16 December 2010

Maddie Case: English suspects of withholding relevant evidence


Cover page
Maddie Case: English suspects of withholding relevant evidence
Gonçalo Amaral believes that the British police did not disclose all that they have found to the Portuguese Judiciary Police (PJ)

Inside article
Maddie Case: British ambassador revelations raise new suspicions

"English may have other evidence"

Gonçalo Amaral, former coordinator, believes that the British police did not disclose everything to the PJ regarding the McCanns and the suspicions of paedophilia of their friend Payne


by Henrique Machado

The British ambassador in Lisbon admitted that the police of his country found incriminating evidence against the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter Maddie, as was revealed by WikiLeaks. Gonçalo Amaral, the former Judiciary case coordinator "without knowing which evidence are those", admits that they could have been omitted. "It is very strange, for example, that they did not send us the information relative to the suspicions (of paedophilia) referring to David Payne", an element of the [Tapas]group in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, in May 2007.

"Similarly, the British police always told the PJ, in the requests made, that there was nothing relevant as to the credit card transactions" made by Maddie's parents or by the group of friends, nor in relation to "Kate and Gerry's relationship or to the missing child clinical records", for example.

The PJ coordinator does not believe that the evidence mentioned by the UK ambassador, Alexander Ellis, with his US counterpart had anything to do with the fact that the dogs, which have detected blood and cadaver odour in the trunk of the car rented by the McCann, were British. "Even because, on September 28 (the day the ambassadors' conversation took place), the English lab [F.S.S.] had already stated that the blood evidence gathered did not belong to Maddie". Therefore, the evidence that Ellis makes reference to "must be something else" - which the British police failed to deliver to the Judiciary.

For Amaral, the most probable hypothesis has to do with Payne: in Majorca, two summers before, he would have rubbed his nipple and put his finger in his mouth while looking at Maddie, suggesting a sexual act, asking to Gerry if his daughter would do that.

Those gestures were witnessed by a British doctor, who denounced them to the British police in May 16, 2007. "The PJ was only informed in October", and, when Paulo Rebelo's team went to England with questions for the group, David Payne "was the only one who was heard by the English Police without the presence of the PJ".

Details
He enjoyed giving bath
Payne was the last person, known, besides the parents, to see Maddie alive. The Englishman, over whom a suspicion of paedophilia was raised, enjoyed giving bath to children.

New Investigation
Gonçalo Amaral, PJ inspector now retired, told the CM that he is gathering new indicia that provide for the reopening of the investigation.

Laboratory
Amaral raises doubts as to the DNA results obtained by the English lab [Forensic Science Service].


in Correio da Manhã - Page. 10 Paper Edition & Online here


"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."

in Euro Weekly News: Gaspars on David Payne odd Behaviour

Read as well
David Payne May Hold the Key to Maddie's Mystery
'Madeleine Case': British Police indicated the parents

182 comments:

  1. Its only a matter of time before David Payne's bitter and twisted sick mind WILL BE exposed.

    Thanks Joanna thank you very much
    Karen

    ReplyDelete
  2. No wonder Kate and Gerry tried to gag Mr Amaral from speaking about the case. Now DP's name, and details of a certain twisted conversation between him and Gerry, is out there. This is the part of the story that the UK media readers, listeners and viewers have been kept in the dark about.

    Let's see if the UK media have the nuts to publish this story.


    Angela

    ReplyDelete
  3. Will a C-R letter/e-mail be winging it way to the above newspaper?

    I have just watched Mark Stephens on TV and how confident and interesting this lawyer is. One listens to him and one is interested in what he is saying. A marked difference to the imo boring C-R snake like one.

    Joana, I hear cages rattling and barrels scraping! Thinking of you and wishing you well. You are quite right to report those who threaten you.

    IIRC there are 250,000 wikileaks documents to be released. There have been 1200 released thus far and within that there has been a McC leak. Hmm how many more could appear?? Esp given that the McPR Spokesone worked for the Govt and was sent by the Govt. IIRC there was a Simon Israel interview were the Spokeone refused to answer a question.

    http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/shocking-clarence-mitchell-profile/

    The McCanns were tipped off that the Portuguese police were monitoring their e-mails and ’phone calls. There was naturally concern over how this information leaked to them. A former Portuguese police officer has admitted working for the Spanish private detective agency, Metodo 3. He in turn had an inside contact in the Portuguese police who supplied Metodo 3 with information about the investigation. Clarence Mitchell was asked in an interview by Simon Israel on Channel 4 how the McCanns were tipped off. He refused to answer.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It would not surprise me if this aspect of the case was the subject of an injunction in the UK, because not one newspaper or channel has ever repeated it. Personally, I'm not convinced these paedophile allegations are necessarily at the heart of what happened to Madeleine, but if Mr Amaral can use it to put pressure on the governments of both Portugal and the UK to get this case reopened, I'm all in favour of it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Euro Weekly News: Gaspars on David Payne odd Behaviour, a Southern Spanish expat newspaper (www.euroweeklynews.com) did publish the story - a few days later they were Carter-Rucked - one has to wonder in whose behalf they were acting for.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anybody who is giving out information about the Gaspar statements is not doing anything wrong.

    The information is in the public domain courtesy of the released Portuguese Case File.

    This also applies to statements of the belief that Madeleine died in the apartment, contrary to the abduction fairy story the McCanns have been selling. This also is in the public domain as being the opinion of the investigators who worked on the case of missing Madeleine, as it was mentioned in a court of law at the time Dr Amaral was applying to have the injunction removed.

    Carter Ruck may threaten people to try to stop discussion of these issues, but they should be told to go take a hike. There is still the freedom to discuss these relevant aspects of the case, both in UK and Portugual, much as the McCanns would like to gag everybody who are not taken in by their 'abduction' brainwashing tactics.

    They are spitting into the wind with their threats, and if they had any sense they would give up and accept that the control they had is no longer there.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Joana
    Just read your side bar on WORLD PRESS coverage, Guardian. What Franco Frattini says is frightening- like an attempt at global control. Links with McCann case make sense now.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I dont think that Mr Amaral has said anything that we have not allready suspected with regards to the L.P not giving all the evidence to the P.J,ever since we heard the L.P had kept the gaspers statement back i think we all knew the L.P. WERE HELPING THE MCCANNS

    ReplyDelete
  9. It was UK not Sweden who wanted Assange in custody. Any guesses why?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Number Four.

    It's the fact that the statements were withheld for six months by Leicestershire Police that might yet turn out to be more damning than the statements themselves.

    If I may I shall paste a comment that I left on Anna Andress.

    Originally written on the premise that Leicester plod were holding other Physical evidence. Then dismissed by myself a short time later as irrelevant, that upon reading Goncalo Amaral's initial opinion (1) that there was probably little, if any evidence held by LP.

    But what I wrote still remained relevant and still applied after reading this statement, effectively a denial of any knowledge of the case, given out by Leicester plod in answer to the recent wiki emails. Which of course is the only road open to them, they have to deny any knowledge of virtually everything. (see comment)

    [i]British police have always insisted they were responsible only for co-ordinating inquiries in Britain at the request of the Portuguese authorities.[/i](2)

    And becomes ever more relevant if Goncalo Amaral's suspicions turn out to be in fact true. (This post)


    This is my comment then, written at three in the morning. I say this in explanation of describing the source as tenuous, not grasping at the time, the full implication of it all.

    [i]Just the one question if I may. If plod was so instrumental in formulating the evidence against the pair, what happened to them, plod not the duo?

    I don't know what to believe on this one, particularly given the source could be somewhat tenuous.

    And if they did, is their knowledge of the case beneficial to justice some time in the future? I say future, because as well we know, it's not done much good in the past.

    Which brings me to the question, why haven't they done something with it?

    It can't be that they have been saving it for a rainy day, or waiting for the Portuguese to relinquish primacy over the case.

    It can't be for either of those two reasons, and the answer is simple. You cannot, not even in this topsy turvy world that we live in; you cannot, not if it has any intention of using it, have a police force holding evidence that implicates the McCanns.

    They, Leicester Police, cannot have stood by and watched this circus play out, watched the McCanns dupe millions out of thousands, because if it ever came to light that they held this evidence, the country would go absolutely bonkers. Let alone what it would do to plod.

    So if they do hold anything, it's never going to see the light of day, is it, it can't? So does this new revelation now become academic? I don't know, I suppose we will have to wait and see, heaven knows, it's something we do well.[/i](3)



    (1)
    http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/12/goncalo-amaral-on-wikileaks-release.html

    (2)
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1338421/WikiLeaks-British-police-developed-evidence-Kate-Gerry-McCann.html#ixzz188cIwYXV

    (3)
    http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.com/2010/12/madeleine-mccann-kate-and-gerry-mccann.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous 4

    I doubt an injunction has been issued by the courts regarding this as it would mean it would have to be applied for, and that would generate publicity in itself. The last thing these people want.

    More likely, CR have tried it on yet again, and that big mouth who 'lies through every tooth in his head' Clarence Mitchell, will have been doing quite a bit of phoning around attempting to keep control on behalf of his pals the McCanns.

    Nevertheless, once the media start getting the message that this information is not off limits because it is part of the information that has been officially issued by the Portuguese, it will begin to filter through. If the Portuguese media start running with it, the UK wont be far behind.

    Payne should realise that he wont be able to stop this unless he does know something about what really happened to Madeleine and he goes public and tells all.

    Time is of the essence for him now. He should not delay.

    He surely can remember what happened to Murat, and this time the information is not made up as it was against him, but is simply a repeat of what fellow doctors have said about himself and his conversation with Gerry which worried one of them so much that she had to go report it to the police when Madeleine went missing.

    This is a serious matter indeed and has not ever been addressed satisfactorily, being as how the Portuguese investigators who have control of the case were kept in the dark for so long.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Joana at 5

    That newspaper was perfectly within its right to publish information about the Gaspar statements and David Payne which were in the public domain at the time and accessible for anybody to go read for themselves.

    They should not have backed down.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I too believe there's a super injuction regarding the Gaspar's statement,if so newspapers can't even reveal that there's a super injunction even in place on said statement.But if there is why do the media pussyfoot around the McCanns and their tapas friends,surely they can see what is blatantly obvious to the public,that Madeleine died on that holiday,there wasn't an abduction at all.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have a strong feeling that Pandora's box is now open......watch this space

    ReplyDelete
  15. Excellent article by Henrique Machado, Correio da Manhã.


    Imo Dr Amaral has every right to make people aware that he never received this crucial information. Portugal had and still do have primacy in the investigation and at the time the statements were given Dr Amaral was the coordinator of the investigation. Imo it was up to him and his team to decide whether this information was important or not. Imo those statements should have been forwarded immediately to Portugal. Given that GM and DP were still in Portugal they could have been questioned by the PJ regarding the Gaspar statements. It is incredible that this never happened! It is incredible that GM and KM were questioned and made Arguidos and the PJ had no knowledge of the existence of the Drs Gaspar statements! I would like to know who decided that these statements would not be forwarded. Surely their motives must be questioned? Especially given that DP and GM who were both still in Portugal could not have been questioned by the UK police when those statements were taken from the Drs Gaspar. Statements like that are made, the UK police do not inform the PJ immediately about imo crucial information and the people mentioned in the statements are not questioned. Why? If someone had come forward and made important statements like that to the UK police about a friend of Shannon Matthews mother or step-father I personally think that the information given would NOT have been ignored? Surely the UK police not informing the PJ about these statements must be considered as witholding information?? Surely witholding crucial statements like that must have hindered the investigation? I wonder if DP and GM knew those statements had been made. I also wonder if GM and DP knew that the PJ knew nothing of the existence of said statements. Would GM and DP have been made Arguidos in order that they could be questioned about the statements?

    Why is there no mention of this in the UK press/media? Are the UK press/media gagged over this subject? If so. Why? This information is part of the publicly available official police case files released in 2008!


    Strength to strength Dr Amaral!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Joana @ 5
    Euro Weekly newspaper, Carter Rucked regarding Gaspers/David Payne comments? Ive come to the conclusion that this case revolves totaly around Gerry McCann and David Payne, why else would you have Carter Ruck sticking their noses in. Why have we not had Payne defending himself with these horrendous allegations.

    It just dosent make sense if you are innocent, let us all hope that the UK Media have the guts to start reporting honestly and fairly, now that Mr Amaral is able to speak out about the case.

    Joana I would like to thank you for all your hard work this year
    and wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a fantastic 2011, where all your hard work will pay off for Madeleine McCann.

    G, UK

    ReplyDelete
  17. I have always believed paedophilia is behind this whole case,Think of this ,ALL children similar age ,no older children who could tell others what was happening ,did Maddie start to ask questions? tell others what was happening (NO MEDICAL RECORDS SHOWN) Did Maddie have to be silenced to protect all involved? Another thing that makes me believe this theory is why ,when they had 3 small children and all the luggage that goes with them,did McCanns take old photos of Maddie on holiday with them ?this is my opinion and until proven otherwise I will always think this is what happened

    ReplyDelete
  18. Any news of Kevin Halligen? Will he be kept in custody for another year? What is he being silenced for?

    ReplyDelete
  19. YVONNE WARREN MARTIN a Child Protection worker within Social Services with 29 years experience(very very experienced) says, that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers to see if David Payne is on that list.

