15 January 2010

Kate McCann Blog Entry



Court Case( Injunction) in Lisbon 14th January 2010

We are currently in Lisbon for the trial to determine whether the injunction against Mr Amaral's book and DVD should remain in place. This trial is about whether the book is a true reflection of the official judicial process in to Madeleine's disappearance and whether its contents damage the ongoing search for Madeleine, her siblings and our reputations.

Mr Amaral's book and DVD contains some information from the PJ files but there is a lot in the files which is not in Mr Amaral's book. Hence it is highly selective and therefore biased. Mr Amaral's book contains his opinions rather than fact. His opinions differ from the findings in the PJ file. The conclusions of the latter are: 1.there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and 2. there is no evidence that Gerry or I are involved in Madeleine's disappearance. This is very different to the theories and conclusions of Mr Amaral. It is logical and common sense that spreading these theories as Mr Amaral did (and continues todo) damages the search to find our little girl. If the general public (and the Portuguese people in particular) are bombarded day in and day out with such theories, this will eventually 'colour' their understanding and judgement -lies and inaccuracies become fact. If people subsequently believe that Madeleineis dead and that we are involved in her disappearance then they will not look for Madeleine, will not consider any suspicions about others which they may have and will not come forward with information. We consider this highly detrimental to the search for Madeleine.


There are few points which have been raised in the last few days which I would like to address specifically:

Abduction theory: For us, there is only the abduction theory possible because we were not involved in Madeleine's disappearance and we know Madeleine did not wander off by herself. It is obvious and right that the police should consider other theories initially.

The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'

The dogs: We realise that the behaviour of the dogs was the turning point in the investigation for the PJ. The use of dogs has proved to be problematic and unreliable in previous cases

(please refer to the Jersey ‘Haut de La Garenne' case and other research published about their use and reliability). It is vital to note that alerts by such dogs are classified as intelligence rather than evidence, as police officers familiar with their use will verify. These alerts must be supported by forensics in order to be used as evidence. The results of the forensic examinations did not identify any blood or Madeleine's DNA. To suggestor use the dogs´ reactions as evidence is simply wrong and abusive.

The proposed reconstruction: The suggestion of a reconstruction of our movements and other key witnesses at the crime scene and/or surrounding area in the early days following Madeleine's abduction was declined by the PJ as 'not usual' for Portugal. When the PJ finally requested a reconstruction to take place in 2008, Gerry and I were still arguidos and as such would have attended for a reconstruction. Some key witnesses (including some of our friends)declined to attend the planned reconstruction as they were not convinced of the aims and usefulness of it. In particular, as the reconstruction was not to be shown to the media (and hence the general public), they did not feel it would help to find Madeleine. Had the intention been to show it to the general public, it may have 'jogged' memories and encouraged people to come forward with information. It should be added that other key witnesses were not invited to attend.

Our team is confident that the injunction will remain in place because none of thewitnesses thus far have been able to prove in court that Mr. Amaral's right to express his opinion is superior to the rights of our family to peace, respect and protection of reputation, and above all, the right to continue the searchfor our daughter Madeleine effectively and without hindrance. As has been made clear this week, Mr Amaral's ‘thesis' is not supported by any evidence. The search for Madeleine must go on until we find her and bring her abductor(s) to justice.

Kate McCann





133 comments:

  1. published for future memory: "pela boca morre o peixe"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Depuis quand c'est aux témoins de juger de l'opportunité d'une reconstitution?
    Sale temps pour les Mccann, journal télévisé 20 heures chaîne publique française avec interview d'AMARAL (30m 12s)
    http://jt.france2.fr/20h/

    ReplyDelete
  3. that kate wants locking up,silly bitch

    ReplyDelete
  4. They are really desperate now, aren't they?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Prove your bleating abduction fairy tale, or stuff it Kate McCann.

    Prove it, or stuff it!

    Stop trying to stifle freedom of speech and opinion and threatening people who dare to oppose what you say.

    You say that the publication of the book may hinder your search.

    What search is that then, being as how you never got off your backside to go search for your daughter at all, just jogged and had your hair streaked within the first few days.

    In other words, get lost and leave us alone, you utter pair of control maniacs.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well well well.

    They are well and truly RATTLED!

    what a load of cobblers!

    ReplyDelete
  7. How didi you know that Madeleine did not wander off by herself? We have heared that before but it has never been explained. This is always the problem with you - making statements with nothing to support them. Please try harder.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks Joana.

    I think this women is truly deluded. Didn't she realized yet the amount of information appeared on twitter, Sky news and in the Telegraph? No amount of silly blog entry will change that. OK, I recon she is reaching out to the readers of the Sun.

    Joana, I would like to take the opportunity here to thank you and your team the tremendous work you are doing and have done for finding the truth and achieve justice for Madeleine.

    the-truthseeker

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wow running scared or what these two have had their cage well and truly rattled, Good work Mr Amaral you darling man.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pretty eloquent statement from one made so distraught by this weeks proceedings. In fact I have never before heard such eloquence flow from Mrs Mccann!

    Still trying to control the whole case with no regard for the investigative documentation or the testimonies of the PJ involved with the investigation. What next? - a case against Mr. Amaral and colleagues for conspiring against two innocent responsible parents who have nothing to hide and are only trying find their missing daughter?

    How very tragic, no official body is prepared to continue the search for their child who disappeared by magic so they must resort to using the services of inappropriate private investigators, who are incapable of nothing but embezzlement? What a dire position to be in.

    Perhaps the case should be re-opened and thus investigated by the professionals - eh! Mr and Mrs Mccann?

    ReplyDelete
  11. hey kate and gerry, WOOF WOOF,YOU MUST BE THE BIGGEST TITS WALKING THIS EARTH IF YOU THINK ANY ONE BELIEVES A WORD YOU SAY AFTER THE LAST 3 DAYS

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is about time now that the McCanns by a court order being evaluated by a psychiatrist. It is obvious that both are seriously mentally disturbed and suffering from the «Professional Liar Syndrome». By now, they really seem to believe in whatever they make up and claim to be true. There is no evidence that Maddie is dead? Died in Apartment 5A on May 3, 2007 or probably earlier? What did Gerry in his megalomaniac manner say: "Ask the dogs!" Well, the dogs have been asked and they have spoken. And - most important - dogs don't lie! Actually, if evaluated in a sober manner, one comes to the conclusdion that the McCanns are finished and may soon end-up in prison. WEhat did their crooked lawyer Isabel Duarte claim? "The McCanns have not been involved in producing material evidence (the sightings) leading to the conclusion that Maddie is still alive!" Garbage! What about the fact that most of the alleged sightings happened in Marocco and every rtime was mentioned that the girl in question waswith bare feet and dressed with a pyjama. Isn't that intertesting? The police did NOT reveal the girl to be bare feet and wearing a pyjama! So, who else knew about it and circulated the message?What about the statement of the former Spanisch private detective who used to work for Metodo 3? He explicitly declared never having had the task of searching for Madeleine but looking for potential witnesses in Marocco and buy them off for claiming false sightings! No involvement of the McCanns either? Isabel Duartes claim does not hold water! And the beat goes on and on and on... And now the final struggle: Filing criminal charges against Gonçalo Amaral for alleged violation of the secrecy of justice! Who do the McCanns think they are? The new European Emperors whos word is law? No way, they are simply criminals and suspects in a homicide case and deserve to be treated exactly like that. If there is indeed a violation of the secrecy of justice perpetrated by Gonçalo Amaral, it would be the task of the public prosecutor to file charges. Most certainly not the job of the McCanns or their immoral lawyer Isabel Duarte. Not long from now, and this farce will come to a grinding halt.

    ReplyDelete
  13. With regard to the reconstruction : surely it was worth trying, whether or not the "aims or usefulness" were in question.

    If my best friend's little girl had disappeared, I would try ANYTHING to help, whether I thought it useful, pointless, whatever. I would do ANYTHING.

    This just does not make sense.

