26 March 2012

The McCann's Stockholm Interview


“Well obviously they were very young, but they have re-counted things that happened prior to May 2007, which has kind of thrown me a little bit.”

by A.Miller

The interview in Stockholm has perhaps provided us with the most polished and proficient performance by the McCann couple to date, polished in both their appearance and almost off pat delivery of their tale of abduction.

A McCann ‘outing’ would never be complete though, without a dash of damage-limitation always included for good measure, not solely to serve the purpose of diminishing their part in whatever became of Madeleine - though that too, but rather another desperate attempt, an exercise in painting a pretty picture portraying themselves as not only the injured party but of being whiter than white. Sad faced Kate -I’m damned if I smile, damned if I don’t- McCann, a keen dramatist, coupled with the discomfiting smirk of Gerry -where is the child- McCann never fail their audience, their self-centred conduct always makes for cringe worthy viewing.

An interview with the McCann’s coupled without the main ingredient - the now customary sprinkle of ‘put downs’ directed at the Portuguese Police and anyone else in fact, who may disagree with their abduction theory – is something too that we have come to expect.

The upside is perhaps that each time Kate McCann makes an appearance, deliberately or otherwise there are disclosures.

The McCann twins, Kate tells us, understand the reason behind their parents visit to Sweden – And no, it’s not “All about the Money” it is to ask the good people of Sweden for their help in finding their missing daughter...

She tells us too, that the twins are able to re-collect events prior to May 2007 which she states has “thrown her”. In what way one might wonder? Does Kate McCann hope that they may recall the night of 3rd May 2007 and be able to throw some light as to who removed Madeleine from Apt 5A? Does it worry her that they might remember something crucial, or, was she simply thwarting an unwelcome question by the interviewer when he made the point that the twins may be too young to actually remember Madeleine?

When asked what her thoughts, now almost five years on, as to what happened to Madeleine, Kate McCann replies:

“Well my view hasn’t changed you know since 4th May really, and that is, that a man took Madeleine. And that man was the person who our friend Jane Tanner saw carrying a child away from the area of the apartment. And sadly I don’t really know anything else since.”

No prizes for spotting the deliberate mistake... But what possible reason could Kate McCann have for stating 4th May and not 3rd? Another red herring, she is rather fond of fish! Time will no doubt tell, but one thing we can be sure of - this was not a faux pas.

She does not “really know anything else since” she declares. Extraordinary that she should say this, as since the sighting by her good friend Jane Tanner there was another sighting by the Smith family, which sadly from Kate’s statement, seems to have escaped her memory.

Patio Door/Curtains

The question of the patio door being left open/closed by Kate after entering 5A on her check is as always a puzzle! In the interview with Oprah Winfrey, Kate states she looked behind her to see if she had left it open. She said she had not. In Madeleine Was Here’ the McCann documentary, the ‘episode’ as to whether she closed the door behind her on entry, is not included at all in their portrayal of events. One wonders why – two different versions?

Now in the interview in Sweden, it re-surfaces.

Kate McCann said in this interview in Stockholm, that when the children’s bedroom door slammed shut, she checked the door behind her (patio door) to see if on entry to 5A she had left it open? She stated she had not. She, therefore based on this, knew that the bedroom door slamming shut was not caused by airflow from patio entrance. Yet, surprisingly, she did not then investigate what had caused the bedroom door to slam closed, where this gust had come from? To most, the obvious answer the bedroom window, but Kate does not check this out, she continued to close over the bedroom door in preparation of leaving 5A without investigating further... then she notices Madeleine is missing.

Not dissimilar to Gerry McCann. Looking in on his children, the open bedroom door once again being the ‘alert’ that something was not right. Yet on discovering his children were asleep had not been out of bed, he too fails to investigate further, he returns to the Tapas.

Quite extraordinary behaviour from both parents each stating the door caused them, if not concern, made them curious, yet each not bothering to discover why the door was open.

In a televised interview a few months back the McCann couple stated that Madeleine could not have exited 5a through unlocked patio door as Kate said “It’s just not possible” as Madeleine would not have:

a) Opened the long curtains, then closed them behind her;
b) Opened the patio door then closed it behind her;
c) Opened the child gate at top of stairs then closed it behind her;

If the child could not get past the first obstacle, the curtains, then stands to reason she would not have needed to attempt the other obstacles (the shutters). What it tells us though, is that when the McCann couple left the apartment by whichever door – the curtains framing the patio door were drawn closed, meeting in the centre.