    Yvonne Warren Martin imo opinion knows exactly where she had crossed Payne

    ReplyDelete
  20. Please do not take my comment the wrong way, but I think it is not very wise to say that David Payne "enjoyed" bathing children. I think it is best to stick to what is in the Gaspar's statements.
    The Gaspars never mentioned that they noticed that Payne enjoyed or made a point of bathing the children, they (Katherine) just mentioned that it was the fathers that usually bathed the children during the Maiorca holiday. This means that it was not only Payne who bathed them, the other men in the group also did it, maybe all "enjoyed" doing it...?
    Also, Mrs. Gaspar's concerns did not arise from something she noticed during the bathings, or by something a child might have told happened on such an occasion, her concerns came from the gestures she watched Payne make at the table and what he asked G. McCann. And, talking of McCann, he must share the same interests as Payne, because if Mrs. Gaspar is right in her suspicions, that the gestures made by Payne indicate innapropriate behaviour towards children, then G. McCann was not disgusted or even bothered by it, if we judge by his total lack of action. He just sat there as if what Payne asked and showed him was completely ok with him! And Payne was supposedly talking about Madeleine!!!
    One would expect him to have jumped on Payne's throat and punch the creep to a pulp! What kind of a father would accept such behaviour???

    ReplyDelete
  21. As the parents of a missing, allegedly abducted, child I find the McCanns to be extraordinarily trusting of their [Tapas]group friends. Perhaps a little too trusting to make the abduction of this poor child seem genuinely believable. I know the betrayal of a close friend regarding one's own child would be the most painfullest things any parent in theses circumstances would want to consider. It is the ultimate betrayal of trust. But surely for the love of one's child one would have no option but to consider all possibilities regarding the disappearance of one's child even if that means looking inward at one's own circle of friends. The fact the the McCanns seem to trust their Tapas group friends so implicitly and without question has, & will always, ring alarm bells with me regarding the disappearance of this poor child.

    ReplyDelete
  22. CM have touched on this 3 times before, as have TV Mais and O Crime, without response from CR.

    The last CM piece contained an interesting quote:

    "On the day that Madeleine disappeared, his behaviour was very strange. He tried to sit in during the interrogations of Kate and Gerry, and he seemed very upset", a member of staff at the Ocean Club who assisted the searches during the first few hours, told CM.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I always wondered why the Paynes were the only ones who definitely did not leave the table, that night.
    And they were the only ones with a baby monitor.
    Even using a baby monitor, parents use to check on their children, an extra observation, when the family is staying somewhere else than their own home.
    Imo, they protected themselves behind a monitor while other monitors disappeared in that blue bag, together with the clothes that were used to clean the floor.
    Imo, Russel O'Brian cleaned the floor,made the bag disappear.
    And who said the monitor would work well the whole evening?
    When I read the book,I always observe the only person who does not show up at all that evening, is David Payne himself.Before and after the "abduction".Fiona Payne sits beside Kate, on her bed, Russel takes care of a sick child,Tanner sees the abductor,Oldfield checks on the children, Gerry idem,Rachel(Russel,Fiona) see Murat.
    Even Kate goes checking at 10pm.

    Where is David Payne in this story?
    Nowhere and that is ODD.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Say, just for example of course, that as a result of information that came to light in Portugal English Police Officers/ Social Services etc decided to carry out a complex child abuse investigation into English offenders and in relation to an English child(ren), would they need the permission of Portuguese Officers or need to disclose full details of that investigation. I think you know the short answer.

    A "Gold Group" convenes at regular intervals when English officers are conducting such an investigation, in the strictest of confidence, of course. (See the items Leicester Police will NOT disclose to the public i.e. Gold Group Minutes).

    I can understand the frustration of Goncalo Amaral but IMO there are aspects of this case that cannot and will not be further investigated and/or prosecuted in Portugal, the offenders are not there.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fiona Payne was the one who went to Lisbon with Kate. To help Kate or to spy what was going on in court related with her husband?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Let’s not forget, the Leicestershire Police web site had a direct link to the McCann’s web site,
    This when the McCann’s were suspects, no wonder Dr Amaral has no trust in the Leicestershire Police,

    ReplyDelete
  27. viv 24, let's say the English authorities/Social Services found evidence that there was a history of abuse of Madeleine by her parents. Do you not think that such evidence should be forwarded to the Portuguese police?

    The only aspects of this case that are out of the jurisdiction of the Portuguese police is the fraudulent fund set up by the parents.

    I think too much is being read into this WikiLeaks snippet. The English have a sense of superiority. Mr. Ellis' remark to his counterpart that it was the English that developed the evidence is just another example of an Englishman saying that only they could solve such a complex case. I have seen it many times. The English reporter who mercilessly criticized the Portuguese police for making the McCanns arguidos and then is offended when someone questions the quality of the cadaver dogs; "no! no!, these are good dogs they're English." The English football commentator who is filled with joy that Portugal, who eliminated his beloved England, did not win the European cup. He intimates that Portugal couldn't have gotten that far without intimidating referees and then goes on to brand the nation as a bunch of losers. The examples of this type of behaviour by the English are numerous.

    I think Mr. Amaral knows there is nothing of relevance in Mr. Ellis' remark to his counterpart. Mr. Amaral is just using it as a segue into the matters he wants to discuss, specifically the Gaspar statements, a subject Mr. Payne and Mr. McCann never broach.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I wonder if Richard Desmond would print the "The truth of the Lie" as a serialisation in the Express newspapers? It would be interesting to know what the legal position is at the moment. could a newspaper be sued considering Amaral's successful overturning of the judgement?
    Perhaps a concerted letter / email effort to encourage Desmond could be a way of really bringing the issues to the attention of the British public.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Joana, please accept my heartfelt thanks to you and your team for all your brilliant work, shedding light on this case and allowing a healthy discussion of the news and real facts. A very Happy Christmas and a Peaceful New Year you.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ask yourself this. If your daughter was missing in Portugal and fellow doctors had made a statement to the British police regarding the inappropriate behaviour of a member of your holiday party about your gaughter, would you;
    a) ensure that the police shared this information with the PJ and questioned the individual? or
    b) allow your lawyers to silence this information from being published in a newspaper?

    That speaks volumes.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The mccanns KNEW they were in the spotlight and were advised to take extradition lawyers.Ye they have been help all the way down to today but I guess their time is up and it is when their extradition lawyers will come in handy.
    This has just started

    ReplyDelete
  32. In his statement David Payne makes clear there is something he wishes to say about the disappearance of Madeleine, but does not want recorded in his statement.

    The interviewer then proceeds with the rest of the statement and it is not mentioned again.

    Can we presume that whatever it was Payne wished to say about the disappearance of Madeleine is on record somewhere held by the LP? If so, did the PJ ever get to see it?

    The policeman who questioned Payne was later himself accused of lewd sexual conduct in a court of law towards a member of the jury (crazy behaviour), so was he really a fitting person to be conducting the interview of Payne, given that they had the Gaspar statements by then, and presumably Payne was also asked about them, though what he said is not on public record.

    All in all, the interviewing of Payne sounds most unsatisfactory given the seriousness of the statement made by the lady doctor Gaspar.

    Being as there is still so much in the Case File that has not yet been released it is interesting that the Gaspar statements were.

    Was there a reason for this? Was it hoped that further information may be forthcoming on this incident once it becomes public knowledge. Are there other people out there who have observed other incidents but have not tied it in with the 'abduction' of Madeleine because they have been told she was taken away in the night by a bundleman.

    That abduction fairy story of the McCanns has really clouded the issue, though not for Dr Gaspar who was intelligent and worried enough to want to go report her observations to the police when she learnt that Madeleine was missing. And what she had seen had nothing to do with an abductor.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This blog here did not publicised the whole Mrs. Gaspar's statement.
    At the very beginning, I read what she said about her intuitions about Gerry X Madeleine.
    That part is eliminated of the blogs.
    But the police must still have it, of course.

    Nige, what is CR?

    ReplyDelete
  34. #3o wrote:

    "Ask yourself this.
    If your daughter was missing in Portugal and fellow doctors had made a statement to the British police regarding the inappropriate behaviour of a member of your holiday party about your gaughter, would you;
    a) ensure that the police shared this information with the PJ and questioned the individual? or
    b) allow your lawyers to silence this information from being published in a newspaper?

    That speaks volumes."



    The problem is that those paedophilia suspicions ALSO included the girl's own father! David Payne was adressing Gerry McCann when he made the innapropriate gestures and asked "if SHE would do that?".
    Mrs. Gaspar interpreted or was conviced that Payne was referring to G. Mccann's own daughter, Madeleine!!! And Gerry accepted it quite naturally, so, whatever was meant by those gestures was o.k. with Gerry and Kate! The actions of Payne are not the problem for the Mccanns, Gerry and Kate's lack of reaction in face of those actions, their acception of it IS THE PROBLEM! That's why they want the Gaspar's statements out of the british public's knowledge, because it puts them in a bad light, shows that Payne's behaviour was no surprise to them and that they accepted it!
    That does speak volumes indeed , as you've said!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Possibly the Vatican knows what happened to Madeleine and who is responsible for it.
    I hope Wikileaks will publish cables between cardinals (and bishops)
    to the Pope.
    There must be some correspondence among them.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Guerra,

    If Maddie was indeed taken by a stranger, then only Portugal would have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute that, there would be no need for investigations in England by UK officers, except of course to eliminate Kate and Gerry from those inquiries.

    If Maddie died an accidental death whilst in Portugal and there was no real surrounding issues of a history of child abuse, again it is possible that could be prosecuted in Portugal, subject to assistance from UK authorities. But even on that basis such a prosecution would be nigh on impossible because, as Goncalo actually points out, the fraud happened in the UK. That clearly suggests this was no accidental death and the Portuguese Court would be prevented from dealing with the whole facts of the case. If you have studied law, as I have, in considerable depth, you would know that a court must have all the surrounding facts and evidence within their own jurisdiction in order to properly deal with a case.

    But the GASPAR statement that has been released clearly suggests this case does indeed involve child abuse. What the McCanns actually admit to is very serious child abuse. They subjected their children to the risk of serious harm, apparently, every single night of that holiday. It is a known fact that parents will admit a lesser form of child abuse in order to try and cover a far more serious form. UK social workers are trained to realise that what they can see very readily is likely to be just the "tip of the iceberg". By that they mean that if they have simply found out parents go to the pub and leave their children alone, they should assume the abuse may be much worse than that and do a very thorough investigation to ascertain the real extent of the abuse. Otherwise children are not adequately protected because what they are actually suffering has not even been properly considered. That is not to say that all parents go beyond that level. It is more than clear the McCanns have shown scant disregard for the wellbeing of all of their children, including continuing to place the twins in the creche and galivanting off abroad when they were suffering the terrible trauma of losing Madeleine. They also subjected them to their media circus which most certainly would not have gone down well with British Social Services.

    If Maddie and any other English children were subjected to any form of abuse, including sexual, it would be wholly wrong for UK authorities to ignore that and not fully investigate it. IMO that is very plainly what has taken place.

    I have pointed out many times that such investigations have to be dealt with in the strictest of confidence. This is to protect children and those under investigation. It is also to ensure that those under investigation do not have the details of the investigation to assist them in preparing their defence. Wanting to know those details is what Kate and Gerry have always been about. They even sued the Chief Constable of Leicester Police.

    ReplyDelete
  37. (cont'd from above)Under English law, our police have the very clearest of jurisdiction to look at English offenders for offences like homicide and sexual abuse regardless of where it has taken place and prosecute those offenders. It is clearly possible others are involved who were never even in Portugal. If it does involve sexual abuse that is most frequently the case.

    This is not a situation where "freedom of expression" will ever win the day. If English Police had made full disclosure of everything they have to Portugal, not only would Kate and Gerry know everything there is to know, the whole world would and that would mean they could never be put on trial. IN addition other children may be put at further risk due to the prevention of such a prosecution. No British newspaper is permitted to identify any British child that may have been the subject of sexual abuse, and so they are never going to print details of the GASPAR statement.

    Internet bloggers may want to know the full extent of information held within British agency files, but they are never going to be told and neither are the suspects. Why do you think Gerry keeps talking about wanting everything put together on one file?

    IMO, by interviewing David Payne separately to the rest, that does prove that LP were running two procedures:

    1. Complying with the request for those interviews by Portuguese Police. I think it is true to say that Portugal just wanted to conduct a proper investigation looking at all the facts and possible offences so far as they could from their end and then close the case to allow English Police to continue.

    2. Continuing an investigation into possible child abuse in line with all the information they had gleaned, including of course the GASPAR statements. If they did not do this I am sure they would be equally criticised!

    People should bear in mind that LP equally have a very clear legal duty to protect Kate, Gerry and the twins from harm. Keeping a notice on their webpage may have been done for that reason. There are certain highly irresponsible people who have leafleted etc right in the McCanns backyard. It does not take any great stretch of imagination to think this might prompt some vigilante into going even further.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Poster 8, totally agree with you, we all have seen with our own eyes that Leicester police have been helping the MaCanns & Tapas, but Leicester police have only being helping the MaCanns & Tapas because of the instructions of a goverment of ours here in the UK, imo Gordon Browns New Labour goverment have instucted Leicester police to protect the MaCanns and Tapas at all costs.

    Why you may ask ?

    http://www.chris-uk.org/another-cover-up/former-p-m-gordon-brown-dunblane

    ReplyDelete
  39. Why is David Payne allowed to continue as a doctor, surely he should be investigated. What was it he wanted to add to his statement, but did not want recorded? Why is Dr Amaral not given the support of the British Authorities? Why did the Gaspars not pursue their statments further after their initial concerns of paedophilia - there are so many unanswered questioned but eventually the truth will out....thank you Joana et al for all your work.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Regarding post #33,
    It's not the first time I see references that say that a part of Katherina Gaspar's statement is missing, the part of it where she supposedly told "something" about Gery McCann, possibly describing some strange behaviour from his part.
    I personally cannot say I have ever read any other version of the Gaspar's statements other than the one available here, or in McCannFiles, etc., so, I wonder what is this all about? Does anyone else remember any other "uncut" version of the Gaspar's statements?
    Is there any truth in this claim? If yes, why would the statements had to be "edited" by the various blogs that adress them? Have they got letters from C.Ruck and been forced to keep Gerry's name out of it? Why hasn't the same happened with Payne? Does he not care, do the McCanns not care that they are being associated with socializing with a possible paedo? Even if something "unsavoury" about Gerry was erased from the statement(s), there is still the rest of the account of what Katherina saw, that is, Payne adressing Gerry DIRECTLY with his sexually charged gestures and the question he asked of if "would she( Maddie) do this?"! He was talking to gerry, of all people, and about Gerry's own daughter, and...what was Gerry's reaction to such disgusting actions...? NONE WHATSOEVER! He just stood there, absolutely calm, no disgust, repulse or anger at all, from hearing and watching "his best friend" refer to his beloved daughter in such an outrageous matter! I do not know if Katherina G. indeed made any particular observations about Gerry McCann in her statement, but, the rest of it is damning enough for him!