    ReplyDelete
  14. i wish they would just piss off and get on with their sodding fictitious search, most folk are fed up to back teeth with being subjected to their ‘dramaturgy’

    ReplyDelete
  15. According to the files, the only fingerprint on the window is a thumbprint of Kate's.
    The shutters had not been 'jemmied'. We all learned from Aunty Phil about the 'jemmying' of the bedroom window.
    She(Phil) in her turn, learnt of this via a phonecall from Gerry, priming his sister.
    Phil, over in Scotland, then told the world what she had of course not witnessed herself.
    Kate is re-writing all of this, though it's probably been written by Clarence Mitchell.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well she would say that wouldn't she, in her position, fighting for her life. There is indeed some indication of a death in the apartment, but there is absolutely no independent evidence of an abduction. I wish there were.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The dogs unreliable? How many times were they reliable that is the question she needs to answer, say out of 10 times or 100. Scientifically I would like to know as well what has been the actual accuracy of these dogs? She does not proffer any other reason for the dogs reaction. Why ?

    She appears to have gained his arrogance. No matter Amral has indicated he will fight to the European Courts so they will never get any money and even if they did all the facts will be revealed by then.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Why worry about what Mr Amaral, or indeed anyone, says, when there is a missing child to find? Madeleine won't be found in a Lisbon court room or in Goncalo's chequebook.

    Surely time is of the essence for this poor mite if we are to believe that she is still alive somewhere. How on earth can Kate waste yet more time writing a blog and spending most of the week in Portugal while the badlands of the Algarve remain unsearched?

    Innocent parents have neither time nor reason to justify themselves to anyone, including the internet bloggers that they so despise. Too little, too late now for self-exculpatory ramblings in the blogosphere.

    Angela

    ReplyDelete
  19. If they want look for Maddie, why they don't go Algarve and looking for a lawless place where Maddie is in a laird? They will won the injuncion and prove she is alive.

    ReplyDelete
  20. so it took Gerry a day and a half to come up with that "thesis"... pathetic

    we know they are lying - the PJ know they are lying and soon the whole world will know they are lying

    try & get your red herrings straight will you?


    oh and btw... jemmied shutter anyone????

    ReplyDelete
  21. Well, she is a lot more articulate with words when she doesn't have to speak them, isn't she? Not an "errm" or a "you know" or an "I mean" in sight. Oh, it's just occurred to me, maybe someone wrote it for her.

    ReplyDelete
  22. How cunning the McCanns are!

    The blog above, attributed to Kate McCann (but no doubt a contrived piece of Team McCann propaganda) claims that the PJ refused their request to do a reconstruction in the early days. Put like that, no doubt they did refuse because the McCanns' request was doubtless for an all-singing, all-dancing TV spectacular that had nothing to do with furthering the investigation and everything to do with furthering "The Campaign" by manipulating the media nad viewers all over the world.

    Thank goodness Portugal's secrecy of justice prevented such a McMini-movie!

    ReplyDelete
  23. She ignores all the crap they have said in the past, doors locked, unlocked, window jemmied; now it's window wide open (and only her fingerprints on it, oops! Woof Woof.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is a major development. This is the first time we have ever heard from Kate in an unprompted manner, and she actually addresses some of the questions people have been posing for nearly 3 years!!

    They are very very rattled. I think she makes a fair point about the reconstruction, while avoiding the fuller questions re the window. Maybe she might like to answer another question: why will the McCanns not undergo a lie detector test and have done with it/try silence the doubters once and for all?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thanks for this article Joana. Those photos above speak volumes. The only ones who are bombarding the public full in the face Kate are yourselves and your team. You could have got on quietly with your lives with the twins; let the police in both countries get on with their enquiries, gone back for the reconstuction, whether or not your pals agreed to go. Team McCann got the world media involved from the start, so to talk of Amaral bombarding everyone is, quite frankly, to use a familiar term, ludicrous! And sueing Amaral is one way to publicise everything he says and thinks, so you have shot yourselves in the foot by your vindictive action.

    ReplyDelete
  26. She has not explained how her friends (4 doctors, 1 lawyer, 1 grandmother & 1 fantasist ) know better than the police about the aims and usefulness of a reconstruction.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I doubt that this was written by Kate McCann. She has never been so eloquent before. It seems a PR ploy, probably written by members of their legal team and published under her name.

    May justice prevail. Wherever that may lead.

    ReplyDelete
  28. remember the last time Gerry (nice blog by the way, Gerry) tried to dis-credit the dogs? He picked on a US case where the dogs findings eventually forced a confession out of the suspect

    "Ask the dogs, Gerry"

    ReplyDelete
  29. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243596/Shes-terrifyingly-hes-boiling-rage-So-HAVE-McCanns-trial.html
    Les médias ne savent pas sur quel pied danser. Que vont-ils dire quand les Mccann publieront les comptes annuels du fonds ou "oublieront" de le faire, ou quand Halligen sera jugé et qu'on constatera que les Mccann n'ont pas porté plainte contre lui? Quant à la reconstitution, il n'est pas trop tard...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Woof..woof...kate mccann,run,run,after... a "golden bone". Yeah...what a FUNNY turn in the investigation! Dogs smell CADAVER find BLOOD and YOU find it "FUNNY"....ah...if you find it "funny" then...
    I can see that your read blogs and forums which gives you a "window of opprotunity" to update your personal blog,once again distorting what people talk about which is simply what is in those dreaful PJ"s files and has been totally pored OFFICIALLY in COURT,your very favorite place of all....
    na...I find it was finally excellent from your "friends" to refuse to come for a reconstruction.Tell you why.
    I personally believe you should have insisted they did it because THIS would have lifted any if not all suspicions that hang over you,dont you think? These suspicions are in fact,MADELEINE"s memory haunting you,days and nights,they make you feel dirty,hence your constant fight to "wash your image").Kate , dear me! your friends are not very goos friends arent they? You say they did not go for this reconstruction because they know it wouldnt help the "search for Madeleine"....tut tut...err..really?
    Dont you find this FUNNY? mmmm...
    About "breach of secrecy",what was this "secret meeting" you held all together with your very good friends during your ARGUIDO time? Are you sure you have not breached the secrecy? mmmmmm...
    As BIG as the Eiffel Tower,kate.....
    I also think it was very good of you to take Dr.Amaral to court because you have been standing very high there, listening to what is in the hated files.It was a HEARING and the judge as much as you did,listened to what very serious and highly professional men had to say.Men who were professionally involved in the investigation. Dr.Amaral did not spread lies nor did his witnesses as you are so desparate to make people believe.
    etc....etc...etc...
    kate,this is becoming really boring like your tender hubby said once...
    By the way,if you get bored I suggest this excellent piece of reading.It is all about the lies the PJ has written and repeated in front of a judge .Now do you really think these PORTUGUSE witnesses would lie in a PORTUGUESE court? How did you like Mr.Moita Flores"s statement? All out on twitter,repeated and repeated,irreversibly repeated....You can win the injunction,yes,but it is too LATE,far too late... err...you know....I mean...
    I am very confident that one of these days you will have to answer many more than 48 questions and it will be in court. But this time it wont be to "look for Madeleine" will it?
    etc...etc... etc...Sorry,I am getting bored and probably boring my fellow posters
    Get a life,kate,before it is too late. Drop it and legg it to .....Argentina

    ReplyDelete
  31. I am convinced the McCanns have split personalities. They are just like Jekyl and Hyde characters. They can change in the wink of an eye from grieving, to laughter, hostility, pomposity etc; in fact whatever the situation at any given time necessitates. The fact that Kate got home and straight away headed for her computer blog says it all. They are definitely very very worried that their perfect parent image is crumbling! And their tapas pals must be very worried too!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Kate...I forgot to post the bit of reading I suggested you did if you get bored
    PJ Files: page 2601, vol.x, of process NUIPC- 201/07.0. GALGS

    Enjoy it!

    ReplyDelete
  33. I think we can safely say that the thicko that is Kate McCann did NOT write the blog entry.
    Going by it's puke inducing style and content, my money is on Clarry.
    WOOF WOOF
    TIC TOC.

    ReplyDelete
  34. the mccanns only know one language and thats lying
    the pair of you need to come clean or maybe jane tanner will drop you in it when she has to go to court ....im sorry i have no respect for the pair of you lying scumbags

    ReplyDelete
  35. There's a simple answer to the McCanns saying their search for Madeleine will be hindered if the book is not banned.

    THEY CAN REQUEST THE CASE BE REOPENED, AND THEN THE PROFESSIONAL INVESTIGATORS WILL CONTINUE WHERE THEY LEFT OFF.

    But then, you wont request that will you McCanns.

    Why is that Kate and Gerry McCann? Why is that?

