Gaspar, being investigated in any way by the police here in the UK?

    Not a matter which should be overlooked by the authorities, nor was it information which should been withheld for any reason, quite the contrary.

    I'll make this three questions if I may?

    Anyone know if the McCann's or the Payne's have made any statement in this regard by way of refuting, or by way of explanation for this rather 'odd' shall we say, behaviour allegedly displayed by Gerry and Dave?

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.euroweeklynews.com/virtual-newspaper/

    The euroweekly is the largest distribution in Spain for the English...This is placed in every bar,restaurant, cafe...

    ReplyDelete
  12. At last its out there - what a relief !
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank you Joana for bringing this to our attention and the positioning of the article is perfect. Let's hope other papers step up to the plate and print this important information.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon 3,

    A sick game: McCanns defend their action against detective. Perverts not yet jailed!

    You got it! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Gosh, Gerry, when are you finally emigrating to Siberia?

    ReplyDelete
  16. dear ironside, it's already on twitter and on facebook, just make RT on twitter or share it using the sharing bookmarklets bellow the post.

    dear Anne, about the UK Police I can't answer, what I know is that the Gaspars statements were not followed up by any of the Police forces investigating the case; and as far as I recall, during the last three years, David and Gerry never denied Katherine's statement.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Of course Maddy wouldn't have been very old in Sept 2005, about two-and-a-half by my calculation. I'm not a parent, not much experience of toddlers, so maybe someone can help me? At what age would a child be expected to give a believable account of something bad that had happened to them? I've also heard that girls under 4 generally can be more articulate than boys but again I don't know much about this.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Joana they may have not denied ...more to the point they have never mentioned it..Time for ALL cards on the table and stop hiding in the shadows...It is time for the Truth..

    Glad you have twittered

    ReplyDelete
  19. At last! The s**t will really hit the fan now. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Tiny Tears gets wind of this news. If CM has jumped ship, i bet he's a happy bunny right now. If this news should hit the UK press the McTw**s will have to cancel the bunfest, can't imagine any celebs wanting to be tarred with that brush.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh my, that's brave! I doff my cap to the Euro Weekly News.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Have just copied this to the children's publicity department at Bloomsbury.com ref their author JK Rowling.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 17, police have gotten tecnics to overhear a child. I even have known a very young girl suffering of Down syndrom, who could explain the police a crime against her mother.

    A 2.5 years old child can tell a lot, even a 2,3-like my daughter could have done if she would have seen a serious accident.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am absolutely gobsmacked that this has finally been printed for all to see in English. It did appear in the Correio da Manhã the Saturday before the case was shelved in 2008. It was said that the Stuart Prior had come to Portugal to prevent information about paedophiles being made public in the police files.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  24. It would be interesting to find out who the reporter was and whether or not he/she, via their contacts, could infiltrate a newspaper here.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Churchill

    This is not the beginning of the end but the end of the beginning.

    Freedom of speech is coming to the British media.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I have noticed that on the bottom of the page it days 21-27 january 2009, but then when i zoom the page it says 2010?
    is this from this year or not?
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  27. I wonder if GM will still be invited to the CEOP conference next week now this has happened. `Himself` has already complained to CEOP (under the Clarence Mitchell article) :-

    http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  28. Like how the article is inbetween. "Perverts jailed" and "A sick game" Wonder if that was planned or a mere coincidence :D

    ReplyDelete
  29. thank you god thank you god lets now hope we see proper justice for this sweet little angel and thank you joana for bringing it to us

    ReplyDelete
  30. 24, it is not a question of infiltrate the British media.
    I bet British journalists know much more about Kate, Gerry and Payne than we know outside England.
    But they are not allowed do publish it.
    Do you think those journalists spent all theses years without investigating all by themselves?
    They really must know a lot, but a lot and they are waiting for the opportunity to come forward with the whole story.
    They must be extremely well informed about Tapas 9 because they all live in England.

    ReplyDelete
  31. if this is true and i have no doubt it is
    WHAT A DIRTY PAIR OF BUGGERS

    ReplyDelete
  32. I will try and see if I can find out who the reporter is..Having said that if I do I shall fear putting it on here in case he or she is Carter Rucked...but then that would be down to the Editor...Will see what i can find out. I want to shake their hand.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I have read the Gaspar statements online on and off since they were available to read. Each time my stomach churns at the thought of an adult talking about a child and behaving in such a manner. This should be in the UK Press/Media. Why is it not?? Dr GA imo is right when he says:

    "Three days of court hearings have been enough to cause more damage to the McCann couple’s cause all over the world, than my book during the 14 months that it was in the shops"

    http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/01/trial-has-already-caused-more-damage.html

    KM said in a Jane interview she trusted her friends 100%. How could any parent with an abducted child trust anyone 100%?

    BRAVO EURO WEEKLY NEWS! BRAVO!

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think we should also send a copy to the CEOP...lets strike while the irons hot.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If the CEOP conference goes ahead with Gerry after this then there is something very far wrong. Wonder if the £150 a head anniversary dinner will be scrapped too. Who in their right minds would go along to a dinner after hearing this?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Post 22, thanks for the reply, makes you wonder whether anything was said to one of those "now you see 'em now you don't" creche workers.

    ReplyDelete
  37. can anyone remember the name of the woman who offered the mcs support at the very time Maddie was reported missing?

    I can recall reading that she had some 30 years experience in child protection in England -anyway she was shooed away by GM or tHe TAPAS group.

    She did give a statement, I think to the PJ -again I cannot recall the link in the case files-where she said that David Payne whom she saw at the scene was familiar to her either as a witness/suspect etc in work she had been involved in .

    She was shown a photo of him by the police during this interview -and identified him as the person she remembered from her past work .

    Of course as a doctor this could very well be above board-but I wonder whether anyone has followed up this statement in view of what the gaspars have said?

    rwt

    ReplyDelete
  38. Post 26, anyone know how to get this onto Branson's desk? IMO Bloomsbury and Warner Bros would have to be nuts to let Rowling go to the Kensington knees-up.

    ReplyDelete
  39. JOANA CAN YOU CHECK IF THIS IS TRUE....WITH MR:AMARAL...

    Just received this reply from the BBC..


    Dear xxxxxx Thanks for your e-mail regarding 'East Midlands Today'. I understand that you have concerns regarding a recent broadcast involving Gonçalo Amaral. On Tuesday 12 January 2010, BBC East Midlands Today reported former Portuguese police detective Gonçalo Amaral's comment in response to correspondent Mike O'Sullivan's question, "Is your book hurting the McCanns?". We believe that we accurately reported his response but having been made aware of claims that a mistranslation occurred, 'East Midlands Today' asked Mr Amaral personally to clarify his comment thus covering all sides of this issue and affording Mr Amaral a full right of reply. On the programme on Thursday 14 January, correspondent Mike Sullivan in Lisbon explained that Mr Amaral's lawyer was reportedly denying the four-letter outburst. To attempt to fully clarify matters, Mr Amaral himself was also asked directly about the matter and claimed that he had not talked to our reporter, that he had said "nothing", and also claimed not to know what was being talked about. Nevertheless, as the BBC has been made aware that a complaint surrounding this matter has been lodged with regulator Ofcom, we are unable to provide any further comment but thank you for your own personal views on the matter which have been formally noted and logged by the BBC. Regards Sarah WilsonBBC Complaints____________________________www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yvonne Warren Martin (1/2), Social worker, p. 3425
    http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post1764.html#p1764
    Yvonne Warren Martin (2/2), Social worker, p. 3431
    http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post1766.html#p1766

    ReplyDelete
  41. It's also in the Mallorca edition of the Euro Weekly news. (Page 16)
    http://www.euroweeklynews.com/component/option,com_flippingbook/catid,6/id,189/view,book/
    Bl**dy marvellous. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  42. my #34 post should read Jane Hill interview.