    ReplyDelete
  41. watch as well, the War on Democracy by John Pilger part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
    8, 9, and 10

    «The War on Democracy is a 2007 award-winning documentary film directed by Christopher Martin and John Pilger. Focusing on the political state of Latin America, the film is a rebuke of both the United States' intervention in foreign countries' domestic politics, and its "War on Terrorism". The film was first released in the United Kingdom on June 15, 2007.

    Set both in Latin America and the United States, the film explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile. Pilger says that the film "...tells a universal story... analysing and revealing, through vivid testimony, the story of great power behind its venerable myths. It allows us to understand the true nature of the so-called "war on terror". According to Pilger, the films message is that the greed and power of empire is not invincible and that people power is always the "seed beneath the snow".»

    «John Pilger's documentary explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile. Pilger claims that the film "...tells a universal story... analysing and revealing, through vivid testimony, the story of great power behind its venerable myths. It allows us to understand the true nature of the so-called "war on terror". According to Pilger, the films message is that the greed and power of empire is not invincible and that people power is always the "seed beneath the snow".

    Pilger interviews several ex-CIA agents who purportedly took part in secret campaigns against democratic countries and who he claims are profiting from the war in Iraq. He investigates the School of the Americas in the U.S. state of Georgia, where General Pinochet's torture squads were reportedly trained along with tyrants and death-squad leaders in Haiti, El Salvador, Brazil and Argentina.»

    ReplyDelete
  42. From the award-winning director of The War on Democracy comes John Pilger's latest work, The War You Don't See. This hard-hitting exposé scrutinises the effects of the media during wartime, asking what is the role of the media in rapacious wars.

    When symbols are separated from facts and the facts don't matter, could the media be accused of conspiring to play down the carnage and of using 'embedded journalism' to amplify the lies? This documentary unveils the war you don't see and allows you to make up your own mind.

    The War You Don't See
    The War You Don't See - trailer

    John Pilger's site http://johnpilger.com/
    Buy the DVD here http://www.networkdvd.net/product_info.php?products_id=1271

    ReplyDelete
  43. On Amaral's DVD, he talks about Payne(30 seconds, 30 minutes) and at the end he suggests Madeleine died of an accident,at around 9.10pm, falling down behind the sofa, eventually also victim of Calpol.
    If he himself believes this story, why talk about Payne, who went to 5a at 6.30pm and left at 7.00pm, a little more than 3 hours before her death?
    I think every word on that DVD is important, the presence of Payne
    very much important and maybe Amaral insinuates Calpol, Payne and another time of death, not 9.10pm.
    No time enough to wash behind the sofa, to get rid of the(full) blue bag, to get rid of the body, to isntruct Tapas 7.
    Specially, no time enough for a cadaver scent.
    Could it be that Kate and Payne were in love with each other, she gave Calpol to the children in the late afternoon,knowing that Payne would come to 5a, both went to Kate's bedroom and the accident happened?
    It seems she phoned somebody on the early morning of May the 3rd.
    Was it Payne? Did she need attention from another man because Gerry was not caring about her?
    For me Payne would be the last man in the world but perhaps not for her.
    Or was Calpol used for other purposes?
    If it was, how come they did not see Madeleine falling down? And why is the police convinced that the death has to do with Kate and not with Gerry? Calpol?

    ReplyDelete
  44. 40 and 33, the translation is complete, it is what it is written on the process page files - if you have doubts pay for a professional translator and stop creating havoc or misinforming people. thanks

    ReplyDelete
  45. 33, 40 Perhaps this is what you mean (statement K. Gaspar)

    "I believe that he did this later on, during the holidays, but I cannot be sure. The only time, besides this one, that I was with Dave and Fiona was several weeks after the holidays, when Savio and I met up with Gerry, Kate, Dave and Fiona at a restaurant in Leicester."

    "I am absolutely certain that he said what he said and that he made the gestures I referred to, but that could have occurred in the restaurant in Leicester, even though (page five) I believe that it was later on, in Majorca. When I heard Dave saying and doing this a second time, I took it more seriously."

    http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic50.html

    ReplyDelete
  46. viv...i dont care how much law youve studied and to what depth ..your talking complete and utter nonsense!
    Infact your posts are infuriating.
    The facts remain that NOTHING has been done in respect to the Mccanns in terms of charges-evidences have been destroyed!
    I am 100% certain that this cover up has been achieved by corrupting the evidence and through not following correct police procedures deliberately.
    For this to have happened it means that their are high ranking individuals within the Police,FSS,CEOP,Government,Courts,Media who have worked together to achieve the whitewashing of the death of a 3y/o innocent girl.
    I would stake my life on it!
    Granted what they are doing is downright cowardly- they are wording in a way that allows an escape route of their behaviour when the "piece of evidence proves without doubt" what has been going on.
    Every single name who has been involved will be aired if i get my way.
    I honestly believe you will at some point be eating humble pie.
    Their are good policemen and women of that im certain but unfortunately they are not in positions of influence-that is saved for corrptible, career mad, ass licking scumbags of which some have been moved or resigned etc.
    This case is an outrage and representive of what has become of a once great country-spolit by these evergrowing types of people.

    mojo

    ReplyDelete
  47. The McCanns are writing about Wikileaks.(see McCann files).
    This is bothering them, isn't it?
    How could they expect Wikileaks would find correspondence about the case?
    May God bless AssAngel, that is how I will call him from now on.
    Our lovely Angel.
    If I would have been the McCanns, I would not have attracked the attention to Wikileaks.
    People who still did not hear about that publication, could search for it now.
    By the way, I read Kate and Gerry's comment on McCann Files but I could not find it on Find Madeleine.

    Who knows it is already deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Is it possible that the Portuguese police interrogate the ambassador, even when the process is still shelved?
    I think it is.
    It is a matter of death, accidentally or otherwise.
    No funeral, no official documents, nothing.
    Crimes, crimes.

    This ex-ambassador could be longing for an interview with the police.
    He saw what happened to Murat.
    Now he has to tell what he knows.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Dear Joana,
    I have send you a link the other day .. this one http://justathoughtyouknow.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=guests&action=display&thread=778&page=1
    I have send it to you so that you can see what has been saying about you. The next thing I read on here is that you receive death threads, i hope this is not linked. I am sorry that some people just go out to be pure nasty. You have done all you humanly can to keep the search for little Madeleine in the public eye. Stay stron in everything you do, the truth will out and then it will be job wel done. Thank you for keeping us all in the picture what has happened to this poor child. I wish you and all your family the best wishes for this Xmas and the new year. J

    ReplyDelete
  50. I have been reading over some old stuff and wondering if anyone can give an opinion on this.

    DP is quoted in one article as saying-- in regard to Madeleine's disappearance-- "We knew something was going to happen but we did not expect this." Or words to that effect.

    Kate is quoted as saying-- also on the day of Madeleine's disappearance-- "A couple took her."

    Does anyone have any more details about these statements?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anon 43

    Yes, and especially not enough time for cadaver scent to develop, unless somebody can come up with new data on that because the nearest anybody has managed to get a dog to alert to cadaver scent so far is one hour and twenty five minutes, and that is only the best dogs (which, of course, this dog was).

    It sounds like Payne is the one person especially who should be questioned by the PJ. Yet, he was the one who wasn't. Beggars belief. The PJ were too trusting on that one.

    So what was it he wanted to say about the disappearance of Madeleine, but didn't want put in his statement? Is it still on record somewhere, and was it passed on to the investigators in Portugal? Was there time to pass it on before the case was shelved, because it sure took them a long time to pass on the Gaspar statements to the PJ.

    Was this the information the McCanns were trying to get hold of when they took the LP to court to try to get them to release their File on the case. This was shortly before the case was shelved.

    Just imagine that, the suspects suing the cops trying to get them to disclose their information.

    The nerve and arrogance of the McCanns to try something like that is staggering. Thankfully common sense stopped them from getting their way on that one. Yet still they keep trying, beavering away at it, all on the pretext of needing it to help find Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  52. 17th Dec. 2010 McCanns update website.
    "This month marks our fourth Christmas without Madeleine."

    Christmas is 25th/26th, isn't it?

    "The Wikileaks 'news' this week has led to the repetition of many unfounded allegations and smears both in the UK and in Portugal in particular." (Kate/Gerry McCann)

    ReplyDelete
  53. #48,
    I think that Kate told that ( Madeleine taken by a couple) to Yvonne Martin, the social worker who visited them the next day, to offer her help and expertise.
    And, there is also Kate's "premonition", or a sense of doom about the holiday, she was not very keen on going.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Joana, I'm #40,
    My apologies to you, I did not for a moment doubt your work (translation), it's just that I saw this mentioned before and wondered...
    Maybe , if there really was more to K. Gaspar's statement, it is not included in the version released by the police. Maybe, for some reason the police "edited" the statement...by now I believe all is possible... but this leaves a big question, how did the person(s) who claim there was more to it had access to the full version, the one that is nowhere to be seen, not even in the official police files?

    ReplyDelete
  55. From the McCann's update:

    "This month marks our fourth Christmas without Madeleine. We hope with all our hearts that wherever she is, she is safe and well and whoever may be with her is treating her with the love and respect she so deserves."

    WHAT, Mr. and Mrs. McCann???!!! Excuse me, but aren't you absolutely sure she was taken by a paedophile? Isn't that what you told "the world and his dog" all this time? And still, you "hope with all your hearts" that she's being treated with "LOVE AND RESPECT"?! Oh, o.k., maybe she was "lucky" and was taken by an honourable paedo, who's treating her like a little princess!
    Are you for real? What's the matter with you people?!

    You cannot be serious, really! You've got to be f***ing kidding, right?

    ReplyDelete
  56. @ viv 36 and 37

    Thank you viv for an excellent summary of the pros and cons. It is extremely helpful to be informed by someone familiar with the law and the procedures applicable in such cases, that there are indeed two possible sides to the story.

    You point out that if child abuse is involved, it would probably extend some way back before the holiday and disappearance and possibly implicate other people as yet unknown. It might therefore be advisable not to treat this like a football match and simply jump to the first obvious conclusion, namely that Leicestershire Police are involved in some conspiracy to frustrate a successful prosecution by witholding crucial evidence from the Portuguese investigation.

    After all, apart from the fact that the child's disappearance was reported May 3rd 2007 and that there are indications she is dead and her parents are involved in some way, nobody knows what crime has been committed and who else could be involved in that crime or possibly crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  57. This new "Christmas update" is priceless!
    Here's another snippet:

    "Those who could help Madeleine but choose to do nothing are also complicit in this injustice."

    Have you drank too much mulled wine alredy, Mr. and Mrs. McCann?
    A few cups of the stuff and you start at last aknowledging the most horrible truth, that you and your friends could have helped Madeleine, but CHOSE to do NOTHING! Injustice indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anon 48

    Kate McCann should have been asked to explain why she said that about a couple having taken Madeleine.

    Especially in light of Jane Tanner and her 'bundleman' scenario.

    Or was it said simply to create yet more confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  59. surely no one believes the mccanns have wasted nearly all the fund money on useless pi and other such shite, more lies from the mccanns,bet they have a secret bank account somewhere where they has salted most of the fund money or it is with the family in safe hands as it is thiers and not Madeleines they can do what they like with it , but they wouldnt want the public to know what they are up to so hence the(another) lie

    ReplyDelete
  60. Anon 32 " Being as there is still so much in the Case File that has not yet been released it is interesting that the Gaspar statements were.

    Was there a reason for this? "

    From what I can remember, the Gaspar Statements arrived in Portugal by accident - they were hidden amongst some other unrelated paperwork that came from Leicestershire Police. It was only pure luck that they were found by the PJ.

    They were not meant to be sent to the PJ - sounds like someone with a conscience at LP slipped copies in amongst other papers.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  61. The McCanns are obviously rattled by Wikileaks, and no doubt that is the real reason they issued a statement clothed within their thanking of the public. This kind of exposure by Wikeleads is also really bad for business, especially at this time of year, Christmas and all.

    It must be a nightmare for them wondering each day what the next days news will bring as more of the Wikileaks gets released.

    If only the McCanns had let well alone, but too bad for them they can't stand not being in control of everything, and they do have a Fund that has to be fed with donated money from the public who buy their abduction fairy story, and by selling their fairy story to the media so it can be fed to the unsuspecting public.

    The McCanns have an 'extended family' to support, don't you know, and that is besides the money they need for all the legal expenses.

    Please give generously unsuspecting public. All donations gratefully accepted, especially by the 'extended family'.

    ReplyDelete
  62. 43

    Payne originally stated to the PJ he last saw Madeleine alive at 7 pm, but if you read the email exchange between Ricardo Paiva and DC Marshall dated October 2007, DC Marshall states he is now saying in statements given to LP he last saw her at 5 pm. So that is a dramatic contradiction between his two accounts, no wonder the cops think he is involved!

    I have no doubt this man has been seriously grilled by the police. At the start of his rogatory, he talks of starting a new job that very week and "all the trouble at work".

    Because investigations into sexual abuse must be dealt wit confidentially, they were clearly speaking to him additionally to conducting the rogatory interviews with him.