    Oh yes, I forgot, didn't you say something about the investigators have been planting evidence against you.

    Quite frankly, that is a last resort, scraping the barrel excuse.

    Very few, but your devotees will swallow it.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Is this the best Carter Ruck can write for you Kate ?
    What a load of utter rubbish.
    Do you really think anyone is going to be fooled anymore with this drivel?
    Your time is up, say goodbye to the fund and your few remainning supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I smell another lie.
    She signs a piece which I very much doubt she wrote herself.
    Lame attempt.
    FAIL.

    ReplyDelete
  38. http://bloguistan.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  39. yes, there are things on the files that we can not find in Amaral's book.
    For example the rest of the statement of Mrs. Gaspar's, telling about Gerry.

    Maybe in Amaral's next book, Kate.
    Why are you in such a hurry?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Oh dear! Someone sounds very rattled, methinks! A few important points:

    Why don't they offer to do the reconstruction now that they are no longer arguidos? And since when did witnesses decide what was useful or not in a criminal investigation? The police are the professionals here, not the Tapas group.

    Why doesn't Kate cooperate with the police by answering the 48 questions she refused to answer originally?

    Why don't they give us proof that Eddie and Keela are not reliable, when the history of their careers as sniffer dogs shows they are extremely reliable. In the Haut de Garenne investigation, Eddie found the scent of a dead body, the forensic team picked up some pieces of material for analysis - THE DOG DOES NOT DECIDE WHAT TO PICK UP!

    A far more interesting case is that of Attracta Harron in N Ireland, where Eddie was instrumental in helping the police solve the case. Go here to read about the case and to see just how accurate Eddie really is -

    http://www.martinharran.com/openstate.htm

    Pay particular attention to this part -

    'On February 20, 2004, police employed the use of the Victim Recovery Unit dogs from England, which were highly trained to detect and alert handlers to the presence of human remains. A video without sound was shown in the court showing a Springer Spaniel dog (Eddie) examining two cars and a small van before being taken to the Lantra that had been driven by Hamilton and subsequently burned out, allegedly maliciously.

    The video clearly showed the spaniel examining the other vehicles without reacting, and as soon as it entered the Lantra it began barking and refused to get out. Its search of the vehicle focused on the front passenger and rear seats.

    Further forensic examination was carried out in the rear and passenger compartments of the vehicle and blood was detected from material taken from the car for examination. A car mat from the rear of the car was also shown to contain blood, and because of that, the investigation focused on Hamilton, Mr Mooney said, which included a comprehensive search of the property at Concess Road and in particular the sites of fires in the garden.'


    I should add that it says later in the article that Eddie was also instrumental in finding the body.

    Not accurate, eh? Looks like someone's trying to hide Eddie's brilliance at what he does!

    As for the official summing-up by the Portuguese public prosecutor, she has omitted to say one very important thing, ie that while they did not know for certain if Madeleine was dead or alive or what might have happened to her, they considered she was more likely to be dead than alive. From the summing-up -

    '... (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.'

    IMO if Mr Amaral and his colleagues used their knowledge and extensive experience of crime-investigation to come to the same conclusion, ie that Madeleine was more likely to be dead, then why is he not allowed to say so? Surely this is the worst kind of censorship, of denial of his right to speak his mind? This summing-up also shows the abduction theory is by no means the only one that needs to be considered.

    Plenty more I could say, but I'm sure lots of other people will be pointing all this out so I'll refrain for the moment. I'm only back home and have lots of catching up to do.

    Looking forward to reading what others have to say later.

    ReplyDelete
  41. What about your abduction theory,
    no evidences nor strong indications?

    A dog barking at a pajama T-shirt, barking at cuddle cat, behind the sofa, the Scenic smelling badly...
    15 alleles out of 19(blood).
    washed up blood behind the sofa.
    The Smiths...

    One tiny evidence of abduction, Kate, ONE!, please.
    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  42. No Kate & Gerry it's not on your blog that you should prove your innocence but to the portuguese policemen in charge of the case !

    ReplyDelete
  43. Not in a month of Sunday's did Kate write this blog entry.

    As Martin Brunt said of them, or rather of Gerry McCann - He is rattled at what he listened to in Court.

    The McCann's said of the information given by witnesses at Court this week:

    'It is just what we expected, there is nothing new in what they have to say, they still have no evidence, it is only their opinion, not facts!'

    I can only say likewise of Kate's blog entry. Just business as usual! Nothing new!

    She states,they are innocent, it was an abduction, the files, the police, the world have got it wrong, they would have done a reconstruction, but their friends wouldn't co-operate, they didn't like, that it would not have been done their way, blah blah blah and then, to top it all Kate said:

    "To suggestor use the dogs� reactions as evidence is simply wrong and abusive."

    --

    Is it really?

    Kate and Gerry are certainly no animal lovers!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  44. 21 - My thoughts exactly. Is this the same Kate McCann who could hardly string a sentence together on Panorama or in interviews?

    My guess would be draft by Gerry, passed to Clarence, reviewed by lawyers, signed off by Kate McCann.

    It's interesting that they appear to realise now that they have to justify their position - which is a first really. I don't think they are at all confident of victory.

    But it is of course full of holes. What possible grounds can she have for saying Madeleine did not wander off? The door was open for heaven's sake and she had a history of wandering from her bed at night.

    The dogs identified 7 times. Odds of them being wrong on a 95% accuracy rate (probably below their true rate) would be 64 million to 1 I think if I recall a 3A discussion correctly. They did not identify anywhere else. If the McCanns are right, they can only really be right by accusing their handler of malpractice (and they are very careful not to do that).

    The dogs were not wrong about human remains in the Jersey case. There were teeth found which would have had blood and tissue attached.

    I'm off to count the green arrows on the Daily Mail site.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I smell shite!

    ReplyDelete
  46. How come out of all the cars the dogs sniffed it was only the McCanns hire car that was picked out by the dogs?

    They aren't biased at all.

    They don't even know the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Kate and Gerry both continue to emphasize "evidence" rather than making clear statements of fact, answering the questions the police asked, returning to PdL for the reconstruction etc. If this is not evidence of their confidence in the COVER-UP, I would like to know what is.

    Although the McCanns are counting on only "legally admissible evidence, there is plenty of common sense and logical evidence they are involved in Maddie's disappearance. Some examples:

    "They've taken her" - immediate cry from Kate.

    Kate's fingerprint was the only one on the window.

    The bruises clearly visible on Kate's wrist and arms in photos taken the first few weeks.

    Eddie, the cadaver dog alerted on Kate's clothing, the floor near the window, a shelf in the parent's bedroom (where a large blue sports is seen in the first crime photos and which is then missing from the shelf) the ground outside the window, on a piece of cloth found in the SECOND apartment used by the McCanns, on their rental car, on the key fob to that car and on "cuddle cat."

    Keela, the blood dog, alerted to the same areas as had been noted by the cadaver dog - indicating the presence of blood in those spots.

    The apartment evidence was sent to the British forensic lab - who first said there was a 15/19 marker indicating it was Madeleine's blood found.

    The McCann's calls made to family announcing the JEMMIED windows.

    Jane Tanner's frequent changes to the description of the "abductor". The fact that Tanner did not IMMEDIATELY alert searchers. The fact that Tanner changed the DIRECTION she claimed the "abductor" was walking.

    Gerry McCann and Jane Tanner's disagreement about where McCann was standing talking to Wilkins and the fact that neither Wilkins nor McCann saw Tanner and that at least one restaurant employee stated that Tanner never left the table before Kate began screaming.

    The complete black-out of the Smith sighting, in contrast to all the other bogus sightings pursued by the McCann "ex-SAS" investigators.

    Metodo3, McCann lead investigator, charged in connection to drug trafficking in Spain.

    Brian Kennedy's meetings with the Smith family and Murat.

    Tapas 9's refusal to take part in the police reconstruction.

    Kate McCann's refusal to answer the 48 questions.

    Kate's call to police re: her dream and the location of Maddie's body.

    The inconsistencies in the Tapas timeline, scribbled on the cover of Madeleine's coloring book - indicating knowledge she would never again need it.

    British suppression of the Gaspar's statement re: David Payne.

    Kate and Gerry McCann's erased telephone calls.