    ReplyDelete
  43. J. K. Rawling should be made aware of this.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Well Sarah Wilson at the BBC has now been informed . What she chooses to do with this information is up to her.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anon 26

    Edition 21 - 27 January 2010. Zoom the first page of the newspaper. top left you'll find the date.

    ReplyDelete
  46. @ Anon #7
    Perhaps The Scum's Antonella Lazzeri would like to do an "Exclusive"?
    Did you email her?

    ReplyDelete
  47. joana

    thanks for the link to Yvonne Warren Martin . She did name David Payne as someone she recalls from her child protection work -but cannot recall in what context.

    I would have thought that someone would have made the link here with what the Gaspars said .

    was she just dimissed as being unreliable, and interfering , and forgotten ??-the mcs certainly did not want anything to do with her.

    rwt

    ReplyDelete
  48. @ post #26, absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the article is new. It would appear that Fiona's trip to hold Kate's hand in Lisbon after Gerry flounced prompted this revelation in the paper :D

    ReplyDelete
  49. @ post #40, thanks for the information. Aside from Ofcom's investigation, I hope Amaral sues the BBC!

    ReplyDelete
  50. Parabéns Equipa!


    A Copista.

    ReplyDelete
  51. The fact they never suspected their "friends" who they barely knew says enough.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Now the crack has appeared in the door with this first printing in an English paper - it is time to help push the door open.

    Everybody here needs to get this to as many media locations as possible - newspapers, radio, tv, bloggers etc etc

    The media are like sheep, they will follow. Now is the time to push home the advances made in the last couple of weeks.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Gerry gagged Amaral's book, afraid it would be published in England and the situation got much worse.
    British people who were not intending to buy it anyway, can now read the most important information about Gerry's best friend: David Payne.And read it for free.
    And they can read they are still friends.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Near the end of David Payne's witness statement to Leicestershire Police 11th April 08

    DC Messiah

    "Is there anything that you consider pertinent or relevant to establish the material truth"....... concerning the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

    DP

    "Err, there are a few things but I don't think this is the right forum for bringing those up".

    DC Messiah.

    "OK"
    So why is David Payne withholding evidence? By his own statement he has important information on what happened to Madeleine. Did the Leicestershire Police follow this up? If not why not?

    ReplyDelete
  55. It's good to see more of this story coming into the public domain. I wonder if this development will put the McCanns' other friends off supporting them in court?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Every British newspaper now has this information in their hands...

    ReplyDelete
  57. The way they have positioned the story between those other two makes look even more sickening ( if thats possible ).
    Perfect placement if may say so. Ha Ha Ha

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anon 2

    What can Carter Ruck do, Gasper's statement is stright out of the police files. What with one thing and another things are starting to stack up against them.
    Lily

    ReplyDelete
  59. At last, at last.

    Yep, it's a big step forward. Whatever one thinks about the allegation, the very fact that it took 8 months to get to Portugal is, well, astounding. The UK media should be askign about that.

    I doubt the UK media will pick up on it swiftly but you can't rule out a "foul rumour spread by Euro newspaper - we condemn it...it must be made up" type story. That's always a good approach.

    Another point, though, I am sure their tame judge would have issued a banning on this being quoted in the UK media.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Have just sent CR a copy of the Costa Blanca Euro Weekly Digital News. Lets watch their next move.
    Very interesting morning show at TVi today. The profiling of a Paedo. Mr Gs personality has a lot in common, maybe I am wrong anyway, ....... lets keep our Freedom of Speech.
    Jamar
    Great work Joana

    ReplyDelete
  61. Would the Euro Weekly News have picked up on this story of the Gaspers if Fi hadn't been at Katie's side in Lisbon, another own goal by the Mccanns imo.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The story to the right would make an apt headline but the one to the left would be the headline i'd love to see one day.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Joana may I have the pleasure...BonnyBraise...have you nothing better to do with your sad life than copy my reply from the BBC?

    What exactly have you achieved since leaving the 3As???????

    You are a sad person and your forum is filled with even sadder people.

    Your hatred for Bren is more than for the Mccanns so you switched sides...I remember everything you said about the Mccanns...you are a two faced dried up old prune who is probably on the lash most of the time. Enjoy ..justice is on the way for little Maddie...By the way are you going to the Bash on the 27th???? You derserve an invite after all your arse crawling.

    ReplyDelete
  64. @post 40, thanks.
    As there was a whole lot of media and press pack hounding Amaral as he headed out, I'm sure he would not have noticed which company posed the out of the blue thrown away question. Just goes to show BBC maligned him over something he didnt say so he didnt know what the fuss was about. Such a gentleman he is.

    Its v. typical of BBC to sensationalise their reporting by making up as they go along. It should be pointed out to them - they should not fob-off their appalling behaviour by excuses as such found in their reply.

    ReplyDelete
  65. That should be sent to housekeeper at Keningston Roof Gardens to include in reading materials basket.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Well it seems that their biggest mistake was to sue Mr Amaral, that has done more damage than any forum/blog could have ever wished for.
    Well done Gerry were very pleased with your performance for a change.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Doubt FP will be going along to support the sainted KM in the next hearing ie presuming thick-skinned KM is still attending!

    ReplyDelete
  68. 66 I allowed your comment to be printed, just because it was your BBC e-mail answer and because you wouldn't have probably another place to air your views. Anyway, let's consider this a right to reply. Regarding that pathetic person who cares what she/he writes, does or says -she/he should be pitied for her/his mental unsoundness, sad really...

    ReplyDelete
  69. The housekeeper of Keningston Roof Garden should be sent copy of it to include in the reading materials basket.

    ReplyDelete
  70. http://www.youtube.com/cheshirepolice

    somebody should tell Cheshire Police they're wasting their time with Ziggy;s training as dogs are soooo unreliable (he's a beautiful dog though)!

    ReplyDelete
  71. Consider sending the dogs 11 markings to Euro Weekly.

    p.s. I wonder whether mccanns is going to wheel out carter ruck?
    If mccanns were to sue every media and press machinery in the world, it will be a full time job, and CR wont need to work for another client for revenue.

    ReplyDelete
  72. rh ...ahrmm....I... eh...well ...I mean....
    so....you know...I read ..something.... well... eh.....
    something...eh...happened...so...I..I mean....
    .....I eh...want't come to your party....

    ReplyDelete
  73. Thank you Joana for the floor space...lol..I feel much better now.

    ReplyDelete
  74. @ post #56, I'm more stunned by DC Messiah's response than David Payne's admission that he may be withholding important information for the time being! DC Messiah obviously would have known what DP was on about. So was DP given the correct "forum" to bring these "few things" up? If so, where are the results? Where they passed to the PJ?

    ReplyDelete
  75. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Yeah! Pop a copy in the gift bags for the forthcoming event.

    ReplyDelete
  77. What an earthquake init? :D

    Remember Mari Luz.....

    ReplyDelete
  78. 64,no, Fiona Payne's presence in Lisbon was a great chance for this paper to talk about David.

    The paper took immediately profit of this chance, thank haevens.
    Another goal against themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I hope this information can be brought out in the court case.

    Possibly in connection with the delay by UK in sending on important information. Not simply in passing only, but by explaining what it was about.

    By anybodies standards, as a child was missing, this would be seen as VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION. Yet it was not sent on to investigators until it had been sat on for so long.

    How can it simply be disregarded by a shrug of Kate's shoulders saying they trust their friends one hundred per cent. The investigators believe Madeleine is died in the apartment, so how did she die?

    There were a number of men who knew the child was in the apartment alone that night. These men should have been more likely suspects that somebody like Murat, as they had direct access to the child and knew the door was unlocked.

    And here we have doctors who were friends of the McCanns going to the police to report their concerns about Payne and Gerry when they heard that Madeleine was missing.

    This would confirm what Sr Amaral had been saying in the book about the non cooperation by the UK.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Just Curious at 56

    Thanks for pointing that out.

    Well, if DP has information relevant to what happened to Madeleine then he needs to bloody well hurry up and speak out, because otherwise what happened to Murat is going to happen to him. He will be crucified by the media.