    49

    Kate and Gerry made their application against the Ch Con of LP on 2 April 2008, the very same day Mrs Justice Hogg made Madeleine a Ward of Court. And so whatever Leicester Police told her, it must have been something very serious, telling Justice Hogg loud and clear that even if Maddie was still alive, the McCanns would have no further say in her care and control. They do not choose to point that out when they continue this "looking for her" farce do they!

    ReplyDelete
  63. Just back from a birthday party.
    It was wonderful and everybody discussed Wikileaks and the Maddie case.
    We were all so happy the British ambasssador discussed this item and not only wrote about the McCann's responsibility in the case but also didn'deny it.
    This is more than a reason to send the PJ to England, to interrogate him, as a witness.
    But only after England gets rid of the snow.

    48, I remember Kate and Gerry somewhere some days after, telling the media that they believed Maddie was taken by a couple, adoption.
    And that they believed that couple was nice to her.

    That I remember very well.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I still miss a piece of the puzzel.
    The logica between Payne's paedophilia and Madeleine dying behind the sofa.
    I don't see the connection.
    There could be connections between
    Calpol and paedophilia
    Calpol and the sofa

    perhaps
    Calpol, paedophilia and the accident, later in the evening.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Express.co.uk is talking about the McCann's comments against Wikileaks.
    Very good, people can read what the ambassadors said to each other.

    Three judges in favor of the book, books back to the editor,two ambassadors commenting the truth, yeah, we are still on the right path but with less and less obstakels.

    This is like a snow ball, getting bigger and bigger, down a hill.
    Impossible to stop it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. In the Mail today

    'Portuguese police admitted they had found no evidence against them, and shelved the case'

    Not 'cleared' and case shelved

    Accurate reporting by the Mail.

    ReplyDelete
  67. After a missive of victimisation and accusations ( To the anti's, to G. Amaral and the Wikileaks), here come the true face of their effort to look for their daughter:

    "we would like to thank everyone who has sent us Christmas cards, letters, donations and gifts at this difficult time of year. It is impossible to find enough positive words to describe such kindness or the hugely important and heart-warming effect it has on us. Without any doubt, it helps us immensely and we are incredibly grateful."

    You tell us, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THE DONATIONS ARE HELPING YOU IMMENSELY, NOT MADELEINE.
    What better recognition for the poor work of your detectives then the headline that you wrote on your site- The fourth Christmas without Madeleine. IS time to Sack them. Why you keep a team of useless pseudo detectives that after 4 years fail to found a single and small evidence to support your abduction theory? What they know that keeps you carry on that people?
    Is not the fault of G. Amaral or the Wikileaks. They have nothing to do with what happened to Madeleine. You must put your hands on top of your conscience to recognise everything that you have done to pervert the legal investigation and avoid the truth. You are the ones who left 48 questions without answers. You are the ones who did not stand your a... on the first hours after she went missing, you are the ones who refuse the reconstruction and YOU STILL THE ONLY ONES WHO DON'T WANT TO REOPEN THE CASE. WHY THAT HYPOCRISY? Your portuguese lawyer, clear assumed on his last interview that you don't want the case to be reopened, then why asking the honest people to sign your Petition on-line, or to download it as a paper type? It's Christmas, you should respect more the nature by saving trees and you should respect more the pain of other parents that lost their childs without having 1/100 of the financial and physical support that you got. You lost the plot with your last post on your site.
    Every day are growing the doubts about your really interest on the search of your daughter. If you really wanted to find her, you must have done more, much more, on May 2007. Now is too late. BUT IS NEVER TOO LATE TO KNOW THE TRUTH AND FACE JUSTICE. I agree, this 4 years have been a total injustice for Madeleine, because of other reasons, not the ones that you point out. Reopen the case ( you don't need a fraudulent Petition) to do it. At least for a small moment that Christmas, be honest with the public.

    ReplyDelete
  68. "The Wikileaks 'news' this week has led to the repetition of many unfounded allegations".
    It is that the reason why almost all governments in the world, shake when they face the leaks and Julien Assange become the most wanted and the most hated person, at moment, for many people with power? Inst it, Mrs Kate? How unfounded you are on your allegations. The facts spoke by themselves. Don't be worried, 250000 files, will have more stuff to leak regarding your issues, The May 2007 and your Fund.

    ReplyDelete
  69. The farcical circus continues at Dacre's mail , the article is a quasi copy of the McCann's statement on their facebook page, posted in there last week.

    On the Express : McCanns reject WikiLeaks claims

    By James Murray

    KATE and Gerry McCann have reacted angrily to revelations by WikiLeaks that alleged British police had been helping to build a case against them over the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

    In a statement on their Find Madeleine website, they said: “The WikiLeaks ‘news’ this week has led to the repetition of many unfounded smears. This has been seized on as an opportunity by those who wish to compound our suffering and hamper our efforts, including the very person who was entrusted with finding our daughter.”

    The couple are locked in a bitter civil dispute with former ­Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral over claims he made in his book, Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie.

    Earlier this year the McCanns met Home Secretary Theresa May and were hoping to persuade her to order a review of all the known evidence but the attempt was unsuccessful.

    Their statement adds: “Those who could help Madeleine but choose to do nothing are also complicit in this injustice.

    “Madeleine is the person who suffers most from all of this injustice. It is that fact alone which causes us the most distress. It is absolutely heart-breaking.”

    Last week newspapers published information from Wiki­Leaks about a meeting between US ambassador to Portugal Al Hoffman and the British ambassador Alexander Wykeham Ellis in September 2007, four months after Madeleine disappeared from an Algarve holiday apartment. In a diplomatic cable the US ambassador reported: “Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working cooperatively.”
    ----

    We're still waiting for the former arguidos pair to make the reconstruction of the night their three year old daughter disappeared, so, the only authority who has the jurisdiction to investigate criminal cases in Portugal, the Judiciary Police, can resume the investigation.

    ReplyDelete
  70. The first comments from readers to the Express article will cheer you up on a bleak winter´s morning. Especially this:

    "AS A REMINDER, THERE IS 'NAE EVIDENCE OF AN ABDUCTION'

    FACT."

    Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/218281/McCanns-reject-WikiLeaks-claimsMcCanns-reject-WikiLeaks-claims#ixzz18XcguSJO

    ReplyDelete
  71. Ellis admitted the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents

    Now they can choose to sue somebody.Pick and Choose!
    Ellis? Julian Assange/Wikileaks? or just go to Portugal ask for a RE-OPENING of the case WITH an apology to the PJ and the whole of Portugal??
    This is the first time they dont claim "justice" against somebody....they should:the fund is running really low but I guess their mortgage has been paid by now??

    They are finished and they know

    @Viv
    Thanks for your excelllent analysis.I do have a question: what about the complete passivity of Justice Hogg and why hasnt she never stood up for Madeleine HER woc?

    ReplyDelete
  72. "This has been seized on as an opportunity by those who wish to compound our suffering and hamper our efforts, including the very person who was entrusted with finding our daughter"

    There is NO opportunity to do anything
    They are REALLY crazy!
    This "person" has a name:Gonzaño Amaral
    A family man,a professional man,the ONLY one who has been trying to FIND if not your daughter,at least the TRUTH about her "disappearance".

    "She is safe and well and whoever may be with her is treating her with the love and respect she so deserves."

    In that case she better stay with those people hasnt she? because with you she has not had the chance to be looked after properly and she certainely had no RESPECT whatsoever: you sold her to suit YOUR interests,
    Dont use word you dont know the full meaning:love.respect.justice...you must be kidding!

    ReplyDelete
  73. It seems McCanns book 'Madeleine' disappeared from the American Amazon site.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Hi I'm new here but i'm always reading this blog and excuse my bad English.
    I rembember that Maddie was treaten at some hospital one week before the trip to Portugal. Baybe therefore Kate said that comment that 'something is going to happend'. And I wonder if Kate is the guilty one. I wonder over the incident when the old lady was hearing a child crying after her daddy. I think it was Kate crying 'Maddy Maddy'. I think she went angry when Gerry was flirting whith other ladies and Kate have to take care of Maddie and her anger went out of Maddie. I think that Kate is the strong one. I remember that i have read somewhere that it was Gerry who where intrested in Kate and followed here over the whole world....before they get married.

    Kate from Sweden

    ReplyDelete
  75. @69,so it seems that kate is saying the wikileaks is not true and that Ellis is now a liar,boy they are f***** and they know it,and i for one am bluddy glad and just hope someone some where really dishes the dirt on them for Madeleine sake an innocent child in this and its all down to the parents and the tapas mates

    ReplyDelete
  76. I also remember the same morning that Maddie disappeared, they chose to eat breakfast in their apartment instead of going with the other pairs. They had time to clean up after themselves in the apartment, I think.
    When Kate was talking to the other pairs in the evening and said that Maddie had said 'why did not you come when Shean and I cried for you'....
    I think she tried to give herself an alibi that it was Maddie and not she who was crying in the apartment another night before. Why else would she say this in front of the others but still leave children alone?

    K. from Sweden

    ReplyDelete
  77. i would just like to say to the mccanns and the tapas,have a nice christmas with your children and family,s because it might be the last one you spend with them for a little while,the truth is coming and YOU will all get your just deserts,with what you have ALL have done to Madeleine may god never forgive you and i just hope you all ROT IN HELL

    ReplyDelete
  78. "Have your say" has been taken off from the Express. Why, I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
  79. So everybody is a liar except Kate, are they? the coordinator of the investigation and his colleagues, the British Ambassador, even the cadaver dogs, and the Home Secretary doesn't care, Yeah right. The Mcs must be desperste now. Poor poor Kate, the victim again.

    ReplyDelete
  80. @78.could it be that the express are going to sue the mccanns to get thier money back now they have the proof that the english police were on to them,i know,i know, wishfull thinking

    ReplyDelete
  81. Why was Murat's life turned upside down on the strength of no evidence whatsoever, just because somebody didn't like the look of him, and the pals of the McCanns were pointing a finger at him, when at the same time Payne has certainly not received the same treatment.

    To all intents and purposes the statement of a fellow doctor, who had grave concern when she heard that Madeleine was missing and Payne was there at the time, has been swept under the carpet.

    This case should never have been shelved, and Payne needs to be brought back to PDL for extensive questioning and investigation. At the very least why wasn't he made an 'arguido' like the McCanns and Murat were?

    Seriously, how can this matter be overlooked in this way? If Murat was ever put on the list of suspects, then Payne should have been way up the list above him.

    The investigators think maybe Madeleine went missing to cover up an accident.

    How about Madeleine went missing to cover up something much more sinister than that? The case should be reopened before yet more time is wasted.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Viv: a correspondant of mine works in the local social services near to the McCanns. She told me that a senior manager, not a trained social worker, was sent to interview the McCanns. This manager came back convinced by the McCanns middle class doctors act. The rest of the social workers were dubious about the whole Madeleine story but the manager was in charge and had the last word so they couldn't pursue it. She also told me that children's social services are being squeezed of funds to the extent that she is thinking of quitting her job so they don't have the resources to pursue a case like the McCanns.
    I'm just saying what she told me. Please don't shoot the messenger.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Anon 77

    Yes, it does seem rather strange to say the least, that Kate should mention that at the dinner table that very night, and then supposedly the checks are upped with them running back and forth constantly, and lo and behold, all to no avail, because little Madeleine goes missing anyway!!!

    ReplyDelete
  84. Express article: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/218281/McCanns-reject-WikiLeaks-claimsMcCanns-reject-WikiLeaks-claims#ixzz18XcguSJO

    The comments are no more there!

    ReplyDelete
  85. I think Payne holds the evidence of what happened to Maddie ,IMO she was of the age where she could be talking about thing done to her, she had to be removed ,has anyone else noticed something with the PDL children? ALL young ,ALL similar ages, MOSTLY girls? why no older children on the holiday ? IMO paedophilia lies behind Maddie demise

    ReplyDelete
  86. Madeleine's Fund Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited Private Company - Report & Financial Statements March 31 2010 http://goo.gl/tRdnp

    http://ukdata.com/company/06248215/MADELEINE-S-FUND--LEAVING-NO-STONE-UNTURNED-LIMITED

    http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/967bce228884eac84d388a35b36b571b/compdetails

    ReplyDelete
  87. Big fall in income for Kate and Gerry McCanns' search fund

    Published Date: 18 December 2010
    By Sam Marsden
    Kate and Gerry McCann's fund to help find their missing daughter, Madeleine, saw income drop by almost 65 per cent last year.
    The amount raised for the cause fell from £629,181 in 2008-9 to £233,099 in 2009-10, newly-published accounts filed to Companies House show.

    More than £421,000 was spent on the campaign to locate Madeleine and merchandise costs last year, leaving

    the balance standing at £470,034 at the end of March.

    The McCanns spoke last month of their fears that the dwindling of the fund would leave them unable to continue paying private detectives to search for their daughter.

    Since then they have signed a lucrative deal to write a book about Madeleine's disappearance, with all proceeds going to the fund.

    Madeleine's Fund was launched a fortnight after the little girl vanished from her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, southern Portugal, on 3 May, 2007.

    Donations flooded in from supporters around the world who wanted to do something to help her parents, and the income for 2007-8 totalled £1,846,178.

    The fund's directors wrote in a preface to the 2009-10 accounts: "Income in the new financial year is lower than last year and we continue to review all our expenses to ensure value for money. As anticipated, the costs of the search during the year continue to be higher than the annual income."


    Page 1 of 1

    * Last Updated: 17 December 2010 9:45 PM
    * Source: The Scotsman
    * Location: Edinburgh

    http://news.scotsman.com/uk/Big-fall-in-income-for.6664695.jp

    ReplyDelete
  88. From BBC Radio Four last week, there was an announcement that the Forensic Science Services were going to be sold off/privatised or otherwise got rid of. They are costing too much. While I decry this constant jettisoning of semi-govermental departments, this might, for us , be an opportunity.
    In the changeover, there would be a chance for previously vetted evidence in the Maddie case to come to light.
    Time for anyone from the labs to contact Wikileaks with a clear conscience.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Joana at 87

    What a load of tosh these McCanns come out with.