    McCann satisfaction with the work done by Kevin Halligen and yet he was said to have only produced Google images and NONE of the hotline phone records were even checked. Although the McCanns are suing Amaral and have sued British newspapers, they are not pursuing any charges against Kevin Halligen.

    The statements made by the McCanns, Mitchell and others about Raymond Hewlett - in some cases outright lies, based on stories that were planted in the press by Peter Verran (ex-Scots guard) and the Thompsons.

    The luggage compartment of the McCann rental car left open to air every day.

    And on it goes.

    This is not a case of an innocent couple being vilified by a "disgraced cop". It is a case of a highly suspicious couple, most likely involved in the hiding of their daughter's body (if not directly doing the work of it, knowing it was done and by whom) vilifying a professional, intelligent and courageous police officer who has refused to be bullied into silence.

    ReplyDelete
  48. This blog entry above shows how worried the McCanns are.
    Instead of getting some rest after three difficult days, Kate comes up with an explanation, something she never did before.
    They feel they lost the three days battle.
    Why did they just not dismiss the book as being garbage and continued their daily lives?
    It was the case, when some media said Gerry was not Maddie's father.
    They knew it was not true and very soon we al agreeded that that was garbage.
    But Amaral's book is not garbage. It is based on the results of the investigaions.
    Accurate investigations, with the help of the British police and the Scotland Yard.
    And the British dogs.
    And...Payne and Gerry.


    By the way, why don't they search for Madeleine themselves?
    Or too busy with "leaving no wallet unturned"?

    ReplyDelete
  49. I don't think the blog entry was written by Kate. They've had help covering up this crime from the first day it went public and probably even before that. They continue to believe that the "cleaning up of evidence" by their helpers will protect them from ever facing the consequences of their choices. You see, if the McCanns go down, so does the Forensic Science Service, members of the British police and intelligence organisations, government officials and others who have been involved in ensuring no actual physical evidence exists.

    P.S. Has anyone heard from Eef Hoos recently?

    ReplyDelete
  50. my humble views on this week's proceedings:

    no winners - well except for the international media

    only losers

    but some fora have brought it down to the winning or losing of their 'favourite' football team

    on the left, Team Amaral..wearing silly hats and getting sozzled at lunchtime

    on the right, Team McCann..whiny voices and jogging at times of grief

    (or whatever other insults one side would like to hurl at the other)

    the sad thing is....every football match needs a ball

    Madeleine has become this ball..or at least her name, as we don't know where she is (passed away or very much alive).

    I am just as sick of Amaral's self-promotion as I am of the McCann's wristbands and balloons

    IMHO

    ReplyDelete
  51. I don't for a minute believe Kate wrote that entry.

    On the off chance that she did, then the lady doth protest too much.

    ReplyDelete
  52. The dogs are not wrong.

    The McCanns are trying on their spin again.

    I doubt it will go down well with the UK public because those dogs are greatly respected by them.

    When are these McCanns going to stop trying to control everything and everyone?

    Hopefully, SOON, VERY SOON.

    They are behaving like people who are not rational and really not believable with their plea to be believed that the dogs are wrong, the investigators have planted evidence against them, (presumably the UK police as well, as they also worked on the case), and so it goes on.

    Everybody is wrong but them and only their voice must be heard.

    Do us all a favour McCanns, get lost, and take your silly stories with you, and stop trying to intimidate and control everybody who disagrees with you.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Anon 50

    So what do you have to contribute to the discussion?

    Go take a dip you fool.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Ok kate lets suppose that the perpetrator did leave the window open as a " red herring". He/she couldn't go out of the front door as it was locked and needed a key to open it. He/she must have gone out of the patio doors and down the steps and then - oops bumped into Gerry as he was rushing to get into position at the top of the road in time for JT to spot him/her. Likely story - pull the other one!

    ReplyDelete
  55. "Team Amaral..wearing silly hats and getting sozzled at lunchtime" - straight out of the early articles penned by the hacks sent out to PdL to actually do a JOB for their papers.

    Whoever you are, take a look at what the British press has written about Goncalo Amaral before you compare apples and oranges.

    The ONLY reason Amaral is written of in the manner you just did - "sozzled at lunchtime", disgraced, bumbling etc. is because he is a threat to the cover up and a whole lot of people have a whole lot to lose. Including journalists who gave up their objectivity and submitted spin instead of news.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Kate on the window-

    The window: "I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim."

    ---

    That is 'every little detail' except the 40 + questions!

    I have to say, if your child was abducted from your home and the window to the bedroom was lying open, you suspected either someone had come in or gone out through the window - Would you describe this as a 'little detail?'

    No, this would be major! Yet Kate describes it as a little detail.

    I was speaking to my friend a few moments ago and she was laughing at Kate saying the window may have been left open as a potential exit route or as a RED HERRING.

    To this my friend said - 'Maybe someone should tell her we've all been thinking that for a very long time!'

    I laughed so hard!

    Poor old Kate. What a life she must have with Mr. Angry. I notice he didn't put his 'signature' to this latest blog entry, duped poor old Kate into making a fool of herself, looking like the dopey one.

    They have made some silly comments in the past two years, Clarence too, but this latest blog is the funniest yet!

    I think they must have been playing a game of Cleudo and got carried away!

    Funniest bit is when speaking of the dogs, she said:

    'Please refer to the Jersey ‘Haut de La Garenne' case and other research published about their use and reliability)

    Doh! Okay Kate will do.

    They are now giving bloggers links and referrals - is that the same bloggers they want silenced that have to go and read the sites/articles they recommend to us?

    There is something quite clearly wrong with these people.

    I certainly won't sleep tonight for laughing!

    Good night all.

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  57. Wouldn't it be interesting to know what is in the UK police files. Do they believe in the abductor. (After all it is only a theses and we know theses are meaningless.) Or do they agree with the Portuguese police. It seems because of secrecy we shall never know.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anonymous # 50, unfortunately this is NOT a game and should not be treated as such, there are many victims here, and in some cases it is a matter of life or death. Whatever came to the child was caused by her parents lack of care and harmful neglect. Mr Amaral was not at fault for her being left alone night after night, and for that matter she was also left at the day care day after day, what kind of parent does that? A very self centered parent, or worse.

    ReplyDelete
  59. They cannot even wait for the injunction hearing to coclude but are already trying to influence the public and who knows maybe even the Judge. How dare they. They have no respect, why not go to the hearing 10 February and be witness then McCann instead of bleating on your blog? Do it under oath. Only you do not like questions.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Doesn't sound like the "you know" Kate we all know at all.

    Who decided it was time for Kate to blog, I wonder.

    What's our Ger up to at this moment?

    All very odd.

    I hope Goncalo and his family are bearing up ok to the media pressure.
    What an amazing man he is.

    ReplyDelete
  61. "...there is a lot in the files which is not in Mr. Amaral's book.." How would Kate know? I'm sure she said the other day in Portugal that she hadn't read the files.

    ReplyDelete
  62. No way did 'poor frail Kate' write that herself. She is far too inarticulate to do so. It was obviously written for her.

    Has anyone read this disgusting piece of shite from the Wail ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243596/Shes-terrifyingly-hes-boiling-rage-So-HAVE-McCanns-trial.html

    I truly hope that Dr Amaral will sue sections of the British media for libel and defamation of character once this is all over - or even before.

    Thank you Joana and Astro and friends for bringing this blog to us. It is a godsend to those of us who are expats. God bless you and Madeleine.

    Hamish x

    ReplyDelete
  63. Kate and Gerry Woof Woof off no sorry Woosh Woosh off sorry F--k F--k off you pair of evil B------S.

    ReplyDelete
  64. IMO Kate McCann didn't write any of that. In her previous blog entry, last time they were in Portugal, she couldn't even spell 'disappoint', let alone construct a coherent sentence. Of course coherent sentences are no proof of logical thought or sensible argument, as is proved by this easily-refuted nonsense supposedly written by Kate.

    Anon ≠49, I too am interested in Eef Hoos.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Looks like some people may have reverted back to wearing nappies- brown nappies to be specific! It's only a matter of time now before the allegations against David Payne are made public. I hope so anyway!

    ReplyDelete
  66. KATE, HAVE YOU BEING INSIDE THE COURT THE 3 DAYS? You seem to get lost in translation. WHY DID YOU POST THAT IN YOUR BLOG AND DON'T TOLD THAT IN COURT, TO THE JUDGE LOOKING AT THE WITNESSES EYES?