If the McCann’s left by the patio door, and depending on whether the patio door from the inside opened right to left or vice versa, did they on leaving draw back the curtains at the central point where both curtains met so as to exit, in so doing, disturbing them, then returning them to original position? Or did they slip through the curtains at whichever side the door opening would be?

If they were able to do so, slip through without opening the curtains there is no reason to suggest that a child, just days shy of her 4th birthday would not be able to do likewise, that she could not slip behind curtains, and with much greater ease than her parents and their friends.


Also it appears that the patio door not only had heavier style curtains but also net curtains, of a flimsier material. So, two sets of curtains for the parents, those checking to deal with?

Which then begs the question, when Kate McCann entered 5A did she draw open these curtains to one side to gain entry, or did she simply flap around until she found an opening to get through?

What did Matt Oldfield do on his check? Did he return curtains to original position on leaving? And Gerry McCann, how about him? He claims to have left by this route also?

If Kate did not open the curtains on entry, when she then “looked behind her” to check if she had left the patio door open, her view would have been obscured. How could she have been sure it was closed without going over to the door and taking a closer look?

We therefore have to assume the curtains were open at that point, whether opened by Kate on entry, or that they were never closed at any time that night. In which case, Madeleine would not have had any “problem” with curtains as suggested in their interview.

Not one of them has ever mentioned curtains, having to negotiate them on entry/exiting by the patio door!

In police photos the curtains are open. Would that be how they were found to be on their arrival? Did the McCann couple/their friends draw them open and pin them back before police arrived?

Kate McCann always said, “if they had had to think about their decision to leave the children it would not have happened.” They have said many times that they, due to Madeleine telling them she was awake and crying the previous night, that they talked it over and decided to make more regular checks than on previous nights. Clearly, then if they were making more regular checks on the 3rd then they did not check as often as half hourly on the other nights.

Kate said, interestingly that it felt like a really “natural” thing to do, to go eat at the tapas restaurant on the complex. Not a mention, that it felt unnatural to leave three babies under 4 years of age alone while they did so. It is the most bizarre of statements, yet no one but no one questions them on this, not in any robust way? We have Gerry declaring how overprotective Kate was with the children. This is absolutely not demonstrated by their actions on any night during that holiday- their “collective mistake.” But how could the collective mistake have been allowed to continue when on the morning of 3rd Madeleine alerted them to their mistake. There it should have ended. On the night of 3rd there should not have been a repeat of this “collective mistake.” Some may consider, accept that it was a mistake up until that point, but most definitely not thereafter can it be described as such. It then became, without question, child neglect. They knew the risks, they knew their children had been awake and crying, they knew by leaving them they were placing them in a vulnerable position, a state of fear. They made a conscious decision to do so.

Gerry describes the alleged abductor as having taken a risky opportunity, Gerry and Kate McCann simply took avoidable risks with their children's lives.

More important might be that all of the above contradicts the rogatory statement given by Fiona Payne, when she declared that Kate McCann told her she left the patio door unlocked for Madeleine to be able to exit the apartment in her parent’s absence.

And I must point out also, in the McCann documentary, ‘Madeleine Was Here’ the film footage depicts the children’s bedroom as having net curtain, it is seen blowing in the breeze. (I do appreciate this was filmed in Rothley) Did the children’s bedroom window at 5A have netting? If so, another obstacle for any intruder - again two sets of curtains – that's troublesome!

Gerry's little dig that their children will read the horrible material on the internet which is written about them. It cannot be denied there is some nasty material out there. But more than this, they should be worried that the children read the police files, watch the interviews given by their parents, the ducking and diving, the money making which could easily be described as “scams”. But who knows, before that happens perhaps the culprits, those responsible for the crimes committed against Madeleine, will be behind bars.


1485 “But you said that Kate told you about Madeleine waking up?”

Reply “Yeah”.

1485 “And you couldn’t remember, you didn’t, you weren’t sure whether it was the night before?”

Reply “Yeah”.

1485 “Or, you know, the night before that?”

Reply “Yeah”.

1485 “What were the circumstances regarding her telling you that?”

Reply “She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying ‘Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or’, erm, ‘or locking it and, you know, finding that we’re not there and the door’s locked if she woke up’, because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh”.
01.15.57

1485 “So she asked you what your thoughts were regarding locking?”

Reply “Yeah”.

1485 “Did she say whether she had locked or?”

Reply “No, that was the point, I think they said they’d left it, well she’d said she’d left it unlocked”.

1485 “Left the patio?”

Reply “And she felt a bit nervous about it but Gerry, Gerry had sort of said ‘Oh it will be fine’, you know. But she was obviously, because it wasn’t something she was quite easy with, that’s the way it came across, you know, but, but Gerry said, you know, ‘It’ll be fine. It’ll be fine’.