    According to them it is costing so much for this so called 'search' for Madeleine, it is costing more than they will be taking in. Aren't they going to put their book deal money into the search then? Or does that go into the 'extended family' half of the Fund money? But that is obviously a foolish question to ask as since when have they ever used any of their own money for this 'search'.

    Yet if they really wanted any serious attempt at finding Madeleine carried out it would have cost them NOTHING.

    All they had to do was request the case be reopened. That they refuse to do this speaks volumes.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Given that the investigators had at one time been searching for a fridge/freezer in connection with the death of Madeleine, it is interesting that Payne in his statement had mentioned the McCanns fridge in the holiday apartment had broken.

    What was all that about? Was the fridge repaired? Was it discarded? What happened to it?

    Did anybody bother to follow up with more questioning of Payne about the McCanns' broken fridge?

    ReplyDelete
  91. #71, where did you find the comments in the Express article?
    I cannot see them, it says -"Have yor say" is unavailable for this story-

    ReplyDelete
  92. I have just read the latest post at the Blacksmith Bureau and I have to say it makes a lot of sense, particularly this section (although I would urge everyone to read the whole post to fully understand the context):

    "Despite much noise this absence of a prosecutable case is not a matter of dispute. The Portuguese prosecutor produced an incoherent summary of the case which was maddening in its lack of intellectual or legal rigour and which skated over the failures of co-operation by the Nine; nevertheless it is overwhelmingly clear that the failure to turn the suggestive evidence into a compelling legal case doomed all chances of prosecution. That remains the case today.

    Goncalo Amaral himself accepts that, at the time of his removal from the investigation, the evidence was insufficient, adding that when he was taken off the case he was about to fill in some decisive gaps, particularly in the vexed matter of how the body of the child could have been hidden. Perhaps he was, but that is speculation, not evidence.

    Amaral has been admirably consistent until recently in his attempts to keep the focus on the activities of the Nine, in particular by encouraging a movement to get the Tapas 7 back to Portugal to clarify their activities on May 3, the one absolutely glaring example of a failure to provide information to the investigation. Compared with this lead, which the prosecutor himself admitted was completely unexplored, all of the supposed leads followed up by the parents and their private detectives are insignificant.

    So there we have it. The focus has narrowed to the one gaping hole in the investigation.

    One would have thought that the next question was how can we move to fill that gap? How can we persuade these key figures to co-operate voluntarily in the interests of truth? Are there intermediaries trusted by both sides who could actually talk to the seven? Do they even accept that they have a contribution to make? Should the question of immunity be pursued? What would the McCanns like the seven to do? Could they be called in a libel case?

    For some reason, however, since the Portuguese appeal court ruling which, among other things, attested to the validity of the Amaral hypothesis or interpretation, the focus has become blurred, as the reaction in Portugal to the ambassador’s cable has highlighted.

    From the UK it looks weird. The Amaral hypothesis – which concentrates on investigating the actions of nine people - is suddenly drowning in a welter of theories which seemingly concentrate on everything but the Nine: governments, states, secret services, secret co-operation between Britain and America at Portugal’s expense. What is going on?"

    Personally, in relation to the wikileaks 'revelation' I believe that it is nothing of the sort (the information contained in the cable was just stating the blindingly obvious to those of us who are connected to, or familiar with, Police operations, and has been wildly misinterpreted by over-excitable people). As far as satellite images are concerned - forget it - either they do not exist (why would there be satellite images of a quiet Portuguese holiday resort at night?) and/or on the grounds of governmental secrecy they will NEVER be supplied.

    BTW Joana, when is Dr Amaral or his publisher going to issue a statement about the return of his books?

    T

    ReplyDelete
  93. 82 Senior Social Workers / Social Work Managers are always in charge of Social Workers who have to receive regular supervision due to the serious nature of the job, just like probation officers do. I have no knowledge of anyone being promoted to a management position in charge of other social workers who is not her/himself also a qualified social worker.

    I would not be the least surprised if a Senior Social Worker (manager) was allocated the McCann case in light of the nature of the allegations against them, and the overall complexity of the case, not least, the legal situation which would take a great deal of knowledge and experience to cope with.

    Further poster above "the passivity of Justice Hogg". I am not clear how you think her making Maddie a Ward of Court and setting the McCanns claims down for trial to enable the Chief Constable, Soca and even our then Attorney General to oppose them is a passive act. It was under that pressure the McCanns then had to back down and withdraw their application demanding sight of files of evidence against them.

    People should be aware that no Family Court Judge is going to offer any public comment in relation to an unresolved case, in fact I think it would be extremely rare for them ever to comment.

    Judges have to abide by and apply the law and to the lay observer that can sometimes appear a bit sterile. For example, I recall she said something like the presumption is Maddie may be still alive, there being no evidence to the contrary. That is a sterile legal presumption, she can only pronounce on actual evidence and the indications of the dogs did not, on forensic analysis produce any evidence of the death of Madeleine. In short, she is not positively stating Maddie is alive, she is simply stating how the law applies in such a situation. As this is primarily a criminal case, Mrs Justice Hogg would have a pretty limited role. Criminal law will always take precedence over family law, it is just the McCanns tried to use (or should I say abuse) the family law courts to their own advantage by obtaining details of the criminal case against them. There is no legal precedent for them to be able to do this and it was action bound to fail. Criminal investigations are confidential, suspects are not allowed to look at files being built against them, even if they do have the name McCann. I have always thought this couple, especially Gerry actually feel they can change the law to suit their own ends. That is just an example of the narcissism of this couple.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Short after Gerry and his filmers left Praia da Luz, back to England, after his documentary was ready, Amaral's DVD was showed on a Portuguese channel and the McCanns had to change their own documentary.
    We did not see the American actress playing Kate's role, etc, etc.
    Now the McCann's book disappeared from Amazon.
    Probably they have to re-write the whole shit, after the Wikileaks publicised about the ambassadors.
    What a life!

    ReplyDelete
  95. Are the McCanns suggesting that those of us who did not donate to the Fund are complicit in this injustice?

    ReplyDelete
  96. Viv at 36 & 37 - Your words make good sense to the extent we should trust that a massive child abuse case is being investigated behind the scenes and that too much talk could void any case they bring. Wouldn`t this involve the CEOP though and why would they seem to be backing the McCanns? After reading what Anon 82 had to say, maybe her friend`s manager at Social Services had been instructed to believe the McCann`s whiter than white story for now as there was a far bigger sea of fish to catch.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  97. The press have reported that the Mccanns and mitchell are angry at the report on the wikileak site,is this because they are afraid the truth will at last come out or people will stop giving money to their fund The whole world knows that Maddie is dead and its time that the truth came out,there are many facts that point to her having died.That poor girl must have had an awful life,what she must have suffered on holiday with parents that neglected her.Its just the money they are after,they are crooks.

    ReplyDelete
  98. When we post a comment we are asked to identify and enter a code word,what is the purpose of this.
    Regards.

    ReplyDelete
  99. "Please remember to spare a thought and a prayer for all the children who will not be with their families this Christmas."
    (McCanns updated website)

    I see, McCanns as spokes(wo)man for all the missing children.
    Disgusting sentimentality; I think the families of all the missing children don't care a damn if it is Christmas or not as long as their children are missing.
    Maybe this Christmas we should spare a thought and a prayer for all the children that are used as a good marketing ploy.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Dont you just love the qoute from Ghandi McCanns have on their facebook page.
    One thing Kate & gerry, why did you make your beautiful daughter, a ward of court?
    As I understand it, you do not have the right to decide about the search or reopening of the case, because you handed over the responsibility and control to the courts? Justice Hogg has the say, so maybe this fund is not legal.
    Why have we not heard from justice Hogg, why has she not asked for the reopening seeing she has the control of the child.
    You bad mouth everyone, take a closer look at yourselves, maybe you werent even allowed to take Maddie out of the UK as she was a WOC, or did you get permission..it stinks to high hell.
    No place at the table this year then for Maddie, obviously very sure she is never coming home for christmas.
    As for D Payne, I suspect he is caught up in this through circumstance, maybe Gerry has something on him, so he is the puppet and he wanted to confess. Food for thought.All of this smells of a Masons handshake.

    ReplyDelete
  101. T4two, could you help me out; I'm a bit slow today. I asked "viv" the following question:

    "Let's say the English authorities/Social Services found evidence that there was a history of abuse of Madeleine by her parents. Do you not think that such evidence should be forwarded to the Portuguese police?"

    Could you please tell me, did "viv" answer "yes or no?" Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Officially, the McCann's book will be published on April 28th.
    I hope Wikileaks will come out with terrible information on April 24th.
    And Amaral with new charpters on April the 23th.

    ReplyDelete
  103. The McCann disappeared out of Amazon.
    I noticed it.
    Maybe the book will not be ready on time.
    Or they have to change a lot of it, because of Wikileaks.
    Who knows they wrote the British ambassador abandonned his carrier because he was feeling sorry for the couple that was suffering so much.Or maybe they attacked the Portuguese government, writing the Prime Minister did nothing for them.
    Writing Portugal is a corrupt country and they are victims.
    There must be a reason.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Joana...are you taking a break for Christmas?

    Well...the McCanns may be pleased to know that I am - unless something truly dramatic happens like Madeleine McCann found alive in Pago-Pago living on the beach with a Samoan family or... (censored).

    Anyway, may I wish all (inc. the McCanns) a very merry Christmas? Merry Christmas!

    Let us hope that with the acquittal of G. Amaral and his factual version of events and the McCanns publication of their doctored version of "what really happened", the new year will bring the case to a satisfactory open/ended conclusion.

    Joana can leave her blog for historical research and we can all have a multi-national party - like avant garde people do when someone dies, you know.

    Justice to Madeleine will not bring her back to life, as it were. Let's try to forget it and forgive.

    Dust to dust; ashes to ashes.

    :g

    ReplyDelete
  105. The Portuguese and British authorities, NO ACTION against a pair of liars, leave them on that position: The pair feel free and comfortable to come to the the Media and deliver all the accusations they want against the Wikileaks and the official police.
    Everything that moves, is disturbing the search of their daughter. It is always the fault of others . They are the only ones who have no responsibility on what happened to the girl and still happen. They know in advance that the girl will be not found until May 2011 (when their book will be launched). They know that there is 48 questions not answered at the hands of the official police. They know that a reconstruction was avoided by who can really do something to help the search. But is always the fault of others and THEY FEEL FREE TO DELIVER ANY LIE TO THE MEDIA AND MOCK TWO COUNTRIES. The story really went too far and seems that nobody with power have balls to stop the circus.
    Apart Amaral, I never saw anybody related with power questioning the use of a team of detectives that produce nothing, no matter if according with Mccann's own words, they had millions of Euros to leave no stone unturned. I believe, the money that this team of detectives had available to do their job, without the need of judges permission to do many steps in the investigation, was much more then what the PJ and the UK police have altogether to investigate a single missing person. If they produce nothing, some question needs to be posed: WHY THEY WERE NOT SACKED? WAS THE MONEY REALLY USED FOR THE SEARCH? HOW MUCH MONEY WAS SPENT IN THE INVESTIGATION? WHERE WENT THE MONEY?
    I hope Julien Assange was not Carter-Rucked and he keep his promise- "That is the beginning of the END and not the end of the BEGINNING". Wikileaks, you can be the power to break the lies and let a little girl to achieve justice. Leak out the truth about what is behind the missing of Madeleine Beth Mccann.

    ReplyDelete
  106. The McCanns are requesting the couple who have Madeleine to look after her and treat her with respect, something they forgot to do themselves.

    If they really think Madeleine is alive and well with someone else, why don't they offer a huge reward to this mythical couple, and why haven't they done so up to now?

    Maybe when the book brings them millions they might think about that!

    ReplyDelete
  107. http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/kate+mccann/gerry+mccann/madeleine/8225714/

    It seems the book is to be released on the 12th May, Madeleine's birthday.
    Maybe it's just a coincidence, but when it was known that the book was to go on sale on the 28th April, the day the holiday started, many started to ask why that particular date? Why launch the book on the aniversary of the day their holiday began, and not the 3rd May? What was the significance of the 28th, was it more important than the 3rd? Any particular reason...? Was it because that was the day the wheels were set in motion for their "new life"? A life of no more finantial worries, and celebrity status?
    Now, they went for the 12th May, the day Madeleine would turn 8 years old...remember that same day back in 2007 in Luz, just 9 days after their child vanished, the pair grinning from ear to ear, outing the church after a memorial service for Madeleine? Come next 12th May we'll see them grinning again, in some book signing in London...

    ReplyDelete
  108. Can you imagine an FSS staff member spilling the beans once they have lost their jobs due to closure of said FSS ?

    Sandie

    ReplyDelete
  109. @viv 63

    Your wrote:

    49 

 "Kate and Gerry made their application against the Ch Con of LP on 2 April 2008, the very same day Mrs Justice Hogg made Madeleine a Ward of Court. And so whatever Leicester Police told her, it must have been something very serious, telling Justice Hogg loud and clear that even if Maddie was still alive, the McCanns would have no further say in her care and control. They do not choose to point that out when they continue this "looking for her" farce do they!"

    Indeed, I have been saying this for some time on other sites. In fact, they would not be able to "bring her home" as keep protesting since she would be in the care of the Social Services.

    Although there was some suggestion that making Madeleine a Ward of the Court was in case something happened to her parents. (One presumes a possible prosecuton). But then what would happen to the twins if this is correct. Why not all Wards of the Court.

    I would like your opinion on this.