    YOU ARE DESPERATE. Please stop trying to foolish the world and acting like if we are all stupid or child's with less then 2 years old. NOBODY WILL BUY ANYMORE YOUR LIES AND YOUR MANIPULATION.

    Now, for us: Am I dreaming or she violated some secrecy with that entry on her blog? I just compare with Face Oculta and other cases which reach the court. People refuse to answer and made comments on the cases because they should not violate the Secrecy as the process still in trial.

    How can we classify her post? Manipulation of the Court and the judge? Pressures on the judge? manipulation of the Public opinion? another version about the night which her daughter disappeared ( so many versions)?

    From what I can Highlight, I think she is not real: In the Court was proved that all witnesses believe that the child died. Even one said, we know exactly how the things happen. Another show the court that they don't UNDERSTAND WHY AFTER A FORENSIC EXAME OF SAMPLES SHOWING 15 alleles in 19 MATCHING WITH MADDIE, THE NEXT CAME INCONCLUSIVE WITH THE EXCUSE OF BEING CONTAMINATED. IT WAS SUSPICIOUS FOR ALL THE INSPECTORS.( cont)

    ReplyDelete
  67. ( Cont)
    One day, Gerry in front of the court door and direct to the world, accused Ricardo PAiva of lying in the court about Kate phone call. The day after, Kate accuse Moita Flores of lying about the window and the physical impossibility of an abductor to pass trough the window with a live child. And the judge asked Moita Flores if he knows the flat. He said yes and he add that he ask the opinion of several experts which arrive at the same conclusion as he had. Paulo Sargento, long ago show as well trough his animated reconstruction that the abduction was almost impossible because the timeline gave by the Mccann's to the police, leave no window of opportunity to any abductor to act. AND MOITA FLORES IS A VERY COMPETENT CRIMINOLOGIST WITH A LOT OF EXPERIENCE AND REPUTATION. Somebody which knows very well the court rules and will not take a risk to lie in court in a case about a little child. By the way lying in court, change the status of a witness into arguido. In her Fairy tale, Kate believe that top investigators in Portugal will made such mistake. SHE IS REALLY A GIRL FROM A COUNTRYSIDE ISOLATED FROM THE REST OF EUROPE, IN AN ISLAND.

    I will remark from her post:
    "If people subsequently believe that Madeleine is dead and that we are involved in her disappearance then they will not look for Madeleine, will not consider any suspicions about others" . The sentence should be.... PEOPLE WILL NOT DONATE TO OUR FUND ANYMORE AND WE SHOULD FACE CHARGES IN ANOTHER CRIME.

    "Our team is confident that the injunction will remain in place because none of the witnesses thus far have been able to prove in court that Mr. Amaral's right to express his opinion is superior to the rights of our family to peace, respect and protection of reputation,". Is Kate saying that they know in advance what is the decision of the court? INTERESTING. AND WHAT ABOUT THE REPUTATION OF MR. AMARAL which have not committed absolutely any crime to went trough that nightmare? He was called into the case because of his competent pass with a lot of cases solved with success. Or she believe that for such delicate case, the heads of PJ will take a risk to give the case to somebody without experience and reputation? He was completed vilified and destroyed by 2 neglect parents which don't help the police, had a parallel agenda, and decide to call the Media into their lives.
    You were the only ones to blame about ruining your peace and your reputation, with your strange behaviour, your spoke persons, your lawyers and your spin machine with support of several British tabloids.

    AND DON'T THROW SAND AT OUR EYES, REGARDING THE RECONSTRUCTION. ALL PARENTS OF A MISSING CHILD WILL FIGHT AGAINST YOUR FRIENDS DECISION OF REFUSING TO DO THE RECONSTRUCTION. You were the only ones which accepted that decision with a huge smile and we know why. By the way, it was large reported everywhere that you, your friends and Mitchell had a meeting in a hotel short before PJ went to UK to execute the rogatory letters. Your friends excuse to avoid the reconstruction was programed on that meeting, IS IT?

    AND THE DOGS AND JERSEY. ANNOTHER FAIRY TALE. SINCE YOU DECIDE TO CONNECT THAT CASE TO YOURS, BETTER YOU KNOW WHAT PUBLIC FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD BELIEVE-- COVER-UP!!! A shame... Beautiful connection.
    Since gerry highlighted to journalist that who is in trial is the book and not you or him, if the court decide to re-open Maddie case don't forgot to call the journalists to say that your trial was done already at the civel court of Lisbon. THE CIRCUS TO BE CONTINNUED....

    ReplyDelete
  68. The odds of the dogs falsely alerting on so many occasions just to the McCanns things/places must be astronomical.
    Post 47 says it all really.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Agreed Anon 66/67

    The McCanns are always accusing people of lying, as if there is some sort of conspiracy against them.

    They have to control everybody no matter what.

    I bet Gerry could not stay there longer as he must have been bursting with rage hearing all that truth (lies, to him of course).

    ReplyDelete
  70. @ Anonymous 24

    Would be a good idea. Lies' detectors nowadays have nothing in common with old polygraphs.
    http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5581230.ece

    ReplyDelete
  71. Quite the deceitful blog entry by Mrs. McCann. This is what is known in the PR business as, "Damage Control."

    ReplyDelete
  72. Talking of lie detectors...this is worth a watch:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJ_SKvzUD4

    ReplyDelete
  73. I hope the judge realises that Kate McCann did not cooperate with the investigation by refusing to answer the 48 questions regarding the disappearance of her daughter.

    And, that instead of staying to answer further questions the McCanns left PDL, and went and got themselves extradition lawyers instead.

    Also, that if they so wish, the investigation could be reopened at their request. Yet they refuse to request it.

    All in all, this does not look like people who are seriously interested in doing everything possible to find their daughter.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Im with anon 15, do you really believe she actually wrote this? this was written and posted by CM and his team, for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  75. You know, I'd be far more convinced by someone telling me ''We didn't do it''or ''she isn't dead'' than I would by someone telling me ''There is no evidence...''

    Of course, people's body language can often betray them in a lie...

    ReplyDelete
  76. Hello Anonymous (73) good post. You rightly say that the McCanns don't look like people who are seriously interested in doing everything possible to find their daughter. That's because they never have done anything to find Madeleine.

    If Madeleine had gone missing because she was either taken from their unsecured apartment, or walked out of the unsecurd apartment, one or both of them, would have searched for the her the minute they discovered she had gone.

    They didn't and they have no intention of searching for her either physically themselves or by using the proper authorities to search for her.

    Of course if the McCanns were seriously interested in their children's health and safety, they would not have left them alone all but one evening of that so called family holiday. In their unlit, unsecured, apartment.

    Not only did the apartment have the dangers that any home has when toddlers are left to their own devices, but the McCanns also left packets of drugs lying on the table. Photographs taken by the police, of the inside of their apartment were released and they showed packets of drugs, lying on the on the table. Photographs were also taken of the inside of the villa they moved into and drugs were also shown there.

    The McCanns excuse for not taking the 3 children with them, when they went out to dine, was that they had no buggy. They soon had a buggy after Madeleine disappeared.

    The McCanns were offered the services of a paid baby sitter, by Warner's more than once after they had received complaints that the McCann children were crying. The McCanns refused the sitter, because they said they didn't want their children waking up to find a stranger in their apartment. The sitter would have been one of the nannies who looked after the McCann children during the day.

    They were also offered the services of the evening creche, they refused, saying their children had a strict bedtime routine.

    The McCanns refused to do anything that would keep their children safe,in the evenings. Instead they preferred the unsafe environment of their apartment. I wonder if anyone ever asked them why?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Am I out of set, or that post from Kate, can be easily classified as a tempt to continue out of the court, a trial which should be permitted only inside the court and in front of a judge? She his trying to refute everything that come out of the witnesses statements, manipulating public opinion, accusing the witnesses and discredit facts proved by the investigation. THIS IS A CRIME- PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE!!!

    ReplyDelete
  78. Kate
    Just Google "goncalo amaral"
    The FIRST entry is his book in English, chapter by chapter, pdf, ready to download, free.
    How can you believe you can stop the book ?

    ReplyDelete
  79. How can Mccann's friends decide that a reconstruction proposed by official polices is useless to find a child which still missing?

    And how can the parents of the child accept that decision without fighting back and forcing them to do it?