    Only unlike Murat, the proof of DP's innocence, if he is, may not be available.

    If he is covering for somebody he is an idiot. It is not worth it.

    Things are just going to get worse for him.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Off topic, but does anyone know where Clarence Mitchell is?

    ReplyDelete
  82. I would really like to know what Kate is thinking about this Gaspars statement.

    ReplyDelete
  83. There must be several other statements about the McCanns and the Paynes in the UK but the police could be holding them back.
    It is impossible that only three people went to the police with information.
    If that lady Martin(?) recognised David in much less than 15 hours, people in Britain must have raised alarm nearly immediately.

    Those people got to write the PJ, by email, not by regular mail.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Finally... this blindness have cure.

    I can imagine busy phone lines at Carter-Ruck office and at Rothley Mansion. carter-Ruck intimidating Euro weekly News and Gerry framing the Gaspars.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Perhaps the Gaspars have also had a visit from Brian Kennedy, or even the McCanns themselves.

    So much interference with witnesses going on, who would believe it would be allowed. But it is, because nothing is done to stop them.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I just looked up the Kensington Roof Gardens - it is owned by Branson and is about as plush and luxurious as it gets. You read the Gasper statement and it is impossible to comprehend why the McCann's are being treated better than Royalty.

    ReplyDelete
  87. There is a crack, a crack in everything, that's how the light get's in.

    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  88. Can't you feel another sighting of Madeleine coming on any day now?

    Or at least some old paedophile turning up?

    Grabbing the headlines as usual. It is getting beyond a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  89. So which representative from the cops will be there?

    Hard to believe Gerry would have forgotten to give them a free invite.

    ReplyDelete
  90. @ post #89, I was thinking just that! Surely, the McCanns would have contacted them given their past form with the likes of the Smiths and Murat. I do feel sorry for the Gaspars because I cannot even begin to imagine the pressure they are under given the protection the McCanns have had. Gerry being invited to speak at the CEOP conference must be a slap in the face for them.

    My main worry is that like Amaral, the Gaspars will become the target of smear campaigns once their statements make it into the mainstream British press. It's bound to happen, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  91. that's an easy one to answer, the same CEOP guy that made the profiling on Murat...

    ReplyDelete
  92. Well excatly Joana @ post #95. Imagine being Mrs Gaspar. I hope she doesn't regret going to the police but somehow I think she just may do especially since her statement was withheld from the PJ for months.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Please does anyone know the exact date the profiling of Murat was done? Through Sky's Martin Brunt, we know that CEOP had guys on the ground in PdL as early as May 4th or 5th. Lori Campbell pointed the finger at Murat to the Leicestershire police on May 6th.

    ReplyDelete
  94. It sounds like Payne had got more to say, but not at that time.

    Was this ever followed up on, or did those UK cops miss that opportunity?

    Have the PJ ever asked about this?

    ReplyDelete
  95. 94 if they are smeared just adds another onto the list of smeared - how much smearing can they do without being suspected even more its all out of control

    ReplyDelete
  96. Anon 77

    Floor space, yes, but dont use the dog"s rug, they might bark at you and more drastic: their flies are biaised :))

    ReplyDelete
  97. Hi lads,
    Just a thought from a different angle on this whole case.
    I don't want to put a morbid feel on this but I honestly feel that Mr. Amaral should worry about his own safety now.
    I believe this because he is getting very close to the nerve now and things could turn nasty, I hope I'm wrong, but it does concern me as these ruthless bastards are beginning to run out of options and it seems they will stop at nothing now. Do you honestly feel they have not considered this?
    The only way I feel he can be protected is to have it organised and widely known( if possible ) that if this great man falls, then there is somebody else to carry on with this struggle to the finish and so on, just like a sharks tooth when lost, another stands in its place.

    Good luck to you Mr.Amaral and God bless you Joana.

    I do look forward to bringing my family back to your beautiful country again soon for another holiday, great place, great people.

    C. from Cork.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I don't remember Lori Campbell spinning Murat as the Algarve 'Ian Huntley' lookalike as early as 6 of May, I believe it was later on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jExBfGR7Fio&feature=response_watch

    ReplyDelete
  99. Why did David Payne keep referring to Madeleine in the past tense in his police interview?

    ReplyDelete
  100. 101 what on earth do you mean? that would be the worst news of any for the mccanns-i do think people are letting their imaginations run away with them

    ReplyDelete
  101. well, not so wild, since a dog was killed, a car was burned, witnesses were harassed, threats range from plain lunatic in the web to legal ones, indeed 101 is right, people should know by now that Team McCann acolytes have no limits.

    ReplyDelete
  102. @ post #102, Lori Campbell gave her statement to the LP on May 6 and according to Sky's Ian Woods, she was already spreading word about Murat amongst other journalists on the ground in PdL- to Woods at least- before she appeared on tv to firmly seal her position in this saga.

    ReplyDelete
  103. 105 where does that leave internet posters lol - should shut up or else???

    ReplyDelete
  104. Anon ≠92, I agree, just the right time for a new 'sighting' of Madeleine or a new suspect with photofit all done and ready to go straight on to the front pages. If not immediately, then certainly sometime before 10 Feb. Timing is everything.

    ReplyDelete
  105. To be honest though since the British Cops are clearly in awe of the McCanns and sat on this Gaspars statement for months there was clearly nothing done about it then or since. So what will be done about it now? Probably nothing and it has not stopped the CEOP getting McCann to muse for them. IMO the case is entrenched in the UK. All the stalling and failure to provide vital evidence was down to the Home Office and the LP et al. The only thing for McCann and Payne is to sue. Will they?

    ReplyDelete
  106. 105..any proof for the dog story..other than Duarte's fabric of lies ?

    I thought not

    ReplyDelete
  107. Good observation Anon 103.

    It was David Payne who also mentioned a fridge the McCanns had that supposedly had something wrong with it.

    He should have been asked more about that, being as how the PJ were searching for a fridge at one time in their investigation.

    ReplyDelete
  108. About Mr. amaral's safety, YES, I agree, he must take extra care! If this whole sad story has its roots in paedophile behavior of certain important people, the usually called "pillars of society", above all suspicion who would have a lot to lose if unmasked, and due to the network of silence, secrecy and protection that shrouds those kind of people, with the blessing of the authorities ( in resume, the cover-up), then YES, Mr. Amaral, the Gaspars, Yvonne Martin, and anyone who gets too close for comfort and poses a threat is in mortal danger! It's not unheard of to have people who dared to "blow the whistle", later suffering freak accidents and unexplained or suspicious deaths.
    Wasn't there some talk about someone ( one of the english police officers that came to Portugal?)saying something of the sort:- do you realize that this (evidence?, names?) could bring down the government?" If true, IT MUST BE VERY SERIOUS INDEED!

    I hope that Mr. Amaral will take the example of Dr. Catalina Pestana, and take some "life-insurance", in the form of putting any important documents/evidence he has in a very safe and secret place, in the care of someone he trusts, with instructions of, if anything bad happens to him, those papers are to be published! Dr. C. Pestana has done just that with her Casa Pia case documentation, someone is the guardian of her papers which might be made public if needed...

    ReplyDelete
  109. Right 105.

    Don't forget also that Rosiepops physically threatened Sr Amaral, like some crazy person.

    That is not on at all!

    ReplyDelete
  110. At last, at last. Please let this get into the wider public domain - ie. UK press. As a previous poster said - there is crack in everything, that's how the light gets in. Hopefully the crack is widening.

    Hamish

    ReplyDelete
  111. Murat´s handicap, he is blind in one eye and wears glasses - this unfit guy never jumbed with Maddie through those window at night.

    Beata, Germany

    ReplyDelete
  112. Please excuse me,

    "that" window

    Murat´s handicap, he is blind in one eye and wears glasses - this unfit guy never jumbed with Maddie through that window at night.