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  110. @Viv

    "I would not be the least surprised if a Senior Social Worker (manager) was allocated the McCann case in light of the nature of the allegations against them, and the overall complexity of the case, not least, the legal situation which would take a great deal of knowledge and experience to cope with."

    I agree but what about the twins then if there are allegations against the parents?Has Justice Hoggs any say at all in Madeleine"s various legal aspect as being her WOC? Recently,Madeleine took Dr.Amaral to court.Is this within the english law?
    This is where I lose track certainely on account of my poor knowledge of english laws but these questions spring to mind imo( well, 2 out of a billion surely!)

    ReplyDelete
  111. What we learn from Wikileaks - Huxley was right.

    [What we learn from Wikileaks - Huxley was right.]

    http://tinyurl.com/2fy5v4d

    Too right!
    The truth is a bitch...

    ReplyDelete
  112. Hi viv, while you are talking about Social workers, what about this Social worker,YVONNE WARREN MARTIN a Child Protection worker within Social Services with 29 years experience(very very experienced) says, that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers to see if David Payne is on that list.

    Why would she ask British police to do such a thing ?

    Yvonne Warren Martin imo opinion knows exactly where she had crossed Payne.

    Im with guerra & mojo ,i truely believe two goverments Portuguese/British have conspired to cover-up the death & abuse of a 3 year old child , and i have not being proved wrong.

    Why else did it take 6 months to send the serious allegations against David Payne to Portuguese police, and only after Amaral was removed from the investigation, what kind of police force would hold that kind of information back, yes a police force under instruction from their goverment.

    The McCanns were due to fly home Sep 11th 2007 after being named suspects on the 7th Sep 2007, they panicked and actually flew home on the 9th Sep.

    This is were Gordon Brown New Labour did his bit, he visited Leicester police 12th Sep 2007.

    I believe in govermental intervention in this investigation and as i have said above ,i have not being proved wrong

    ReplyDelete
  113. I've just read Peter McKay's column in the daily mail,and he mentions a few people who's popularity is going down ,he mentions wikileaks and the McCanns quote"Even the McCanns ,who got the newspapers to apologise for doubting what they said about their missing daughter, Madeleine ,are on the 'down'public esteem excalator after it was reported that British police help Portuguese colleagues build a case against them".So the British press did doubt the McCanns,so what was it that made the press suddenly turn psychophantic over the McCanns,do they know something but not telling the public,but then if they do why won't they put it into the public arena?.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Anon 109

    Since the McCanns had their 'arguido' status lifted they spent a lot of time telling people they had been found innocent of all charges, and many have believed them.

    That might have something to do with it.

    Whereas, the truth is they are still the main suspects.

    No wonder they don't want the case reopened.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Mojo and Guerra have got it exactly right. If you read the PJ files, check out some names and links, look at people at the top of the FSS... you will discover quite a lot. Viv does not seem to have done this and saying you've read a lot of law doesn't make you a lawyer. I've read a lot about medicine, but I'm not a doctor and don't offer diagnoses. How come the twins are not under any wardship protection for example. I've had experience of wardship and would be amazed if only one child of 3 is considered at risk? The wardship proceedings were for the McCs own benefit.
    I'm making sure my info about what I have found is going to the right places.

    ReplyDelete
  116. @108,jimuck,totally agree with what you say,but cant see gordon brown admitting to being involved in any cover up, so what can we do now,any suggestions

    ReplyDelete
  117. I think this is scurrilous nonsense myself, beneath Goncalo's normal standards.
    And did he REALLY say that the blood was proven not to be Maddie's?

    ReplyDelete
  118. Joanna,
    Hope you have a peaceful and good Christmas, thankyou for all your hard work this year.
    One point and maybe I missed it somewhere, 2 directors resigned from the Fund, Doug Skehan & John McCann, but the accounts show a third director resigned on 19th September, PJ Hubner, who ever that was and what ole they played. · directors resignation in a short space of time. Has this been announced before??

    ReplyDelete
  119. The Leicester Police had no intention of sending the Gaspar statements to Portugual - they only got there by `accident`. If it had not been for this `accident` no one would even know about the paedophile allegations. That must have been a bad day for the McCann fraternity.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  120. I wonder if Isabel Duarte is very happy with Wikileaks.
    "WHAT DID I START?"
    I think she will give up the whole story.
    And I hope she sends a terrible invoyce to the McCanns.
    I can't wait till the day Murat and the media start sueing the McCanns.
    And the media sueing Tapas 7.
    They will pay for what they have done to Murat and to the media.
    Can you imagine if there is any privete communication about this between Brown and some other riff raff people?

    ReplyDelete
  121. When I was young and beautiful, I worked in a laboratorium for development of slides, films,etc, and I remember photos of dead people in coffins or still lying on the bed where they died.
    Photos of children, dressed up as angels, very sad and tragic.
    Could it be that the evidence that the British police have is not the body itself but a picture of the dead Madeleine?Dressed up like an angel, holding a rosary in her hands?
    Short after her death, her grandparents did not know the truth and the McCanns kept the photo to show them later?

    ReplyDelete
  122. Good point Nancy at 103.

    If one day for a single moment they offer a reward, on the next minute, one of their gangs will be where the money went to recover it and blame somebody else. As usual.

    When they said "it is our fourth Christmas without Madeleine", they should say " It is our fourth Christmas having a good life, living under donations expenses without having to spend a coin" because even who make the donations have to support the price of bank transfers. That is the best business in the world. And the governments who allow that charade to go on and rip the houses of who cannot afford to pay them because they lost their jobs or get an illness, should cover their faces in shame. That governments are saying to their citizens:" Go, abuse your child and let it down. You can always fake an abduction and foolish honest people to help you win a jackpot without spending a coin". This just did not happen more because, fortunately, the big majority of parents love and respect their childs, and the others were afraid of not having good connections and the police of one country to cover their backs.

    ReplyDelete
  123. @ no 115 - yes, every so often something slips through. I wish I understood why the Gaspar statements were withheld by the police for so long, then suddenly forwarded to the PJ - was it a filing error, or did someone decide they should be seen? Also, who put the infamous mobile phone footage of Gerry swearing in front of the kids on the way to PdL online? Or the made public the notorious "wider agenda" picture? Presumably this stuff has originated from "sources close to" the couple.

    ReplyDelete
  124. @115.well there must be one good cop at leicestershire police station who made sure the gaspers statement got to portugal,glad i dont live in leicestershire though and have to rely on the bad cops there,how unlucky could Madeleine get.

    ReplyDelete
  125. 108

    I think Yvonne Warren Martin would have found all her professional alarm bells ringing following the confrontation she describes with this group. The mother crying and upset, but being guarded by Payne and Gerry. Payne in particular removing her from the social worker and then telling the social worker to clear off, that would surely tell her a great deal about David Payne. He is often described hanging around like a rottweiler on guard duty.

    The email exchange between DC Marshall and Ricardo Paiva dated Oct 07 confirms in no doubt Payne is of major interest to the investigation and his wife is covering for him being equally unhelpful and evasive when questioned.

    Up until October 2007 there were some very major leaks of what was supposed to be a confidential investigation under secrecy of justice. UK would have been equally concerned to make sure this wasnot being played out in the press, clearly they would not have wanted Payne alerted and so I can entirely understand them not disclosing this statement until they were clear it would not appear in the press. DC Marshall is of low rank but he disclosed it, he must have had authority from very high up to do so, if it had not been already disclosed. Goncalo, I think, refers to it in his book?

    I see this as a case involving abuse of children that needed and still needs to be dealt with confidentially and hope that given how much has already been disclosed a fair trial of those responsible is still possible.

    As for Gordon Brown being involved in a cover up? How absurd! Do you not think the tory government would like to say so!!

    ReplyDelete
  126. 106/107

    If you look at case law reports of Wardship proceedings you will see that the identity of the child is protected by referring to them as "Child X" etc. and so in that respect, Madeleine's case is exceptional in that she is actually named. The only other wardship case I can think of where this happened is where the Killshaws bought American twins on the internet, when they brought them back to UK, the UK court promptly warded them and then ordered their return to the states.

    Wardship is generally used where a child is out of the jurisdiction of the court or where doctors need urgent consent for medical treatment that the child or the parents are refusing to give consent to. Under the Children Act 1989 social workers are given numerous other powers to deal with parents whose care is falling short of what is required, including the most draconian a care order where the child is removed from the parents. This step can even go so far as the child being adopted if the parents cannot be rehabilitated back to being fit parents for the child.

    And so even if the twins are wards of court, they would not be identified. In fact I am disappointed that so many people fail to think how they may feel about all of this. Why should every step concerning these two clearly living children be in the public domain? Do they have no right to their affairs being dealt with in the same way as every other child in need in the UK, in confidence? How do you think they would feel if they could read all about themselves on the internet or if they were taunted at school or by neighbours?

    I do think the McCanns position and access to huge amounts of cash may have assisted them because my own view is the McCanns did more than enough to have them removed from their care. I think the legal argument on behalf of the McCanns is this would pre-judge the criminal case against them and make it unsafe for them from the public in view of the huge publicity in this case. Of note here, who is it who has engendered all the huge publicity! Inevitably when any public authority like the police or social workers are contemplating legal action they have to think of what opposition they are going to get to that and their likelihood of winning. If they are not going to win, it would be a waste of public funds.

    And so I think it is unlikely but possible the twins are wards of court. It is probably far more likely the McCanns are supervised by Social Services or may even be subject to bail conditions from British Police designed to protect the twins from the sort of harm Maddie directly and quite obviously suffered (aside from what may have been going on prior to that), ie disappearing whilst abroad. It is interesting that this couple who like to tell us pretty much what time they get out of bed each morning etc did tell us about just one "sad" holiday they actually had abroad. That was to Canada to stay with Aunt Norah, could it be she guaranteed the safety of the twins and that is why they were allowed to go? On each occasion since that time when the McCanns have travelled abroad it has always been minus the twins, this is pure conjecture of course but it does make you wonder whether they are simply not allowed to do a Maddie with them.

    In relation to the McCanns potential claim for damages for Maddie in Portugal, I doubt Mrs Justice Hogg would feel able to get involved in this or think it was a step she needed to intervene in, her concern is she is clearly at risk of serious harm and to protect her and it is hard to think how the McCanns action actually comes within that remit. Additionally I have a sneeking feeling UK authorities have been instrumental in making sure this is an action they are not going to win.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Peter Hubner; a retired consultant, friend of the McCanns, appointed 21 May 2007 - No. of Company appointments: 2

    A search on the net reveals his research interests were to do with the heart.

    This mass exodus started in September 2007 with Kate's old school friend Esther McVey.

    Thanks for the info I was not aware a THIRD director had recently resigned, a "friend" too.

    Surely something is seriously amiss in Team McScam.

    By the way I got the above from McCanns files, a fascinating collection of information, including use of family lawyers from the outset under the pretext they were "advising them on how best to use the money". In fact they were starting court action designed to get their mitts on police files against them.

    Also there and worth remembering is Gerry's comment "it is a disaster we have got all this fund money and cannot use it to defend ourselves". I think it is a disaster for you Gerry that even your close friends and relatives no longer wish to be associated with you and YOUR fund.

    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html

    ReplyDelete
  128. If anyone is interested here’s what I believe, not much different from Mr. Amaral if at all.

    Madeleine died in apartment 5A in Portugal on May 3rd 2007, her death was unexpected. She died of a drug overdose. Her parents with the help of a third party disposed of their daughter’s body. I do not believe Mr. Murat was the third party. The British government intervened in the case. It halted any cooperation which existed between the Portuguese and British police. It pressured the Portuguese government to archive the case.

    How many individual British law enforcement officers were on Portuguese soil at one time or another soon after Madeleine’s disappearance, was it a couple of dozen? What was the turnover rate for English ambassadors to Portugal in the first year? The British authorities had seemed to be concerned about finding Madeleine. What I don’t understand is why they lost interest in the child so quickly. Why did they all depart when Madeleine’s parents left? The British prime minister, by his own admission, took a personal interest in this case; you would think then that his government would do everything possible to expedite the investigation; however, the opposite occurred. There were extensive delays on the part of the FSS laboratory and the Home Office. The latter even denied the Portuguese detectives information that could possibly be important in determining the fate of the child.

    Has there ever been a case where someone quits his job, a governmental position, to be a spokesperson for suspects in a criminal investigation? Have there ever been politicians who have used parents suspected of harming their child to promote a child welfare cause? Has there ever been a judge who has let his or her opinion be known with regards to an ongoing investigation by making an appeal in a courtroom to an, as yet to be determined, abductor? The oddities in this case are many.

    “mojo”, if someone is unyielding and truly believes what they’re saying and then is proven wrong, you could say that that person ate humble pie. However, if a person insists on disseminating information contrary to what he believes or knows, then it really isn’t a shock to that person when the truth is revealed; therefore, I don’t think that the phrase “he or she ate humble pie” applies in this instance.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Anon 118 - That never crossed my mind before about the telephone video footage of them on the bus. Surely it was DP doing the recording. I assume all the phones were taken into police care, so was it someone in the PJ that leaked it or was it one of the Paynes. Also wasn`t it Payne`s wife who cast some doubt on Kate by saying in her statement that Kate kept checking to see if the twins were breathing?
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  130. @viv 121

    Many thanks for your in depth reply - very much appreciated. I didn't realise that it was possible that Social Service would still be monitoring them.

    Many thanks.

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  131. Viv - I would never suggest that GB might have been involved personally but I wouldn`t be too quick to discount any high profile politicians from being involved in child pornography, including the opposition parties. The opposition wouldn`t dare cast aspersions of that nature because they know there are probably many in their own ranks. I`m pretty sure this is something that is known but just cannot be brought to light because there are too many that are high profile. Some scandals have seen the light of day, Kincora, Jersey, Dunblane and the Holly Grieg abuse in Scotland - but it always gets covered up. I`m pretty sure there are links here with CEOP, Crimewatch and some film makers and producers. There is vast money to be made.