    SOMETHING VERY ODD HIS BEHIND ALL ATTITUDES!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  80. "The results of the forensic examinations did not identify any blood or Madeleine's DNA."

    Can anyone interpret this for me, please, as it's not clear what technicality is being used to hide behind here? Something along the lines of never being able to say with 100% certainty that anyone's DNA is really theirs, just that it's incredibly likely?

    It may have been an own goal to quibble the definition of "evidence" - now it can be said that it's "intelligence" that raises any doubts over this story. You're too kind, Clarence.

    ReplyDelete
  81. did i not read that it was SCOTLAND YARD WHO FIRST SAID IT COULD BE MURDER,i wonder how they came to that conclusion hmmm.SHE REALLY IS A FRUIT LOOP

    ReplyDelete
  82. You'd think with all that money she could have afforded a better writer ....

    ReplyDelete
  83. If anyone wants to discredit the work of the dogs in Jersey, I suggest that they consult Lenny Harper's report on the dogs' work at Haut de la Garenne. I read it on the 3As just days before it went down and it was very edifying.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  84. She can hardly come out and admit theit guilt. They have been told what to say by their lawyers and they are sticking to it.

    One thing that's come out of this trial, neither of them are intelligent enough to be doctors someone please check their credentials.

    ReplyDelete
  85. their backtracking is getting more and more speedy...

    the trouble is that the 4 points that Gerry brings up (in the guise of Kate - another cowardly thing to do - but true to form) have all been debunked.

    The abduction - it's the only thing that can never be proved, the suspicious thing is they would never let anyone consider any other option

    The window... well they are on very dodgy ground as in previous versions there was shutter tampering etc. etc. but it would mean an abductor hiding in the tiny flat without being spotted (and TM claimed that the abductor may have visited the flat on the previous evening as well)

    The dogs are not unreliable or problematic... see all their previous cases

    The reconstruction... we know why they wouldn't go back (and they said they wouldn't in plenty of interviews) - their timeline was so ridiculous it would not have been able to re-create

    whitewash/hogwash whatever you want to call it - they are LIARS

    ReplyDelete
  86. Ask Professor David Barclay Kate!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Since when is it up to people invited to a reconstruction to decide if it is of value or not!

    How utterly incredible this blog post is (and I doubt very much indeed if this was written by Kate McCann!).

    It is, however, welcome - as it shows they are on the run.

    ReplyDelete
  88. By discussing these items for the first time, they surely are simply doing the same thing as the heoric detective - thus cancelling out their own claims against him. Well done Gerald (AKA kate!) you have made the best mistake yet!

    ReplyDelete
  89. I'm a Biologist and Biology is an Exact Science which answer doubts and help to achieve conclusions. The ADN is one of the best tools to help criminologists answer questions and solve cases.
    When a crime happen, there is facts which we know were always like that, irrefutable facts:

    - The victim and the author of the crime, leave biological and physical evidences at the crime scene and take with them evidences from the crime scene. AT THE BED, FROM WHICH THE MCCANN'S CLAIM MADDIE WAS ABDUCTED, THERE IS NO BIOLOGICAL OR PHISICAL EVIDENCES FROM THE VICTIM OR THE ABDUCTOR- this is a fact and tell the investigation that they are lying. Why? First question to explore and answer in Court.

    - The Victim always keep on her body or personal affairs, biological and physical evidences from the crime scene and the author of the crime. The same happen with perpetrator of the crime, he always take with him ( her) evidences from the victim and the crime scene. This can be, dust, hair, nails, blood, cotton, pollen, fingerprints, body fluids,etc.- THE QUESTIONS RELATED WITH THAT ONLY CAN BE ANSWERED IF CLOTHES, JEWELERY OR THE BODY from the victim was recovered and the perpetrator found. A LONG WAY TO GO which prove that a lot of investigation still not done on that case and shelving it was a wrong decision.

    - The ADN is our Biological ID. Something that we did not share with anybody else in the world. Even identical twins have different ADN . Members of the same family share parts of the ADN ( genes) this is why we can identify the parents of a child or some hereditary diseases, but the genes appear in different combinations from one people to another which let without doubts an investigator tell that this Biological evidences belong to somebody, EXACTLY, AND NOT TO SOMEBODY ELSE. Less then 50% of the alleles, matching to the ADN of a victim , tell Us that there is a probability for that ADN to belong to that victim but there is also a probability to belong to somebody from her family. Facing that situation we have to match all this ADN with the ADN of all other members of the family which were reported to be in the crime scene. If no-one have that combination, then a few probability become a strong evidence, must belong without doubts to the victim.
    If there is more then 50% of alleles matching the ADN of the victim, this show the investigation that there is a high probability to be in front of a strong evidence to solve the case and show which track the inspectors have to follow if they want to find the body, the author of the crime and solve the case.(CONT)

    ReplyDelete
  90. (CONT)
    Lets to apply that to what come out from Maddie investigation and was largely reported in the Media and repeated at Lisbon court this week: The first samples ( blood I think) show 15 alleles out of 19, matching Maddie ADN. What this means.... MORE THEN 50%, Is it 80%, 90%. A high probability to tell the investigation with almost no doubts that this belong to Madeleine. THERE IS ANYBODY ELSE, KATE, GERRY, THE TWINS with an ADN matching so strongly? We, the public don't know because very important part of the investigation still under secrecy. But the Inspectors they know. According to what I know from the ADN, as an ID, I take the risk to say, that this sample is a strong evidence. Belong to Madeleine because from trillions of studies done all over the world we can say that never two people share more then 50% of the ADN. Now, lets look to the place where the sample was recovered and why is it recovered: It was recovered because the dogs find it( dogs are reliable and one of the best tools to use in very complicate cases, like the ADN).
    The sample was recovered under the tiles ( they need to be removed because was not evident at naked eyes). That means the crime scene was altered by somebody which wash it ( WHY?) and for a sample to run into under the tiles, two things must happen to the victim: Or she fall violently letting the blood running inside the floor or she was in the floor for quite long time to let the blood run deep under the tiles ( WONDER TO SEE THE ANSWERS OF KATE AND GERRY, IN COURT).

    In my mind, I can just find one reason for the prosecutor to shelve that case and is far away from the lake of evidences. After the report sent by the FSS saying that the test was inconclusive due to contamination of the samples, and after all the feelings and facts showing that the British police were in Portugal not to help the investigation but to control the investigation and perhaps to pass vital information to the Mccann's ( THIS IS WHY THEY WASH THE CLOTHES BEFORE PJ CARRY OUT AN IMPORTANT CHECK ON THEIR HOUSE AND BELONGS), The PROSECUTORS REALISED THAT THEY WILL NEVER GOT THE EVIDENCES WHICH THEY KNOW, THEY EXIST, FROM THE UK. THEY REALISE THAT THERE IS A HUGE COVER-UP FROM THEIR PARTNERS AT UK. BUT NOW, AFTER ALL THAT which CaME OUT FROM AMARAL BOOK TRIAL, AND AFTER A CLEAR MANIPULATION OF THE MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC BY THE MCCANN'S WITH THEM ACCUSING WITNESSES TO LIE IN COURT, the situation changed and Maddie case must be re-opened and solved in court. LETS SEE IF UK AUTHORITIES WILL HAVE THE ODD BEHAVIOUR OF KEEPING THE BRITISH INVESTIGATION UNDER STATE SECRECY TO PREVENT A BRITISH CHILD TO ACHIEVE JUSTICE? LETS SEE WHAT, OTHER LABS, HAVE TO SAY ABOUT FSS REPORTS AND WORK. LETS FIND OUT WHO CONTAMINATED THE SAMPLES AND WHY. LETS SEE IF FSS INSIST WITH THE SAME ANSWER TO REFUSE SEND THE SAMPLES BACK TO PORTUGAL-DESTROYED. It was a crime if a Lab destroy a sample by negligence, special when the case is complex and not solved.
    BUT IRAQUE CASE SHOWS ALREADY THE WORLD THAT MANIPULATING LAB REPORTS IS AN EASY ISSUE IN THE UK AND DONE WITHOUT RESPNSABILITIE SINCE A COUNTRY WAS INVADED UNDER THAT GROUNDS AN STILL IN WAR. AND THE BRAINS UNDER THAT DECISIONS STILL PLAYING IMPORTANT POLITICAL RULES IN UK.