    Beata, Germany

    ReplyDelete
  113. Joana & co, I really hope one day that all the hard work and countless hours you have put into this pays off.
    Thank you ( I think I can say from all of us ) for your relentles ongoing efforts to seek justice.
    I wish you good luck, health & happiness.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Uptill now the McCanns nor the Paynes did anything against the Gaspars and Mrs. Martin.
    And they will not.
    Everybody has the right or even the obligation to go to the police when they suspect something.

    Besides, the cadaver dog was barking at Maddie's pajamas'T-shirt and not at its trousers much BEFORE the Gaspars'satements were sent to Portugal.
    And for the rest: none of these witnesses said the child was dead and killed by someone of Tapas 9.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Anon 105

    I understand very well your genuine concern but I would think that "something" is in place in regard of security.
    Have you ever thought the mccanns could be secretly under check? As you say they are capable of anything.... :D

    ReplyDelete
  116. PEOPLE FROM THE UK WHO HAVE SOMETHING TO TELL,


    Please send an email to the Polícia Judiciária em Portimao (Alagarve), or to Lagos or even to Lisboa.

    Tell your story directly to the Portuguese police.
    Madeleine needs you.

    ReplyDelete
  117. 103,an, because she was dead.

    ReplyDelete
  118. 49, how do you know Yvonne W.Martin is dismissed, where did you read that?
    Could it be she investigated Payne all by herself, she went to the police and she was dismissed?

    if this is the reason, she would make a wonderful witness for the PJ and Amaral.
    Working where she used to work, she must have had access to files.
    Let us keep her name in mind.

    She will never be sued by the McCanns because a person is obliged to colaborate with the police.
    And if the PJ published her statement on the DVD, it is the PJ's responsibility, not hers.
    Will this be a case of "if you know who is involved and if you are keeping this secret, remember it is never too late to lose your job".

    ReplyDelete
  119. Am I going crazy? I went on the electronic version of Euro Weekly earlier on and found the article. But I just went back there and I can't find it in edition 1281. They've got stock market info on page 10.

    Am I missing something or has it been - to use that venerable phrase - "whoosh-clunked" thanks to full on Carter-Rucking?

    ReplyDelete
  120. 94, who said Gerry was invited by the CEOP?
    He manipulated those people in order to get a chance to be respected.
    This is the end of the eventual trust few people still had in that organization.
    We all know now the kind of people are working there.
    What a corrupt country.

    Sydney

    ReplyDelete
  121. 122 - Just checked - it is still there for all to see......

    ReplyDelete
  122. David Payne's remarks when he was interviewed after Maddie went missing are worth mentioning again.

    "We know they didn't do it. One of our party saw Madeleine being abducted. We were waiting for something to happen but didn't, in our worst nightmare, think it would be this"!

    Just why were they waiting for something to happen, and what did they have in mind?

    ReplyDelete
  123. @ post 56
    Unbelievable!! Why, why, why was D P allowed to say this without follow up?

    ReplyDelete
  124. 122 - If you are checking the Mallorca edition 1281 see page 16.

    ReplyDelete
  125. http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.com/2010/01/coming-soon-to-letterbox-near-you.html


    Mccanns leaflet dropping...I think this leaflet should be read very carefully...Seems to me it contains SLANDER...

    ReplyDelete
  126. Anon 110

    It's GA who speaks about his dog death in " A Verdade da Mentira"

    ReplyDelete
  127. 108 - If there was a new sighting, wouldn't that go against the "nobody will look for her because of Amaral's book" Their argument would go out the window (no pun intended) if there was a new sighting.

    ReplyDelete
  128. I wrote to Ed Balls about the CEOP conference, making the same pointa about the Gaspar statements and asking if GM had passed a CRB check, as all doctors must. I didn't expect a reply, but I hope my words will ring in Ed Balls ears, next time he talks about protecting children and the need for CRB checks on anyone with significant contact with children/vulnerable adults.

    ReplyDelete
  129. I read some where that cadaver odour only comes from a body after being dead for 2 hours can anyone confirm this. And if so there is neglect of 2 hours when she was possibly dead.So it then dismisses their claims of their regular checks on the children

    ReplyDelete
  130. I think the accusation "Miscarriage of justice" in that booklet is a bit eyebrow-raising, although I'm sure we all agree there certainly has been one!

    ReplyDelete
  131. Post 132. Yes that's correct it takes that time for the cadaver odour sensed by the dog to develop, (Martin Grime) it can then be present on items/surfaces in contact with that dead body.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Doesn't Keir Simmons have a twitter account. Does he know about this, I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
  133. Post 134, thank you for clariying that up for me.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Sr Amaral had a dog that was killed, I believe that is mentioned in the book.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Anon ≠130, yes, I see what you mean, but even the McCanns couldn't pretend to believe that absolutely everyone in the world has read GA's book or knows what's in it. A sighting in some far-flung corner of the world might prove useful and make it harder for GA and his former colleagues to be taken seriously when they say Madeleine is likely to be dead. We've had some of the most ridiculous reports of these so-called sightings before and they usually go straight on to the front pages of the papers, even when there's nothing that would lead anyone with a grain of sense to take them seriously.

    But I agree that at the minute it's something of a balancing act that needs to be pulled off - a sighting to give hope to the idea that Madeleine's still alive and thus GA is wrong to say she's dead, or no sighting to prove GA's book has stopped people looking for her. Hmm, tricky one ...

    ReplyDelete
  136. ANON 133

    Not if they found her dead and placed her in the wardrobe whilst the clean up operation took place.

    ReplyDelete
  137. They could still turn up some old paedophile though Dimsie. Didn't Edgar say recently that he had some in his sights.

    ReplyDelete
  138. What did Halligen, M3, Cowley & Edgar the supposed experts the McCanns hired to investigate do about the Gaspar statement. It was in the file! So what did they do?

    ReplyDelete
  139. 8-} Again it is suggestive, but it can be construed/deconstrued both ways: as an expression of child curiosity and/or sexuality as in "does she does that to herself too?" or an unlikely snippet of a public conversation between two latent paedophiles (at least one) as in: "does she does this to you too?"(felatio).

    They were chatting casually and gesturing about a crime in front of others? Too risky! The "vino veritas" effect? Hmmm.

    I have no problems with this hypothesis. Human nature being what it is and the mathematical probability of any conceivable event always greater than zero, anything is possible...

    Are we then pointing at the possibility of another scenario? That the culprit was Payne?

    :-o "WHAAAAT?".

    Well, unlike the others he did not go to check on Madeleine that night he made sure he took a two-way radio instead. That could have been an alibi. Also, he was (by his own admission) the last person (besides the Mc's) to see Madeleine alive with Kate at around 6.30 PM (by his own testimony).

    Payne knew where her parents were and that the back door was open. So let us suppose that at some stage he goes in through the back, tries something dirty with Madeleine, she starts shouting and he accidentally suffocates her? Then what? Places her behind the sofa? The father later comes to check on her daughter and thinks the mother and/or himself overdosed her on "Calpol"? Does it make sense? No?

    OK! Let's try this one:

    Other scenario: Payne was alone at 6.30 with Kate and Madeleine. Kate and Payne try some quick "monkey business" and are caught "on the trapeze" by Madeleine? "Mummy! I am going to tell Daddy what I saw!"."Shut up! Shuuuuut up!" (same death scenario possible). Kate later briefs Gerry on the scenario (less the infidelity byte). Then what? They go to dinner as if nothing had happened? Hmmm...

    The child could just as easily have wondered into the night through the back door. The problem with the "abduction" and "wondering-off" theories is that there would not have been cadaver odour found where it was. The dogs picked it up here, there, over there, etc. Not just one place, several and all of them are connected with the Mc's. Again, this is highly suggestive but not enough for an incrimination of such high-profilers even if Eddie and Keela (dogs) are super-star detectives and rarely fail. Not on so many accounts anyway.

    Of course, it could have been Gerry who accidentally suffocated Madeleine during his check. He had had quite a few glasses of wine, Madeleine became a bit too verbal, he become exasperated, worried she might wake up the twins and goes "Shuuuuuuut Up!" Oops! Then he is seen by the Smiths carrying his "bundle of joy".