    What I cannot understand is why Gamble (when he headed CEOP) seemed to be defending them and why was GM invited to speak at their annual conference.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Are Govermental cover-ups absurd ?, maybe, then maybe not, Tony Blair tried, but failed to save his close friend Philip Lyon from being convicted for downloading child pornography.

    Instead Tony Blair saved others by slapping a military D-Notice on the paedophile investigation Operation Ore, yes a military D-Notice on a criminal investigation, is that normal procedure.

    Why did Alan Millburn MP suddenly disappear from political life ?

    Whatever happened to the once powerful NATO Secetary General George Robertson, do people remember this chap, his name seemed to crop up along with Michael Forsyth MP, ever time the Dunblane disaster was mentioned ,Tony Blair again saved the day and slapped a 100 year secrecy clause on the findings, yes a 100 years, we will all be gone by the time we have a chance to investigate the findings, or is that the idea.

    Why did Robertson & Forsyth suddenly disappear from political life ?

    Haut De La Garenne the child abuse investigation, this is where Eddie & Keela gave there first false alerts in over 200 cases,did the Jersey authorities ever get to the bottom of this child abuse investigation, yes as i thought, no they did not, Eddie & Keela's second false alerts according to many, was another child abuse investigation, that was the investigation into the disappearance of the child Madeleine MaCann.

    Were Eddie & Keela wrong ? , of course they were not.

    Then we move on to the case of the handicapped child Hollie Greig,just Google it to see the types of professionals who were allegedly abusing her, has Hollie received justice for this child abuse, of course not, the child was paid off by the justice system.

    Is David Cameron going to throw Brown/Blair to the wolves ? Viv , of course hes not.

    There are as many Tory MPs/Councillors with child abuse convictions as there are Labour !

    Please have a read,,,,,http://www.chris-uk.org/another-cover-up/former-p-m-gordon-brown-dunblane

    ReplyDelete
  133. viv,i think you are wrong about gordon brown, as the mccanns are so confident, swanning around saying and doing what they like,now you wouldnt be doing that if you didnt have help from high places,and if you still think gordons not involved how are the mccanns still getting away with what they do and say.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Viv 121

    "Why should every step concerning these two clearly living children be in the public domain?"

    This is absolutely right.They will have enough to deal with when they grow up.No need to invade their privacy and sell their good or bad news.They have a right to privacy and I terribly dislike to see the mccanns circus around them,their soappy interviews mentionning these children

    "Additionally I have a sneeking feeling UK authorities have been instrumental in making sure this is an action they are not going to win."

    I tend to agree with this.
    It also looks like Justice Hoggs cannot take any part in any thing because this is really a criminal case.Since ever they legged it back to the UK I am sure they have been under close watch,at least in regard to the children and other issues.

    ReplyDelete
  135. @ guerra 99

    I think viv's answer to your question lies in the following two paragraphs from her post 37 and I think the answer is no and the reason is explained.

    "This is not a situation where "freedom of expression" will ever win the day. If English Police had made full disclosure of everything they have to Portugal, not only would Kate and Gerry know everything there is to know, the whole world would and that would mean they could never be put on trial. IN addition other children may be put at further risk due to the prevention of such a prosecution. No British newspaper is permitted to identify any British child that may have been the subject of sexual abuse, and so they are never going to print details of the GASPAR statement.

    Internet bloggers may want to know the full extent of information held within British agency files, but they are never going to be told and neither are the suspects. Why do you think Gerry keeps talking about wanting everything put together on one file?"

    ReplyDelete
  136. Joana, really wise of you not to publish my theory about the evidence the British police could have.
    Just a theory, and there have been hundreds of them, till now,hundreds, one more, one less...
    But it is an interesting one, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  137. A question from Pernambuco, Brazil,

    Is there any hope that the FBI will find out why the McCanns sent their money to the United States?
    I wonder what was the goal of that transaction.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Poster 127 you said, If English Police had made full disclosure of everything they have to Portugal, not only would Kate and Gerry know everything there is to know, the whole world would and that would mean they could never be put on trial.

    No in my opinion , if British police had disclosed all they knew on Kate & Gerry MaCann and Tapas especially Payne, then there would have been charges, the case would have gone to trial and resulted in convictions.

    Poster 127 , i am not comfortable with what you say about,if Brtish police disclosed all information they had about MaCanns & Tapas to Portuguese police, then every man and his dog would find out about this information, i find that theory of yours quite defamatory also quite libelous if you ask me .

    Poster 127,says "no British newspaper is permitted to identify any British child that may have been the subject of sexual abuse.

    That quote is also incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Maddie sightings and media madness

    Kate and Gerry McCann last weekend complained of “the injustices that we continue to be subjected to.” Their complaint, widely reported in the press in Britain and Portugal, referred to the Wikileaks disclosure about them that had “led to the repetition of many unfounded allegations and smears both in the UK and in Portugal in particular.”

    A modest group of people in Portugal have also been subjected to injustices, unfounded allegations and smears in connection with the Madeleine McCann investigation, but they have had no outlet for complaint - and their side of the story has gone totally unreported until now.

    Ivone Albino, a Portuguese woman who makes her living as a part-time house cleaner,was shattered to learn in April this year that newspapers in the UK were running sensational stories directly linking her with the alleged abduction of Madeleine McCann three years earlier. She was the latest victim in a tidal wave of misinformation and false “sightings” that began soon after Madeleine's disappearance from a holiday apartment in the village of Praia da Luz in May 2007.

    Mrs Albino's name was buried in a “secret” 2,000-page dossier containing information about Madeleine “sightings” that had been brought to the attention of the Portuguese criminal investigation police, the Polícia Judiciária. The existence of the dossier emerged after it was referred to by a police witness during a Lisbon court hearing considering the ban on a book by the former lead detective in the Madeleine case, Gonçalo Amaral.

    When the judge in the hearing ordered the dossier's release, it was eagerly seized upon by Kate and Gerry McCann, their advisers and the British press. It was brandished as yet more evidence of the “incompetence” of the Portuguese police in their search for Madeleine.

    http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com/2010/12/madeleine-sightings-and-media-madness.html

    and the new McCann family blog http://madeleine-writingthewrongs.com/2010/12/21/kate-and-gerry-mccann-clarification-on-the-news-published-based-on-wikileaks%E2%80%99-referrals/

    ReplyDelete
  140. @139,jimuck,you said,---if British police had disclosed all they knew on Kate & Gerry MaCann and Tapas especially Payne, then there would have been charges, the case would have gone to trial and resulted in convictions.-- you beat me to it,i was going to reply the same

    ReplyDelete
  141. I want to say clearly that I am not a Public Relations person speaking on behalf of the McCann's before I ask this question.
    You will probably think I am silly to ask but I do want to hear an answer.

    If the McCann's are responsible for Madeleine McCann's death how did they conceal the body and hide it while the media cameras were on them all the time when the child went missing?

    ReplyDelete
  142. Jimuck at 133

    The dogs gave no false alerts in Jersey.

    Just because the corpse or corpses were not still around to be found doesn't mean they never were, and there were children's teeth found there.

    So how did the teeth get there?

    The home of the tooth fairy perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  143. From Kate and Gerry McCann – clarification on the news published based on Wikileaks’ referrals
    Dec.21-12
    Unbelievable!

    http://tinyurl.com/27vtnay

    7. he has the obligation to present it for the procedure to reopen the investigation, in which we are most interested.
    (I personally doubt it very much)

    8. We are aware that Madeleine’s disappearance is an inexhaustible source of enrichment to Gonçalo Amaral by means of false accusations, deeply offensive and harmful to the investigation itself, so we appeal to journalists’ critical sense to sort out what is journalistic information and what is speculation, surgically oriented, to obtain easy profits.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Actually, this humble group didn't want compensation money so much as an apology.

    http://tinyurl.com/2g7agd7

    ReplyDelete
  145. The Leicester Mercury (McCann Files) is publishing(yesterday) about Wikileaks "the McCanns are angry..."
    That is the safe way that news paper found to tell about those blessed ambassadors, and without being sued.
    Very clever. They wrote it on purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  146. I think the last text on Find Madeleine was written by Kate because the word "smear"was used on it.
    She is the one who says "smear".
    Possibly she wrote it when Gerry was away, publicised it, he came home, he saw it,got angry, they deleted it for a short time and they had no other choice but to show it again because their text was already known.
    Imo this was a terrible mistake, giving the opportunity to the media to refer to Wikileaks, without being sued.
    They are the ones who opened doors and windows to that leak, not the media.
    Kate makes me think of Carmen Silvera, on the role of a "stupid woman", on a British comedy serie about the French resistence, Alo Alo!
    Her husband René would always start talking to her : "-You, stupid woman!"
    That is why she was not allowed to answer the 48 questions.

    ReplyDelete
  147. 138
    Good question
    They were transferring funds to Kevin Halligen,the Oakley International'conman', awarded a six-month £500,000 contract by the fund, and allegedly disappeared with £300,000.
    The mccanns NEVER said they would sue him.They never said "it is an injustice as the lack of fund would seriously damage the search for Madeleine".
    What despicable people!
    May be it would be a good idea to contact the FBI

    ReplyDelete
  148. T4two, I think Mr. Amaral, early on in the investigation, would have appreciated a call from the English authorities verifying whether or not the police or child services had been called upon to visit the McCann household. For your peace of mind, there need not have been any details of the incidents disclosed, although I can't think of any reason for not doing so. Perhaps armed with such information the Portuguese police would have felt confident in approaching a judge to request authorization to tap the McCann phone lines. The judge, being presented with this information would likely authorize the request and the circus would have ended long ago.

    ReplyDelete
  149. I think this extract from "Protecting the Public" produced by the Home Office in helpful to people who want to understand why any detail of sexual abuse of a child cannot be revealed. It will be seen that in relation to sexual offences adult victims are also protected, after all if you had been raped would you want your name in the Sun? Note also the potential perpetrator is also protected from having his identify disclosed ahead of any criminal conviction and even then, if this would lead to the identity of the victim the court could order that the perpetrator's identity can never be revealed either. The full document can be read at
    http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm56/5668/5668.pdf

    and by the way 139, it is not "libellous or defamatory" of me to point out that the whole world and the McCanns can read the PJ file ! You must have been reading too much of that Gerryspeak, lol x

    Anonymity
    One specific way in which victims of sex offences
    can be helped and encouraged to go through
    the trauma of reporting and testifying about
    their experience in court is to provide anonymity.

    The identification of victims by the media is
    prohibited in sex offence cases.
    This is because many victims of these crimes would simply not
    come forward if they thought their identity
    might be revealed.
    Anonymity for defendants in sexual cases was
    repealed under the Criminal Justice Act 1988,
    following a recommendation by the Criminal
    Law Revision Committee (CLRC). The restrictions
    had caused practical difficulties; for example,
    if a man escaped custody before conviction,
    the police could not warn the public he was a
    suspected rapist unless the judge exercised his
    power to lift the restrictions. The CLRC took
    the view that those accused of sex offences
    should not be singled out for special protection
    while other defendants, including those accused
    of the more heinous crime of murder, could
    be identified.
    The issue was discussed again in 1999 during
    the passage of the Youth Justice and Criminal
    Evidence Bill. On that occasion, the then Home
    Office Minister Paul Boateng made it clear that
    the Government fully appreciated the very great
    distress and discomfort that is often experienced
    by those wrongly accused or charged with a sex
    offence after having been publicly identified.
    However, the criminal justice system operates
    on the principle of openness, which is a vital
    ingredient in maintaining public confidence,
    and in encouraging witnesses to come forward.
    19
    Restrictions on the freedom of the press to report
    court proceedings have to be fully justified and
    can only be justified in exceptional circumstances.
    The courts have powers to withhold a name or
    other matter from the public in the proceedings
    before the court and to prohibit publication of
    that name or matter in connection with the
    proceedings if it is necessary to do so in the
    interests of the administration of justice. The
    name of the defendant, for example, might be
    withheld in circumstances where doing so
    would be necessary to ensure his protection or
    that of his family.
    The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO)
    has also issued guidance to all police forces,
    applying to all offences, which makes it clear
    that anyone under investigation, but not charged,
    should not be named, or details provided which
    might lead to their identification before they
    are charged.
    We are minded to retain the existing format
    in regard to anonymity for defendants as no
    other category of offence is dealt with in this
    way. However we are still prepared to listen to
    the arguments of those who feel strongly on
    the matter.
    Protecting the public
    20

    ReplyDelete
  150. Jo, I am afraid it is very sadly so typical of Kate and Gerry McCann that they complain of the "injustice WE have been subjected to". At no stage do this utterly ungracious couple even manage to think of their own daughter as their victim, so I guess we should not be surprised they have no compassion for the terrible hardship they have wreaked upon poor Portuguese people who only wanted to be able to just carry on scraping a living, not living in some mansion with a Fund to pay the mortgage!

    But maybe Ms Albino has the greatest gift that of being a normal human being who treasures those things in life that just cannot be bought. The gift of love. I am sure we all wish her well and hope she can get more work with a kind family.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Hi Joanna,
    I read the link you posted (Writing the Wrongs)such B---s---, its incredible. I also read The Devil is in the Wrong Details, re David Payne, this site is really scratching for alternative explanations, I wont visit again but it was interesting to read the c--- the McCanns are putting out. they are obviously upset by wikileaks. The site is not worth a comment, but then when people are drowning they wriggle a lot. Thanks joana, have a good christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  152. Laughable the last post on "Madeleine writing the wrongs". Is about David Payne and the Gaspars statement. Interesting the absolute need of the pair to discredit the Gaspars and save the face of David Payne. Whatever posted the post while asking Us to dig accurate information, forgot few things:

    .We dig accurate information.
    .The Payne about who the Gaspars stated was David Payne, 44 years old, friend of the Mccann's, part of the Tapas 7 and related with Madeleine's saga. NOT THE DAVID PAYNE WITH 64 YEARS OLD WHICH I DOUBT IF THAT GUY REALLY EXIST.
    .The David Payne,friend of the Mccann's, was the one reported by a holiday maker, a lady working in the UK social service, as a man connected with paedophilia.