Fiona Payne statement to the Leicestershire police, April 2008


(Tran)SCRIPT

Fredrik Skavlan [Host]: Kate and Gerry McCann welcome to Stockholm.

Kate and Gerry: Thank you.

Host: It’s been almost five years eh since, since eh Madeleine disappeared and now you Kate are reliving the whole thing by writing a book about what happened. Why are you doing that?

Kate: Well I actually started to keep a diary back in May 2007 I was advised to do it actually, and at the time I felt it would be important for Madeleine really, so that when we found her we’d be able to fill in the gaps in her life, and then I also thought it would be good for Sean and Amelie as well, so that they would have an account of the truth of everything that happened.

Host: Your twins?

Kate: That’s right.

Host: If we could start by going back eh to May 3rd 2007, what’s your strongest memories of Madeleine from that day?

Gerry: I think the strongest memory I have is, of really, the photograph it was the last photograph we have of her and eh ye know, we’d had a lovely holiday. Madeleine was having a great time and just after lunch we went over to the pool area and eh she was sitting there paddling in the pool and I was sitting next to her and she turned round and she’s just beaming. And then the last time I saw her which was probably minutes before she was taken when she was lying asleep. It’s terrible, I’ve said this a few times but I had one of those poignant moments as a parent where I went into the room the door was open, I just paused for a second and I looked and she was sound asleep, and I thought how beautiful she was. The twins were asleep in the... their cots and I thought how lucky we were. And within ye know, minutes that was shattered!

Host: What happened is that you went to eat with the other parents that you were on vacation with?

Kate: That’s right.

Host: This was not far from the apartment?


Kate: It’s about 50 metres as the crow flies but that’s about 70 metres on foot.

Host: Yes, and as you sat there in this restaurant you went back and forth on shift to check on the children is that right? And what happened when the last time you went to check?

Kate: Well it was 10 o’clock when I went to check on Madeleine and em I walked into the sitting room of the apartment and I noticed that the children’s bedroom door was open further than we’d left it. We always use... close it quite far over but just enough so some light gets in and it was quite open. And it was our friend Matt who had checked on the children at half past nine when he was checking on his daughter next door, and I thought to myself well maybe, maybe Matt‘s left the door open when he checked on them. So, I walked over the bedroom door and I was about to close it to again, and as I did that, it kind of slammed shut, and I thought oh there must be a draught and I checked the door behind me and I hadn’t left that open.

And then I opened the door again of the children’s bedroom just to leave it open a little bit and that’s when I really looked in. And I couldn’t quite make out Madeleine in her bed and I just looked and looked and erm it was obviously quite dark, it must be a parental thing when you don’t switch a light on in case you’re worried about waking them but then I realised she wasn’t actually there and then I thought she must have wandered through to our bedroom and maybe that would have explained why door was open. So I went into our bedroom and she wasn’t there and that was the first time really that the panic hit and I just ran back into her bedroom, and literally at that point the curtains which were closed just kind of flew open and that’s when I noticed that the window was open as far as it could go and the shutters outside had been raised all the way up. And I just knew straight away that someone had taken her.

Host: So, this was your first thought?

Kate: Yeah, absolutely, there’s no way a young child could have got out.

Host: This decision of not eating in the apartment it has been lot of discussion about that not staying in the apartment, to go to eat with the other parents as you did every night.

Gerry: We felt incredibly safe and we were in a very quiet holiday resort. We were with a group of friends we hardly saw anyone of an evening and it was so close that it didn’t feel very different to eating outside in your garden, with the kids upstairs in the bedroom, and literally we were only going back erm to check that no one had woken up and of course at the time someone stealing your child was the furthest thing from our minds...and erm...

Host: This was really not something you thought twice about?

Gerry: Yeah, no, it was it just felt em...

Kate: I think if we’d had to think about it or, even say to each other ‘do you think that’s okay?’ it wouldn’t have happened. But it just felt like a really natural thing that we’ll eat at the restaurant on the complex.

Gerry: I think the hardest thing with this is, ye know with hindsight we made a mistake erm it was a collective mistake but unfortunately we can’t change that, and erm whatever anyone may think about our decision making that night Madeleine’s completely innocent and you know she’s been taken and erm it’s hard for us because ye know no one could feel more guilty than we did to... to... to, think that your behaviour gave someone an opportunity, a risky opportunity , but one that they took, and ye know we persecuted ourselves for that, but you’ve got to look forward you can’t go back we can’t change that unfortunately, and erm what we’ve tried to do is, is always to look forward.