    Where did he leave the body? With a friend? Hide it? What?

    The Portuguese police was shackled by political pressure.
    Dr. Amaral makes that clear in his book. Everyone should have to stay put for a reconstruction, further interrogation. Kate refused to talk. No problem. Take her to court. There she had to face the music. It does not mean she/they would be found guilty. It means we would have a much better picture of what happened or might have happened and the investigation would be still on.

    One thing is for sure, both Mc's are highly educated and expert diagnosticians. The sort perfectly capable to commit a perfect crime. Not saying they did. I am saying they could.


    8-}I don't think we will ever get to the bottom of this case. Not unless something truly dramatic happens - like Madeleine being found (dead or alive).

    The only thing we can do now is to ensure Dr. Amaral is not gagged and wins his libel against the Mc's. We can do this by donating something to his defence fund. Every penny counts.

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  140. I agree with 141

    If the terminally ill Hewlett was to 'confess' to having taken Madeleine, they would have less 'problems' to deal with and it would generate looooooots of sympathy.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Oh where oh where is Sentinel now that the story has been published for all to see...like to see him defend the gesture one more time on the David Payne thread

    vplane

    ReplyDelete
  142. Who was the last REAL person (not one of the McCann team) to see Madeleine alive?
    Was she really at the creche that day/afternoon?
    What has been driving me crazy all this time is that it is as if all this happened in a ghost town.
    The Batista supermarket opposite had no customers? How late did it stay open? No other parents saw Madeleine when they collected their own children?
    Perhaps all these details are locked away in the secret files, but it is amazing that no one comes forward to add their bit of confirmation or even a comment.(As far as I know - I would be delighted to be contradicted here!)

    ReplyDelete
  143. Posted info on Find Madelene website

    ReplyDelete
  144. Out of this whole sorry affair this is the one thing that assures me that this is a huge cover up.
    Get to the bottom of the Payne story and you will be there

    Payne needs investigating NOW, if this does not get followed up then it's quite obvious that something is a miss.

    Mr Amaral keep going we are all behind you.
    Joana this wonderful blog is getting more support it seems everyday, i salute you all.

    ReplyDelete
  145. I believe that Madeleine died at least 24 hours prior to her 'abduction.' GM is not the kind of person to hastily concoct an 'abduction' story. He will have thought long and hard about disposal and cover up story. It was possible to alter creche records to give the illusion she attended - and if you look at the records you will see that it appears likely this was in fact carried out.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Poster 141 and 144,

    IMO Hewlett would only confess if they paid him richly enough and and it would look bad on them. Hewlett is dying and is unscrupulous and may have tried to manouvre himself into the frame as a plan to get rich and have something to leave his family after his death(it was his own friends who fingered him). He realised he fitted one of their many drawings of an abductor and used this to his advantage. The McCann's viewed him as an advantage as well. He seems to have played a game of denial but at the same time, admits to being in the area at the right time, just like he's trying to dangle a carrot in front of them. However, the Police, both British and Portugese, are dissinterested in him. Therefore, the McC's have considered that it would look too obvious and would go against them if they handed him wads of money in exchange for a confession so their only tactic was to blacken his name as much as they could and hope the mud sticks hard enough for people to believe he has killed her and taken his secret to the grave. I bet they are hoping he dies before the end of the Court case.

    IMO I think most people will see Hewlett for what he is, a conman whose last hope of wealth is in the pockets of the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  147. To Anon 149. It is plausible given the seemingly tight windows of opportunity on the night. Could you support that possibility further or is it just an hunch you have...

    ReplyDelete
  148. keyser sose at 148

    I tend to agree with you.

    If Payne begins to feel cornered, which looks possible as the information about the Gasper statements gets out, then he is more likely to tell what he knows.

    If the policeman who interviewed him did not follow up on what Payne said about having more to say, but that moment was not the place to say it, then it beggers belief.

    It was obvious that Payne wanted to say something further concerning the disappearance of Madeleine, but not to have it put down in his witness statement.

    Are the PJ aware of this, and did they ever find out what that information was? If not, they should be alerted to this.

    Perhaps Sr Amaral will know.

    ReplyDelete
  149. I would like to inject a note of caution here.
    I'm not sure that suggesting increasingly fanciful scenarios doesn't just play into the McCann's hands, to be honest. I'm not comfortable with a situation where a man is being condemned on the strength of a couple of witness statements which themselves do not ehtirely support each other, and where the claims made in those statements have not been put to him so that he can have the opportunity to respond. There were spurious claims made about Robert Murat during this case too. It didn't mean that they were actually truthful.

    Although I am grateful for the transparency of the process which allows for the contents of the case file to largely be made public, I do think that there needs to be some consideration given to the fact that the man in question has not been specifically questioned as regards these claims, cautioned, or charged with anything. In the UK, those statements would never have found their way into the public domain.

    I may well be shot down in flames for saying this, but it just worries me that either contributors to this blog are seen as indulging in extreme speculation, or worse, doing a Lori Campbell en masse to the man. That's all I'm saying

    ReplyDelete
  150. ;)) Joana are you sure "Anon 66" is fom the BBC? He is probably a mole with a raspy tongue. A "Mac theory" supporter.

    Mind you, if you check the BBC website all the links the BBC gives on the case are "official". That should not come up as a surprise. The "Beeb" is not as independent as it purports to be. It is a central pillar of Ideology.

    Keep up the good work. I say.

    ReplyDelete
  151. When was the McCanns' fridge said to have gone wrong? Which day?

    Payne said it was when the McCanns were in the original apartment where Madeleine disappeared from.

    Was that an excuse for the McCanns to go buy a new fridge or something similar?

    Their credit cards should be checked.

    ReplyDelete
  152. 154, read again the comments posted, I never said that anonymous was from the BBC, what I said is that I was giving him/her the «right to reply» to a «pathetic person» of another forum, given that his/hers previous comment here was his/hers email letter that he/she had received from the BBC.

    ReplyDelete
  153. What would you suggest then Bridget?

    That there was nothing said, and it was swept under the carpet?

    I am sure that would really suit the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Bridget@ 153
    I think the point is,why has there been no attempt by the McCanns or David Payne to refute the statements? I agree that there might an explanation for what the Gaspars heard, other than paedophilia. If Payne has not been questioned by the police, I would want to know why not and also, why the delay in sending the statements to the PJ, who could have liaised with LP about procedures to interview Payne?
    Unless the parties concerned are fully in the clear, an invitation to GM to address the CEOP Conference is highly inappropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Anon 158

    I agree.

    Given that Gerry McCann is also mentioned in the statement by the Gaspars, the CEOP either don't know about it, or, if they do, could not care less.

    If that is the case, there is something very wrong about that organisation.

    ReplyDelete
  156. "IMO I think most people will see Hewlett for what he is, a conman whose last hope of wealth is in the pockets of the McCanns"

    IMO I think most people see Hewlett as far more than a conman/pervert.

    It is very important that his entire history is reviewed by as many people who have the time to do so.

    Hewlett was able to stay one step ahead of Interpol, Scotland Yard and the Irish Gardai for years. Without the help of the police or perhaps the intelligence services, I do not believe a simple conman could have accomplished it.

    Ask yourselves why Hewlett was able to escape arrest - sometimes by a matter of a few hours...and look very very carefully at the Lesley Molseed case, a murder of a child - Hewlett the PRIME SUSPECT for many years, according to Max McLean. It is very important.

    If the McCanns try to blame Maddie's disappearance on Hewlett I won't mind at all.

    Perhaps enough people will take a second look at the REAL possibility that Ronald Castree was NOT Lesley Molseed's killer - that Hewlett WAS Lesley Molseed's killer and that the FSS was involved in the planting of evidence to convict Castree.

    Hewlett has conned nobody in the McCann case, but it might be a good idea to take a careful look at Peter Verran and Alan and Cindy Thompson, when you are thinking about con games. Were it not for them, we would not even know Hewlett existed - and it is a real safe bet that the powers-that-be in British intelligence wish we would look the other way and accept the lies the McCanns are attempting to tell about Raymond Hewlett.