    Then, dear HL, your post is useless. If there is somebody misinformed on that issue, that guy seems to be you. A good effort to clean the face of your dearest friend, David Payne with 47 years old. Not enough, my dear...WE got more then 3 years of good and accurate information.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New year to everybody here, special to you Joana, Astro and G. Amaral.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Anom 104

    I knew exactly what you meant but just for the sake of historical research a little amend:

    "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust, etc." Incidentally, from the same book (Anglican Book of Common Prayers) I would add the following:

    “There was never anything by the wit of man so well devised, or so sure established, which in continuance of time hath not been corrupted”.

    Merry Christmas to all - including the Gonçalo Amaral family.

    ReplyDelete
  154. I look forward to the day when the facts are properly aired in a court of law. The mccanns,ofcourse,like OJ Simpson, will never testify under oath nor subject themselves to cross examination ,but,god willing ,their holiday companions will be obliged to. In the meantime ,whilstever they continu to defame others we have a duty to counter their propaganda with the unspun unvarnished reality of the case.

    ReplyDelete
  155. 142. You ask how could the McCann`s hide & conceal a body with all the media watching.

    Here`s what I think.
    It was ALL done & dusted before a single alert.
    As in,days beforethen sanitized completely.

    By the time of the alert there was nothing to see until the hired car & the moving of the body.Then who knows who decoyed.
    Do not forget they made deals with the media to leave them alone until the agreed times to interview.

    I hope this helps.

    W.

    ReplyDelete
  156. A VERY HAPPY CHRISTMAS AND 2011 TO YOU JOANA AND EVERYONE ON HERE WHO ARE CONTINUING TO GIVE THEIR TIME AND ENERGY TO TRY AND GET JUSTICE FOR FOR MADELEINE!

    ReplyDelete
  157. Anon @142,

    Who said that "the media cameras were on them all the time when the child went missing?". You said that. Have a look on the news and pictures delivered at the time. Where is the Media? In front of the O.C. and near the Church. Did you believe that Madeleine's body was near there after the alarm been raised? Give us a break and don't show us such naif question.
    The Media was the first one they foolish by delivering to them the exact time when they will be available to give interviews or Press conferences. Where this interviews or press conferences hapenned? In front of the Ocean Club, always in the same place, exactly to take away the eyes of the journalists, from other places.
    Why was Kate always jogging alone, and delivering to the press the places where she was jogging? Where was Gerry at the time?
    Why they still leaving the twins, day after day in the Creche of the O.C. if one of their childs disappeared from there? If they are not working and not physical searching their daughter, why they need relatives or the creche to take care of the twins? Where Kate and Gerry have been during that time and doing what? Their travel around Europe and to the Vatican took less then 2 weeks. They spent months in PDL, Why and doing what, if they runaway one day after becoming arguidos?
    When they raise the alarm, the body was already somewhere in a place that was not easy to be found. I don't believe they use the church or the beach to hide it. The beach was too risky, any dog could find it. The church was too exposed and the keys were handed over after the alarm. I believe the church was used for meetings with other important characters ( the anglican priests) who help them, forced or accidental, to perpetuate the circus.
    G. Amaral on his book highlight's how important was for the investigation, to have somebody following the pair all the time. They propose that to the top of the PJ, but they refuse the idea saying that the British authorities will not accept that ( that shows already political interference at the top of the investigation). Then, this is the prove showing how free wete the steps of the pair.
    Something that was not talked too much, up to now- Why Kate's cousin was the second name allowed to drive the Renault Scenic?

    Any step done by the police, need authorization from the head of PJ or from a judge. When people criticised the police, must have that fact in mind. The Mccann's had all the time, free to conceal the body and they play a dirty game with journalists that they foolish with help of the head of CEOP and Mitchell.
    Don't try to trow sand at our eyes. The crime was too simple and following the same steps as any other criminal. What was different, was what hapenned after, with all the interferences to pervert the investigation. Even the more stupid criminal will walk free if had the same help.

    ReplyDelete
  158. In the beginning of the case I wasn't a conspiracy theorist at all.
    But meanwhile I am. I think the unspeakable "p" -word is indirectly crucial in the affair though I don't want to claim that the child was abused. But I believe someone close to those who were suspects in the past has the means to blackmail some people in high places. Otherwise the complexity of the twisting, manipulating and obfuscating of facts wouldn't be possible.
    All IMHO of course.

    ReplyDelete
  159. Cody. I too think the "P" word is the top & bottom of this case. For me it is the only thing that fits.

    W.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Post 155

    Thank you for your response to my query and I got on to this site to ask a question not to throw sand or any thing else at anyone.
    I think it was an uncalled for remark and I won't be asking for some information again. Goodbye.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Rachel (Everton) LiverpoolThursday, December 23, 2010 1:44:00 pm

    Looking for some Christmas decorations I found a small Teddy bear that was bought for my Mother, she has been dead 13 years, the bear was very very dusty, I was just about to wash it, but stopped because I did not want to wash away, my mothers touch, really and truly I could not wash the bear, in case some trace of my Mother was left on it. My thoughts went to Kate Maccann, 2 words vile bitch, how could she do it to her own flesh and blood. Call that thing a Mother never in a million years is she worthy of the honour of the name Mother.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Joana and Astro, I wish you and your colleagues a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Let's hope that next year there is less bureaucracy and more common sense. Happy Holidays everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  163. Now this:

    "Madeleine McCann's aunt explains why she has joined charity for missing people.. and how search for little girl goes on"

    Poor kate & gerry etc....the same tune over and over

    -They are both drained emotionally, psychologically and physically
    -They are overwhelmed by trying to be breadwinners, investigators and parents.
    -For the McCanns, there was a desperate need for funds to pay for legal advice (what for????) and a worldwide search
    -Gerry is the baby of the family
    -They are both just exhausted.....

    I will finish with this pearl and let you read this piece of crap: "When Madeleine first went missing, family and friends had to step in to help them pay the mortgage."

    NOT one word about Madeleine"s feelings being "kept by her abductor"

    http://tinyurl.com/2v4bx5z

    ReplyDelete
  164. I have been reading "Writing the Wrongs" the new McCann "written by supporters" blog-- in particular the entry regarding David Payne. It is written in a style that is friendly, yet clearly trying to persuade the reader to their point of view by starting out with a question that sounds reasonable enough. I thought the writer was perhaps an intelligent individual until I came to this sentence-- "Take a paedophile called David Payne (not the person who was involved in the Madeleine McCann case) and add a witness statement that implies inappropriate behaviour and wallah!, it all ‘fits’."

    Wallah! I cracked up. The person clearly meant voila, but did not have the intelligence to know that wallah mean 'by Allah'. Voila means 'see there!'

    I think that blog is written by amateurs who think they are cleverer than they are. There are some extremely ugly websites linked to it.

    If David Payne wants to clear his name he could easily do it by coming forward and telling the truth. Who would allow themselves to be branded a pedophile if they could clear it up, unless the truth is even worse.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Madeleine McCann's aunt explains why she has joined charity for missing people.. and how search for little girl goes on.


    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/editors-choice/2010/12/23/madeleine-mccann-s-aunt-explains-why-she-has-joined-charity-for-missing-people-and-how-search-for-little-girl-goes-on-86908-22802145/?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4d132d98551552c3,0[/quote]

    ReplyDelete
  166. There are many unanswered questions and many unexplainable situations within this saga - many more people are involved in this cover up but the mccanns cannot help themselves they are greedy and have tasted celebrity status and want more, hence the publication of their forthcoming fairytale which in time will be their downfall - 'everything comes to he who waits' and there will be justice for Maddie and also Sr Amaral and the people of PDL all have been treated appallingly by team mccann.
    Well done Joana et al on a fantastic blog and a happy new year xxx

    ReplyDelete
  167. If you're gonna show such wilful ignorance 158 then don't complain when people respond to it. Shut the door on the way out

    ReplyDelete
  168. Anon 155

    I don't believe that many parents would leave the body of their child behind in a foreign country if they could get the child back home.

    If the McCann's couldn't do that, given the resources they had available to them, including private planes, then nobody could.

    As for staying on in PDL, that would be one of the biggest distractions of all as the media kept looking at the parents there and not at Rothley. They only skipped back to Rothley when they had no choice and had the media focusing on them there. That was the time that Kate and Gerry really did look like wrecks until the investigation was called off.

    Why no search with the dogs ever took place at Rothley, given Gerry was back and forth from PDL to UK? This should have been a basic search for the investigation, yet it never took place.

    If the case gets reopened it should still take place, and no pass for the McCanns, just like there was no pass for Murat and his family.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Joana, happy Christmas, may God bless you and all people who are making ths blog possible.
    Happy New Year.

    ReplyDelete
  170. I never noticed any paranoia in the McCanns, that one of the siblings would be abducted.
    I know two cases in which two couples became completely paranoic after having lost each one child.
    One was found dead, the other disappeared forever.
    I've seen interviews with their(already grown up) brothers, in which they told they had a hell of life because of the paranoia of their parents.Even if the parents trusted relatives(grandparents,aunts)still at least one of them would stay close to the children.No nannies, nothing.
    Those parents used to go back to the place(every week) where their vanished child was last seen and they would check the ground,the beach, the streets, everywhere, for years and years.
    I saw the McCanns going to Oprah, to Washington, to North Africa, to Rome, Germany, Spain and Holland, all by themselves and many times leaving the siblings in PRAIA DA LUZ, MY GOD!
    No concerns at all!
    I would not have trusted anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  171. I get the impression that most people think the Mccanns moved Madeleine's body. But perhaps while the cameras were on them a family member or friend did it.

    ReplyDelete
  172. Anon 171
    It really is most revealing.
    On that first night, Kate, KNOWING there was a predatory abductor, or possibly even a gang, ("They've taken her") deliberately left the twins in the unlocked apartment, from which she insists her eldest daughter had just been taken, whilst she trotted all the way back to the Tapas bar, raised the alarm, and then trotted back again.
    And KNOWING that PdL was the scene of an unresolved crime of abduction, and that small white English girls were the victim of choice, deliberately left the twins there whilst they trotted off round the world.
    Even their own No 1 Detective Agency says the abductor and Madeleine are within a short distance of the place.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Happy Christmas to Joana and Team, Dr Amaral and his family, and to all those who continue to hope and pray that the truth of what happened to Madeleine will be revealed.

    Also, many thanks to Joana and Team for all the hard work they put it to keep us all informed about this case.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Anon@169,I think Rothley towers should be searched too,and i believe one day it will be hopefully sooner the better.In the book Faked Abduction,the author says that the McCanns managed to dodge the media and press in early June 07 when they went to Huelva,i think it was by car,allegedly Gerry was unwell on the day the McCanns were scheduled to go so the media layed off,and the McCanns allegedly went there unexpectedly on another day.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Anon @ 168, as usual, a Pro that over-reacts. The pictures and interviews speech by themselves.
    Cheers from 158 & Merry Christmas. The Truth is raising the surface and Amaral will leave no stone unturned.
    At least, today, think on Madeleine, the little girl, not the trademark.

    ReplyDelete
  176. I wonder how many friends the McCannas have like this stupid lady?

    http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/crime/brocks-friend-tampering-arrest-12-29-2010

    Friends that are prepared to do anything to help cover-up a "scandal"?

    I could think of a few pro McCanns who would fit the bill quite nicely couldn't you? :d

    ReplyDelete
  177. when watching the s.c -reconstruction- (that is more like a bad joke) on the McCann documentary -Madeleine was here-..i can't help but get a really weird vibe of how Gerry and Fiona Payne "interact" with one another..she seems nervous of him (like some sort of "submissive" attitude toward him..she giggles in a nervous manner and he gives her a few really strange glances)..it just simply seems to me that there is something really strange going on between them there. Yeah, i know, just my opinion..i have always been a people observer, and i just thought i'd mention in it case anybody else wants to have a look at what i mean.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Madeleine...wether live or dead was not in the apt anymore by the time her parents went to the tapas bar..the "time" of the disappearence was just a smokescreen..No1 but the McCanns and David Payne saw Madeleine after 05.30 when she was picked up from the creche..and neither the McCanns or David Payne can be trusted..that we all know. Therefore, Madeleine was taken away from the Ocean Club somewhere after Kate picked her up from the creche and before they went to the tapas bar at 08.45. By the time they "raised the alarm" at 10.00..Madeleine could indeed have been all the way in Spain..dead or alive no1 knows except them. Still, that they did something and were involved somehow in whatever happened, that fact is clear as a bell. Unfortunately with the way it was assumed that they "told the truth" about the timeframe when she disappeared, they knew that no1 would come up with any sightings, and Jane Tanner was in on the whole story and came up with a FAKE sighting, and that further confused the investigation..on purpose of course! Therefore, assuming that Madeleine was taken live or dead across the border to Spain, it would explain the McCanns "urge" to go to Spain, as they already knew she was there. My guess is that she was dead by then (ritual murder of some sort) and THEN her body was moved in the rental car which explains the cadaver and blood dogs reactions in their rental car. That's my theory..for now..Anybody wishing to expand on that or point out something i've missed in my theory, please do..i'd be happy to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  179. ..i apologise..i of course meant Jane Tanner, not Fiona Payne
    (in regard to my previous/above post)

    ReplyDelete
  180. IT'S 2016 AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO THESE EVIL LIARS!!! CRIMINALS LIVE LASCIVIOUSLY IN HIGH PLACES, WHILE PETTY CRIMINALS ARE LEFT TO ROT IN JAIL.

    ReplyDelete