    From last Kate POST, I really have serious doubts about her medical degree. How can a doctor try to foolish the world saying that there is no proof of Maddie ADN? Give us a break!!!

    ReplyDelete
  91. Kate which dismissed the dogs and all forensic evidences find as facts by the investigation, want the world to accept that SHE KNOWING THAT HER DAUGHTER WILL NOT WONDER OFF THE FLAT BY HERSELF WAS A PROOF THAT SHE WAS ABDUCTED. WHAT a POOR LAUGHABLE LADY WITH HER LAST JOKE.
    This is not a proof of anything. BEST THAT PAIR OF SPECIAL PARENTS START TO CHANGE THEIR STRATEGY AND TRY TO CONVINCE THE WORLD THAT MADDIE NEVER EVER EXIST AND THE ALL SAGA IT WAS A TRAGIC TALE. WE ALL HAD A COLLECTIVE IMAGINARY PERTURBANCE. Same as the panic which societies experiment, after terrorist attacks.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Anon 87

    How right you are about THEM deciding whether a reconstruction is of value or not.

    There's arrogant doctors for you.

    They think they are a law unto themselves because the people who work with them hang on their every word, and practically bow to them. Yet they are often not that bright, and only need a third class degree to scrape through.

    Sorry to those who work with these people, but afraid it is the truth. They are treated in many cases like they are little gods. It must be something to do with them and the power over life and death or something.

    Shipman certainly took advantage of that and he was absolutely arrogant, yet he got away with it for years because he was a doctor.

    Sad to say, these people have done exactly what they want in this case, and nobody has called them to account.

    Anybody else, would not have been allowed to get away with this.

    It is about time these McCanns were charged. They have walked Scott (excuse the pun as Gerry McCann is Scottish) Free, and had money sent to them.

    It beggars belief. It is about time people saw these people for what they really are, and not for what they want people to believe they are. That is, dangerous to small children, who should never have been in their care.

    By the way, I don't say these things because I have a down on doctors or something. I know quite a number and like them very much, but I am trying to portray how they are perceived by many and trusted.

    I think the fact of them being doctors goes some way to explaining why the McCanns have been walking on water for so long.

    ReplyDelete
  93. The spinning and lies never stop…

    From the very first word ‘We are currently in Lisbon… ‘. The blog is dated 14 January but we all know that Gerry returned to the UK on 13 January. Silly me, perhaps Kate has adopted the royal persona now, or might even be referring to her friend Jayne with the inconsistent memory.

    My second minor point ‘ … and we know Madeleine did not wander off by herself’. Erm, how did you know that? It is at least, or more, plausible than that a stranger abduction. Could it be because the patio door was not actually left unlocked, or that she was drugged up to the eyeballs or that she was never actually in 5A on 3 May?

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  94. One rather amusing thing is that since Eddie and Keela did their stuff back in the summer of 2007, there have been numerous programmes on British tv about sniffer dogs of all kinds. Every single one of these programmes that I've seen has shown all sorts of sniffer dogs to be amazingly accurate, often astonishingly so. The British are known as a nation of dog-lovers and they won't stand for people who try to trash the abilities of these highly-trained and much-tested working animals.

    But as usual, Team McCann don't seem to understand simple things like this and expect people to believe them instead of believing in the totally non-biased dogs. Foolishness of the highest order.

    ReplyDelete
  95. The date is the 14th : on that day K. was with her friend F. in the Court room most of the time. Then they flew back home. I don't see when she would have found time to write this. CM or more likely ID did, trying to balance the bad effect of the medias' tittles on Tuesday. The medias were very careful, they wrote "It was heard at Court to-day that...", not "Police officers pretend that..."

    ReplyDelete
  96. My apologies...

    I meant Fiona Payne being the 'we' not Jayne (Tanner).

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  97. i have a problem with something they have said?

    they were happy to come back for a reconstruction but some of their friends decided not to take part??????
    are they all not parents? who in their right mind would dissagree to a reconstruction and why?
    i think we need to start asking the rest of the tapas posse how they feel about their kids as well? they seemed happy to abandon their kids and then refuse to help a police investigation because they think it would not be worthwhile?

    id like to know who exactly thinks and feels this way as in my mind any form of reconstruction would help the search for madeleine. not just the investigation but also absolving the mccs of any guilt?

    i do wonder why this was not challenged in court? if they were happy to return then they should have? how could the police shelve an investigation like this with all this alarming evidence is astonishing.

    i dont have faith in the justice systems anywhere but i do have faith in humanity and i do hope this judge takes her time when deliberating all the facts and i live in hope of her asking for the case to be reopened.

    thanks to joana and your team for an well run site and constant information. you all stand sbove the mainstream media

    ReplyDelete
  98. John again!

    This very sad case is very similar to Tony Blair and the illegal war in Iraq - a 3rd enquiry is ongoing. Why? The same people are coming along to give the same evidence and the result will be the same as before - no action to be taken.

    It is without fear of contradiction, that I can say that the Iraq war was illegal under the terms of the UN Charter - that is a fact.

    Then surely if that is a fact - Tony Blair and others should be held accountable.

    Kate says that 'she knows Madelaeine did not walk off by herslf' - how can she possibly know that - even if Maddie was not the sort of child to wander - surely it is still possible that she opened the sliding doors and walked off.

    The friends not coming back for the reconstruction is the biggest tell tale of all - and they picked up GBP 350,000 in damages!

    This mystery is still just that - unlike the illegal war in Iraq - and the 'disappearance' of Maddie will still cause huge debate.

    Like it or not - Kate and Gerry will continue as they are - how can they stop? Any outcome other than abduction makes them liars - the best we can hope for is that they are right!

    ReplyDelete
  99. i would have thought they managed to damage their reputation all by themselves when they left their children alone at night in a holiday apartment whilst they wined and dined with friends!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  100. Anon 50 (or Tapas friend)

    Amaral is a honrable desent dignified man, its yours friends the Mccanns that are self promoting, get it right

    ReplyDelete
  101. Perhaps the friends of the McCanns didn't bother to come back for a police reconstruction because they REALLY KNEW it would not be of any help to find Madeleine.

    Now, why would that be???

    ReplyDelete
  102. @101 of course the tapas know what happend to madeleine, disgusting lot, but o boy when the truth finally gets out(and it will )how proud thier friends and family will be.

    message for the tapas lot, you know that hole your digging well if i were you i would start filling it in with you beneath the dirt because the shit is going to hit you lot from all angles in the not to distant future,remember the gaspers statement, yes? and so do we and we are not going to let it go.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Anon 89 and 90 - thank you, thank you for explaining about the DNA samples - I`ve always found this a bit confusing - you`ve made it a lot clearer for me.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  104. There is a great thread over on www.digitalspy.co.uk

    I loved this quote, with regard to the "abductor", so succint and yet so true-

    "I just wanted to mention that they are clearly dealing with a well-organised abductor, who was thoughtful enough to bring with him a pot of cadaverine with which to anoint the flat, cuddlecat, the mother's trousers and a car they haven't hired yet, in an effort to confuse the dogs. Now THAT'S forward planning."

    ReplyDelete
  105. After looking at those photos above again, I am left wondering if the McCanns aren't a pair of the most consummate actors.

    These pics were taken not that long after Madeleine went missing, and it is hard to believe they can be laughing and grinning like that unless they are.

    On the night she was reported missing we are told they were going crazy, rolling around and moaning. Yet, not long after, there are photos like this.

    What to make of these people?

    I have no idea what is the truth about this behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  106. to anonymous #89 and 90
    I am really grateful for your explanation. I have been reading and re-reading the John Lowe final report and blaming myself for not being able to grasp its meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Ever since Kate washed 'Cuddle Cat' I've been certain of their guilt.You would not wash off the essence of your'missing'child from their favourite toy for any reason. That and their bizarre behaviour after Maddie'went missing'and their total lack of genuine emotion,convinced me of their guilt.
    There is no evidence of an abduction but much firm evidence to prove Maddie died in the appartment and her body then moved by the McCanns.How much more evidence does there need to be for heavens sake! I too don't think the McCanns are 'firing on all cylinders' so to speak.God knows how they ever became doctors.
    I can't understand why the British government were so quick to cover this one up and continue to do so. What hold do the McCanns have over them? What is it that the government do not wish to be exposed? They're treating the public as complete idiots as usual and ignoring our wishes.Perhaps a protest march may help although I've no idea how it could be organised. They,(the McCanns and the damn government),cannot be allowed to get away with this one for Maddie's sake and for the sake of our freedom of speech.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Thank you for that post Anon 89 and 90.