    ReplyDelete
  157. #157 and #158

    Firstly, I suggest that you go to any solicitor and say ''I have not been charged with any crime, or in fact accused of any crime, but someone I once went on holiday with has made certain allegations about me which have now found their way into the public domain. Should I make a statement refuting them ?'' I will give you a pound to a penny that the response you get is ''Are you quite mad? Of course not !''

    To do so would for him personally make the McCann's error in dragging Sr Amaral to court look like small potatoes. It would throw the full beam of publicity firmly onto matters which at the moment are confimed to, mainly, the internet, and ensure that the rumours would never leave him, guilty or not

    Any brushing under the carpet which has been done was achieved when the case was archived, and I would think if people wanted to do something useful, them perhaps looking at ways a legal challenge to that could be mounted, in an effort to have the case reopened.

    Some of the questions you pose can only be answered by the police, and perhaps relate to operational matters, especially with regards to the delay in passing the information to the investigating team, so perhaps a request to Leicestershire Police under a Freedom of Information request might be one approach, although I think you would be wasting your time.

    I wholeheartedly agree that any invitation extended to Gerry McCann to address the CEOP conference is highly inappropriate, but not on the basis of this - he shouldn't be there because of his own admitted behaviour in the course of losing one of his children.

    ReplyDelete
  158. :)] Hi! Anon 153! Point taken. Assuming you were referring to the observations I have made in "143" I can only add that the investigating team, no doubt, went through all possible scenarios - including the ones I indulged in.

    The scenario Dr. Amaral choses to express is perhaps the one he thought the Mc's would feel more confortable in accepting (to confess to) assuming they were prepared to do that. A "fat chance" but a good try by the investigating team. Pity they were forced to let the "birds" fly. They should have been all cross-examined in a court of law.

    These people are extraordinarily clever high-profilers. They would never admit they would harm their own children.

    It is not by adhering strictly to one scenario that the truth is best served. We are free to speculate. One may even argue they are innocent, the problem with "Mac Theory" is that there are contradictions, inconsistencies, pacts of silence (to achieve "consistency") and, most importantly, Eddie and Keela's sniff evidence. These dogs don't just go on barking up the wrong tree. These dogs are star detectives paid at around £500 an hour plus expenses. Add to the list the Smith's testimony.

    All items in this list (and others besides) are the Occam's razor of Dr. Amaral expert opinion and one I feel inclined to agree with.

    :) Informed speculation is the essence of freedom of speech. Express yourself.

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  159. I tend to agree with you anon 149 that the child probably died earlier than the "official" disappearance date/time. Maybe she was found long dead behind the sofa late between 11 and 12 pm on the previous night and nothing could be done then. In that case the whole scene of the 3rd May would have been sort of planned ahead to look like an abduction but so badly scripted and the characters such bad performers that it's "full of holes". The main thing that would go against this theory was if anyone outside the "tapas circle" was 100% sure that they had seen the little girl during that day, is the nanny a reliable witness for instance? I don't know how many children would attend the club but is it possible that the nanny could have imagined that Madeleine was there when she wasn't, amongst all the other children?

    ReplyDelete
  160. Joana comment on 156:

    ;)) Oh! I see. I got it all wrong didnt I? My apologies.

    I will stand by my comments on the BBC, though.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Given that Jane Tanner has given various accounts of what she saw, is it so hard to believe that the creche staff may believe Madeleine was there because they were told she was.

    The imagination did the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Gerry McCann has been telling people he has been 'exonorated', so maybe they will use that as an excuse to include him in the conference, whereas if they hear about the Gaspar statements they may have to change their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  163. :)} Anon 149. Good point. I understand it takes time for a body to leave a cadaver's trace for the dogs to pick up on. Hmm.

    Assuming no one saw Madeleine all through the day (assuming) then your intuition is a valid hypothesis.

    Furthermore, it might imply the alarm was only given after M's body had been duly hidden/disposed of. Could that be the reason why the "Tapas" drank so much that night? Or was that number of bottles just average?

    But...would the Smith's testimony still fit in? The timing of their sighting is too close a match for the alarm. I think, but still...you got me thinking now...

    8-} I need a drink.

    ReplyDelete
  164. also i suggest people read the statement of Yvonne Warren Martin,(maddie case files)
    very interesting and concerns david payne

    ReplyDelete
  165. @ ac, post # 162

    No, I hadn't read your post, and I wasn't referring to your observations. I don't think there is anything wrong with speculating, but caution should be exercised when filling the gaps. Just my personal opinion

    ReplyDelete
  166. If you want cheering up go see what is being written here:

    http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/media-statements-stories-f34/david-payne-mentioned-in-spainish-pess-t2334.htm

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  167. Poster 160 quoted:

    “Hewlett was able to stay one step ahead of Interpol, Scotland Yard and the Irish Gardai for years. Without the help of the police or perhaps the intelligence services, I do not believe a simple conman could have accomplished it.”

    Hewlett was not simple, far from it. He has, as you rightly point out, dodged the authorities for decades. Perhaps conman was not putting it strong enough, maybe devious, deceitful, conniving are some of the words to describe his many traits more aptly, along with wicked perverted molester. However, I do believe he would try to scam people out of money as well to grind out a living in his campervan, and that he tried to use the MC’s predicament to his own advantage, with help from his 'friends' Verran and the Thompsons. Hewlett still has to have money at the end of the day and has nothing to lose now, at the end of his life. I believe he deliberately manoeuvred himself into this position in the first place, to take advantage.

    The MC’s were hoping he was simple though, that he would sign a confession up front, because they must avoid paying him. Their PI’s did not try very hard to see him at all, once they realised he was not simple enough to fall for their attempts at trying to 'con' him and took the next plane home.

    The longer Hewlett lingers on, and given his past, the question must be asked, why are their PI's not trying harder to see him? But, then they already know the answers, don't they.

    ReplyDelete
  168. Since the Euro Weekly News published the article on Payne and the Gaspar's statements, we appear to have been gripped by a sense of "Euphoria" bordering on insanity on this blog! We are beginning to sound like Monty Pythons Flying Circus! Kate McCann said that the open window could have been a "Red herring"-----if we continue to invent increasingly bizarre scenarios,we may create our own red herrings! We must'nt lose our focus on the "Main game" i.e. supporting Snr.Amaral in his present fight in Court. The Gaspar statements are very important and must be followed-up, even at this late date. If Payne and Gerry McCann ARE a pair of of sexual perverts it could have a great bearing on this case. However,in order to get the case re-opened, the first thing is for Snr. Amaral to win the present action, get his book circulated Worldwide----THEN we can pursue any perverts we have discovered on the way! There is an old African proverb"Softly,softly,catchee monkey" we need to remember that,if we charge off like a group of Lemmings, we may all end up over a cliff and perhaps in the sea !

    ReplyDelete
  169. Quite frankly some of the opinions written here makes me feel nauseous. I will not comment on what happened to Madeleine Mcann as quite frankly no one knows.

    We can all sit and surmise "until the cows come home", but from what I have read here and the amount of anti British feeling and you all jumping on the band wagon makes me realise why the UK is like it is today.

    I will be the first to agree that things don't add up,but if anyone entered that apartment it was a keyholder!, that keyholder could have had access to the apartment under the McCanns also.
    Do any of you stop and think for just a minute that your wild accusations could lead to distress,unwarranted finger pointing?

    You all jump on the defence of Amaral (and maybe he is right) who knows? but under English law (innocent till proven guilty).

    I would not want to live anywhere else but here in the UK, and I will also state that yes we have our own fair amount of what I would call "scum" here on these isles, but we have a proud history and a FAIR legal system.

    For God's sake take a step back and think for a moment.

    I am not saying anyone here is wrong, I'm just pointing out that no one has the right to make accusations out of equations that don't add up.

    I do not know what happened to Madeleine Mcann,I am the same as everyone else commenting on this blog,but I will not allow anyone to slate my country,it's heritage and it's population (whatever colour or creed).

    OK on this thread it might not be so transparent,but on others it is shocking.Madeleine was British,she was one of us,I guess that is why the debate is so heated, this is not a political debate it is one of a missing child,and I do not personally care where she went missing,she needs to be found and the perpetrators of her dissapearance brought to justice.

    My thoughts on Snr Amaral are that he should not have written the book, but time will tell in this scenario.

    I doubt if my comments will be put on here, once again I do not wish anyone any harm,and we are all entitled to our own opinions, but it's time to stop this portugal against the UK nonsense, we are a united european state,and we should act as one.

    Steph

    ReplyDelete
  170. Hello poster (170) I think most of us reached the conclusion that members of Team McCann lurk on message boards and forums. Gerry and Kate McCann have remarked on these boards from the early days of Madeleine's disappearance. I have heard Gerry McCann call bloggers nutters or sad individuals.

    The McCanns should brief their team that anything they read on these message boards is already in the media. I for one am glad that their "spies" lurk on these boards at least the McCanns will be aware of the contempt for them. By those of us who are disgusted, that they've dodged jail for their part in the disappearance of Madeleine. Only for now, the clock is ticking for the McCanns.

    TICK TOCK TICK TOCK.

    ReplyDelete
  171. to 173: The British do not have the best reputation in the world for being 'fair' or honest.

    ReplyDelete
  172. Something has puzzled me for a while now, Where did the twins' bedsheets disappear to? Also didnt one of the "doctors" state that his daughter was sick on her bed and had to have her sheets changed, and wasnt it stated that houskeeping had no dirty sheets from anyone and never issued any clean sheets to either in the party?

    ReplyDelete
  173. To 173 : No one knows about the two dogs signalling about traces of blood or cadaver smell.
    No one saw the labelled walls of the apartment showing spots of blood up the side.
    No one saw the clear photo of the investigator dusting powder on a very undamaged, un-jemmmied window shutter.
    No one read the released files from the Portugese Justice dept.
    No one knows anything?

    ReplyDelete
  174. poster 173 quoted:

    "I am not saying anyone here is wrong, I'm just pointing out that no one has the right to make accusations out of equations that don't add up".

    But that is exactly what the McCanns have done, and this is the whole point isn't it. Yes, we all know another keyholder MAY have been able to get in, but the McCanns signalled the shutters and window, no-one else. I am confident that Snr Amaral and his team checked out every single keyholder who had access to that apartment block. It has to be remembered that Mr Snr Amaral was in the PJ and as such was not first on the scene so it was not his fault that contamination of the apartment had taken place with people treading everywhere and touching everything. That occurred before the local Police arrived also and perhaps, with hindsight, the local cops should have immediately cordoned the place off, but they were CONVINCED by the McCanns that they were looking for a live child.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Well I for one am hoping to see mention of the Gaspar statements in the mainsteam UK newspapers.

    Let's see if there are others out there who are able to throw some light on this, and have similar tales to tell.

    In case we have forgotten, we need to remind ourselves that the Gaspars, who are doctors themselves, felt so concerned by what they had witnessed, and for the safety of their own children at that time.

    When they heard that Madeleine went missing on another holiday which included Payne they had to speak up, so went to the police.

    They did the right thing, what else were they supposed to do.

    Turn the other way and ignore it?

    ReplyDelete
  176. To 175,I believe we have a fairer judicial system than most!
    To 173, errr sorry to dissapoint but yes we all know that!

    And yes no one knows anything not even you. When I was 16 I read J.D salinger's catcher in the rye,it enthralled me,captured me,I read it again when I was 30 and it meant nothing, by then I had entered maturity, had taken most of what life had to throw me.I saw things in a different perspective.

    Steph

    ReplyDelete
  177. Hello poster (176) I saw the photos of the McCanns PDL apartment and I too noticed there was no bedding in the twins cots,yet Madeleine's bed did have bedding.

    I heard Gerry McCann, say to a media reporter last week as he was leaving court. "We made a mistake when we left Madeleine alone in our apartment" I now firmly believe that Madeleine was left alone in that apartment for one reason only and that was for her to be taken.

    The McCanns wouldn't have wanted the twins to be there when she was taken so someone from their group who had a taken their mother along as a baby sitter could have been looking after the twins, without any knowledge that something was going to happen to Madeleine.

    It might sound far fetched to some, but it would explain why the twins never woke up during the commotion in the apartment. Especially when Kate McCann was on the bed, screaming and banging her fists on the wall and her husband was rolling on the floor wailing.

    It would also explain why Kate McCann ran to the Tapas bar to raise the alarm that Madeleine was missing. If the twins were in the apartment and Madeleine really had been abducted, she would have opened the window and screamed, she would not have left those twins alone.

    If there was sheets on the twins beds, those sheets could have been used to wrap Madeleine in, as she was taken away. Either by one of the McCanns, or someone known to them.

    ReplyDelete
  178. I am off now, Have said my piece and wish no harm on any of you, All I request is that you remember Madeleine Mcann was a UK citizen.
    Do not knock your own place of birth for the sake of a few "points up", This after all was not a UK case it was a portugese one, The UK police had nothing to do with this apart from sharing what they knew about the family which amounted to zilch!

    The portugese police made the mistakes of not "securing the scene of crime" that night,You cannot blame the UK police force for such behaviour!

    Do not mock your own judicial system, after all if your house was burgled the first phone call you all would make is to the police.

    Enough said

    Goodnight.

    Steph

    ReplyDelete
  179. Now we're getting somewhere - sounds very plausible Kathybelle!

    ReplyDelete
  180. Very good post 181. i also find it very strange to leave the twins alone and run back to the tapas bar if they were ment to be an abductor about ,Kate said she knew right away maddie was taken ,but still left the twins ....

    ReplyDelete
  181. So you are willing to dismiss the dogs Steph.

    No explanation for them alerting only in the McCanns' apartment and in their hire car, and only to certain items belonging to them.

    That about says it all.

    The official investigators say Madeleine is dead.

    You need to wake up and smell the coffee.

    ReplyDelete
  182. are all posters who think we have fair justice system in the uk aware of a report over a year ago in the times which said in a survey of top police and judges eighty per cent of those asked declined to say if or not they were freemasons. it has been noted that the leniency towards child abuse in recent trials is connected to this not to mention soft sentences for top people.Another times report was about tony blair holding a secret list of judges involved in porn

    ReplyDelete
  183. Steph

    Ironically the polar opposites in this debate are looking to achieve exactly the same thing...a resumption of a proper police investigation.
    The situation, as it stands, is farcical. We have ex-suspects running a non profit company that turns over millions and is supposed to be conducting an investigation of its own. The 'investigation is wholly ineffectual not least because it's not allowed to persue an enquiries in the counrty where the missing child disappeared.
    A resumption of an police investigation could be forced at any moment by said ex-suspects coming forward and requesting a resumption of the process and furnishing the investigation with the answers to 48 unanswered questions or insisting on a reconstruction.
    Seemingly well founded allegations of political interference in a police enquiry should concern anybody purportedly proud of the principles of law, free speach, democracy and justice, the very principles I once thought the United kingdom stood for.

    ReplyDelete
  184. The names of these people should be readily accessible. If not, what have they got to hide?

    ReplyDelete
  185. @ post # 185, anon

    You said the following
    ''Anonymous said... 185

    So you are willing to dismiss the dogs Steph.

    No explanation for them alerting only in the McCanns' apartment and in their hire car, and only to certain items belonging to them.

    That about says it all.

    The official investigators say Madeleine is dead.

    You need to wake up and smell the coffee.''

    I'm at a loss to understand where you are going with this, Steph didn't mention anything about the dogs as far as I can see, but was talking about the perception of the UK and comments made about the UK police.