    Sorry to say this, but it was tragic that in the case of the McCanns, the UK were trusted so much.

    The case should never have been shelved. I hope they get it reopened again. It looks like it was so close to resolving what really happened to Madeleine.

    There could also have been a reason that the AG advised the shelving of it, and the backing away at that time.

    I hope I am wrong, but it might have been told it was feared there might result a suicide if continued, whether a threat or intended.

    Does anybody know if this is true?

    ReplyDelete
  109. A RED HERRING DEFINITION(idiom) ....A misleading clue , something used to divert attention from the real issue.

    There appears to be a great deal of red herrings swimming about in the McCanns goldfish bowl!! jemmied shutters, nights out dining with friends (it was like dining in you own garden) children crying (where were you when we cried) , cadaver contamination before holiday trip to Portugal, un-reliable dogs (dirty nappies and rotting meat)man carrying child (J Tanner)

    These are just a few of many in my opinion.

    In fact everytime Mrs.McCann opens her mouth to explain away any little detail I cringe as to what the next "RED HERRING" will be.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Kate, if you go blind don't take a dog. They are unreliable!

    ReplyDelete
  111. I am totally now convinced the woman is off her trolly

    ReplyDelete
  112. I guess the twins request for a puppy has been turned down then!

    ReplyDelete
  113. Anon 108 - it was reported that KM was suicidal (It could have been a spin on concerns for her mental health) but denied by Clarence Mitchell. Thats all I know.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  114. What an interesting compilation of writing styles. It starts off like one of Gerry's soulless blogs 'we are currently in Lisbon', then has tastes of Kate's pseudo-uneducated speech 'there is a lot in the files', then there is the careful legal langauge 'was and is', 'logical and common sense', then there are the sentence constructions that don't sound English - 'for a person to easily climb through it' - anyone English would say 'climb through it easily'. The there are the missed spaces - 'suggestor' - careless, or an intentional way to suggest writing with spontaneous haste?

    I could go on, but if Kate wrote all of this, then I could be fooled into thinking it's multiple personality disoder.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Thanks Louise at 113

    Kate did go skeletal when they first skipped back from Portugal after they were questioned, then put the weight back on later.

    Yet there was also something about Gerry and his mental state floating around at that time.

    They must have been very worried. They were lucky they weren't charged then.

    But if something like the threat of suicide did get the case shelved, then it certainly worked.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Interesting that Kate did not address the "nightmare call".
    I got this from Mccannfiles.
    It's from her diary:
    "MONDAY, JULY 23: I got up at 7.00 and went running. I was surrounded by a pack of dogs (more or less 12)—it really wasn't a nice experience. I went to the flat, high part of the cliff as I felt really alone and a little frightened. Please God, don't let Madeleine be buried here. Please God, make sure she's alive. Please God, bring her back quickly to us."

    Gerry was in the USA at the time.
    I find this quite significant.
    Like you said,Joana,(#1): "Pela boca morre o peixe".

    ReplyDelete
  117. Post 89 and 90. Thank you for sharing with us your expert experience so clearly. I hope that you will continue to keep an eye on things and let us know what you see and think. I am very grateful for your posts which explain the issues so well.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Oh yes Kate , I agree with you for once ," she could't have wandered off ", simply because Madeleine was drugged up to the nines .

    ReplyDelete
  119. The ball is rolling now, and the momentum is already too great for Kate, Gerry, or anyone else to stop it.

    Come clean now, please, before its all dragged out into the open.

    ReplyDelete
  120. I find it very hard to believe anything Kate and Gerry McCann say.

    Blogs, diaries left around for the finding. How kind of them to give us this information.

    Nah, we are being led by the nose. Look for the ulterior motive.

    Now we have somebody saying Kate phoned and made a statement about a dream, which Gerry says she didn't make. Will she also back him up?

    I don't believe Gerry, but I also distrust the story given out by Kate. So what was her ulterior motive for relating that so called dream?

    There will be one.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Has Kate actually denied the dream conversation took place??? So far I have only heard Gerry deny it for her. Can she not speak for herself???

    Also, have the McCanns produced evidence that their right to peace, respect & protection of reputation is superior to Mr Amarals right to freedom of expression. Why does he have to prove it and not them- is their right a default position and everything else has to proved from that basis?? Or did they present their evidence in private at the original hearing which got the book injuncted, the one which Mr Amaral was not invited to attend????

    ReplyDelete
  122. @ Anonymous 114
    This confirms the suspicion ID wrote it, not KMC.

    ReplyDelete
  123. ''Anon ~ 104 said : There is a great thread over on www.digitalspy.co.uk

    I loved this quote, with regard to the "abductor", so succint and yet so true-

    "I just wanted to mention that they are clearly dealing with a well-organised abductor, who was thoughtful enough to bring with him a pot of cadaverine with which to anoint the flat, cuddlecat, the mother's trousers and a car they haven't hired yet, in an effort to confuse the dogs. Now THAT'S forward planning."





    Yes, that was me, actually.

    It is a good thread over there. A few idiots, as ever, but a very interesting and stimulating debate.

    It's very notable that Kate's blog has been received with similar consternation to here. Everyone feels like this sad fiasco just entered a new phase.

    ReplyDelete
  124. I think Kate is being thrown to the wolves by Gerry. Is it a mere coincidence that Gerry flounces out of Portugal having heard unhelpful testimonies in court including Kate's "dream" and then Kate suddenly becoming vocal what with her blog entry and comments to the press about their fundraising event? I don't think so! Interestingly, there has been NO word from Gerry since he flounced out of Portugal! It's all Kate, Kate, Kate!

    ReplyDelete
  125. Gerry went back to England to write that piece of garbage. That's for sure. This is not Kate's text and she wouldn't have the time to do it.
    Gerry's state of mind in Portugal was such that he couldn't think clearly. He needed to go back to prepare the answer to what was being said in court by GA's witnesses. And this is the sad result.

    ReplyDelete
  126. IRISH PRESS:

    "Kate McCann's claim last week that the proceedings have "shown again there is no evidence that Madeleine came to any harm" are bewildering, to say the least. Sniffer dogs who had been trained to detect the presence of cadavers and blood both reacted strongly in the couple's holiday apartment. SOMETHING BAD HAPPENED THERE, even if there is not a scrap of credible physical evidence that it had anything to do with them."

    (CAPS MINE)

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/mccanns-pain-doesnt-justify-censorship-effort-2017386.html

    ReplyDelete
  127. @89 and 90

    Obrigadíssima. Excellent information.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Derek @post #126, thanks for the link. It's about time media commentators spoke some sense.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Sorry, that should be debk not Derek.

    ReplyDelete
  130. ShuBob at 124

    Kate is really the more sympathetic looking of them, so maybe that's why she is being put up front for the time being, yet still being worked from the back.

    ReplyDelete
  131. "If the general public (and the Portuguese people in particular) are bombarded day in and day out with such theories, this will eventually 'colour' their understanding and judgement - lies and inaccuracies become fact.'

    Well, there's the evidence that the McCanns are quite aware that if a lie is repeated often enough people will eventually believe it. Thus the 'abduction' claim has been repeated endlessly from the word go.

    ReplyDelete
  132. It's all suddenly become clear now - I know now why the snifer dogs are wrong. A little research has shown that the red herring is a distant relative of the sea bass, and therefore probably also leaves the odour of cadaverine behind it. Therefore the sniffer dogs were not reacting to a body in the apartment, but to one of the many red herring that the McCanns and their legion of misguided followers have thrown into the investigation!!

    ReplyDelete
  133. @ anonymous 120. I believe Kate is going on about this "dream" because she has been advised it would help her if she - " didn't sucessfully pass a lie detector test. The witch would state that " uh, well, you know, it must be because of the dream I had".

    And I would like to say that I think all of us "bloggers", that the Mccann's hate so very much, should be very proud of ourselves...we are a voice for Maddie.

    I'm from the U.S. and there is a popular term we use here it's LMAO. Laughing my ass off.....at this sad blog entry from "kate" aka Ms. it takes me 5 mins to complete a sentence. lmao

    ReplyDelete