    Your comments seem like a non sequitur to me. The danger about using the 'Dogs trumps everything' response is that you may miss the point someone was seeking to make, I believe.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Hello poster (173) I feel we have posted with each other on another board. Your adverse comments about Mr Amaral, is what makes me think we have, they are so like the comments that are made on the other forum.

    I could ask you to take a step back and think about your posts, but I know you won't. Remember the McCanns are the ones who caused the disappearance of Madeleine, when they selfishly put their needs to have a good time, before the health and safety of Madeleine.

    Mr Amaral has every reason to right his book, he is not the one who is to blame for whatever has happened to Madeleine, yet he has been kicked up hill and down dale, by the McCanns and the rest of their team.

    The McCanns have not been backward in coming forward, they have sold their story in many magazines and newspapers and used Madeleine's name as another way to aid their finances. Now they are going to try to sue Mr Amaral for a £1m, they're not interested in the contents of the book, which contains information that was in the PJ files, they just want the money.

    The McCanns say they want the book banned, because no one will look for Madeleine if they read it. If the McCanns had taken proper care of Madeleine, there would have been no book to be banned.

    The clock is ticking for the McCanns. TICK TOCK TICK TOCK

    ReplyDelete
  187. 167 and 151
    My belief that Madeleine died a couple of nights prior to the'staged' abduction is due to a number of reasons:
    When you analyse the bahviour of the parents - it first starts to deviate from the 'norm' a coupole of days before the 'abduction'.
    You start getting lots of mobile phone activity etc (all in the files).
    I think a lot of time was needed to dispose of the body /remove evidence / clean apartment etc and come up with a plausible scenario - not a mere 2 - 3 hours.

    A few peeople analysed the mobile phone records / creche attendance records etc etc and the most simple and logical 'solution' seemed to be a much earlier death - possibly on the night that Mrs Fenn heard the crying, which abruptly stopped.

    If you actually look at the creche records you can see how it was done. Much work was done on this by a guy in France. He believed the Smith sighting was of 'Gerry carrying Sean or Amelie' through the streets -hoping to be seen to give plausability to the abduction scenario. Gerry was interrupted as he tried to manipluate the shutters that night, by jeremy (TV Producer). I cant remember all the exact details now as this work was done months ago, but
    it became evident that death had already occurred prior to staged abduction. A couple of days prior to 'abduction' Kate and Gerry withdrew from all social gathering in the daytimes too....

    ReplyDelete
  188. a comparison with our(british justice) v. others may come about one day when some investigative journalist tired of having his FOI requests turned down because "it would not be in the interest of the public" asks what percentage here are turned down compared with say usa canada or australia.

    they of course would be given a reply that "it would not be in..............

    ReplyDelete
  189. Hello Steph/Sally (182) although you say you have left the board, I know you will be lurking, all I want to say is, yes Madeleine is a UK citizen, but what's that got to do with anything?

    Madeleine disappeared because of her parents neglect, not because she was in Portugal. I feel the UK police haven't done enough to help the Portuguese police in their investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.

    ReplyDelete
  190. To all who have answered me thankyou for your comments, I appreciate all of your comments I really do,I have read the files,followed the arguments for and against for the last few years, but what anyone (I think) has failed to mention so far is this:

    I am a Mother you see I have even buried one of my own children a few years back (through a congenital heart defect) I will add.
    I appreciate some parents crack at times,some parents do the most horrific of things to their children but to hide your child that you nurtured,loved and bought into the world,to leave that child buried on foreign soil,alone and without a catholic burial? In my opinion is far to much to contemplate.

    This is my opinion for doubting the Mcanns, and I hope in my soul I am correct because to think on the other side of the coin is far to painful.

    And no book should have been written, any information available should have been used to find the truth not for personal gain.

    Kathybelle do not give me any other name than my own please, my name is stephanie D'or I do not use other names as the owner of this blog can verify if she has access to IP addresses being posted. So I will ask you to refrain from attempting to apply my name (my real one) not a psedonym with anyone else thankyou.

    Steph

    ReplyDelete
  191. Steph @173 «I would not want to live anywhere else but here in the UK, and I will also state that yes we have our own fair amount of what I would call "scum" here on these isles, but we have a proud history and a FAIR legal system» please read and watch Nico Bento's case before speaking of a fair legal system http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/08/stolen-life-nico-bento-speaks-up-and.html

    ReplyDelete
  192. Joana, Mme Morais, I am not saying that our legal system is perfect but neither is it as corrupt as is being portrayed here. You have a proud sense of whom you are, but so do I.

    Our judicial system is fair,that is my opinion and I will stay with it,I am not here to influence your opinion,you are more than entitled to your own opinion.

    Madeleine McCann went missing on Portugese soil not British,the British legal system did not come into this,same as in the case of Ben Needham.

    Yes we are an old fashioned establishment, I will give you that,we get tied up in red tape that takes ages to unravel,but our system is not corrupt I cannot and will not accept that,I am sorry.
    I will now read your link you kindly passed on and will come back and comment.

    Steph

    ReplyDelete
  193. 173 -

    I admire you for being loyal to your country and, yes, we would all call the police when in trouble, but it seems to be a lottery these days as to when or whether they will turn up. And if they do, it's the perpetrators of crime who get more sympathy by our legal system than the victims in these violent times.

    As far as the LP's are concerned, one only has to read the statements they took from the tapas pals to see they treated them all with kid gloves.

    ReplyDelete
  194. Hello Steph, I don't believe Madeleine was loved by her parents, if she was, how could they treat her the way they did? I have said this a million times, if Madeleine genuinely was abducted, why did they not look for her? Why did they carry on as if they were on holiday?

    The locals of PDL, stayed off work to look for Madeleine. Holidaymakers gave up their holiday to look for Madeleine, yet the McCanns gave nothing up, even though it was their fault Madeleine had disappeared.

    Even now they aren't interested in the book Goncalo Amaral has written, their only gripe is people won't look for Madeleine if they read the book. They've never looked for Madeleine, from the minute she was missing.

    How Kate McCann had the nerve to admit that fact on television is beyond me. The police should have been waiting outside the studio for this couple and arrested them.

    Many of us have suffered extreme sadness in our lives, but that has nothing to do with the issue we are talking about.Many of us are parents and its because we are parents that we can't understand why the McCanns wilfully neglected Madeleine and maybe the twins.

    They left Madeleine and maybe the twins, in a very dangerous environment, not just one night, which would have been bad enough, all but one night of that so called family holiday.

    ReplyDelete
  195. Post 194. What you say about hiding one's child and burying on foreign soil being too much to contemplate may be true for normal people, but it wouldn't really apply to narcissists. After all normal people wouldn't leave their babies alone in the dark, night after night now would they? That would be far too painful for normal people, get it? Anything's possible in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  196. @191

    I have surmised before, Madeleine died on 1st May, the night Mrs Fenn heard cries of Daddy, Daddy for one and a half hours.

    Perhaps cries from Kate of Maddie, Maddie, (Oh my God, what have I done....) hence their later, and since proved wrong, claim that they did not call her Maddie..... oh yes they did.

    This gives plenty of time to store the body temporarily(the fridge), clean up (buying cleaning materials - credit card records non existent), including replacing the fridge (credit card records non existent), arrange temporary storage of the body in a freezer somewhere(where? there MUST be another accomplice), arrange a cover up story with false times as presented to the PJ(not perfect as we now know), and then, with no other alternative (perhaps the pressure from the accomplice was too much or perhaps the PJ were getting close) they hired a car (when they really, really didn't need one, the day before they left for Rome, also remember, they had not needed a car for the previous few weeks, and they used a "non-existant" credit card to hire the car.....) and whilst they were away in Rome, perhaps, the car was used to transport, and finally dispose of the body, hence the transmission of "bodily fluids" and cadaverine.

    The hire car was returned to the hire company with "unusually high" mileage. The car sat outside the McCanns later residence with the hatchback open "night after night according to a witness" due to an unusually pungent smell, which the McCanns attributed to fish, rotting pork, and nappies. Hmmmmmm.......

    Now....... are they guilty?

    ReplyDelete