Host: Were you the worrying kind of parents, I mean..?

Gerry: I’ll answer that! I would say - I wasn’t but Kate was! I would have said that Kate was a bit over protective. Whereas I grew up in a big family the youngest of five and you feel, oh you know, indestructible but Kate was much as an only child maybe I don’t know, but definitely much more protective of the children than me.

Host: There were...eh you, you came in contact very, very quickly with the Portuguese Police...

Gerry: Sure...

Host: Eh how was that experience?

Gerry: We were expecting a Metropolitan type response and I remember saying to the officers “where’s the helicopters? I want helicopters with heat seeking equipment.” And ye know the officer kind of laughed at us and said “you know this isn’t you know we don’t have a Royal Navy” and this thing... and you just... and I’m sure every single parent can understand this because everyone has lost a child momentarily and the terror and how frightening it is, be it in a supermarket or a playground or a park, and you just want everything done and you want... you want the world to stop, and, and scream, and the response ye know was slow. And that’s been one of the hardest things for us, because ye know, Madeleine could have been moved very easily and the Spanish border is only about 90 minutes away and obviously you are on the Mediterranean, and one of the aspects of why we are campaigning internationally is because she could have been taken anywhere.

Host: What happened was that as time went by, you didn’t really trust the Portuguese police and they didn’t trust you?

Gerry: We were there for three/ three and a half months we felt we had been completely eliminated from the enquiry we’d been interviewed...the circumstances, ye know em and then ye know for whatever reason, and possibly pressure, and a desire for this case to go away, it was portrayed in media that there was very strong evidence that Madeleine was dead people have said DNA and other things, and that we were responsible for hiding her body...and..

Host: Was there not DNA in the car, in the car that you hired?

Gerry: And we want to be absolutely clear about these things there are two aspects- We didn’t hire that car for 3 and half weeks until after Madeleine was taken, and the second aspect is there is no DNA match. Eh you know when you see the files there’s a mixed sample of DNA that comes from 5 people and obviously some of it matched Madeleine’s. But of course, all, of our DNA matches Madeleine’s. To be fair, ye know it was incredibly frustrating from the time we were arguido, through to the file being closed the following July but the Prosecutors final report was very clear, actually unequivocal, there was no evidence Madeleine was dead. And there was no evidence that we were involved but certain people have chosen to ignore that information.

Host: Which one of these media speculations was most shocking, was most hurtful?


Kate: I mean there were loads, but I guess the worst thing is if they say she is dead, and there is no evidence because if she is dead there is no search.

Gerry: I think the other thing just to go back to that Frederik is that - We had an interview with the police which Kate details in her book, an unofficial interview, and basically two of the senior officers were saying to us em “Tell us what happened, we know what happened.” And I was in tears, saying “Do you have evidence that Madeleine is dead because if you do, as her parents we need to know.” And they were saying “it’s coming, it’s coming”. And that ye know, the pressure that was put on us to confess to a crime of hiding your own daughter’s body and to say that you were going to pursue us for murder. And it’s not unique to Portugal, this happens with police the world over, it’s happened to many different people it’s happened to other parents in similar situations to us.

Host: How is your daily life, it’s been five years, how is your daily life affected by this...or do you have a daily life?

Kate: Yeah we’ve reached a new normality I guess. You know our life will never be what it was ye know it’s never gonna be truly normal again after what’s happened but we’ve got to a place where we are obviously functioning and Gerry works full time. I haven’t returned to medical practice but I’ve worked on the campaign and investigation. Six months of my life was spent going through the Portuguese police files, nine months was spent writing a book, and of course we’ve got two other children. We’ve got Sean and Amelie, and it’s ye know, it’s actually quite a luxury, but a nice luxury to be able to take them to school and be there for them when they come home, so...

The Process archival written by two Portuguese Public Ministry prosecutors, called by Gerry McCann mistakenly as the 'final report', actually states something different.

Gerry: It’s probably important to emphasise ye know, we do spend obviously a lot of our spare time focused on it. The last year we’ve slept a lot better knowing the review is taking place. But if you had a casual observer looking at us as a family they would see a family of four. They’d see a happy family of four, and they wouldn’t really see they wouldn’t suspect that we’ve been erm ye know suffered a great trauma... em but for Kate and I... Sean and Amelie are as happy as any 7 year olds that we know and for Kate and I, we get enjoyment from life and we do, we do, do that, but until Madeleine is back with us there’s always going to be a void and there’s a limit, whereas before you could be, you could have unbridled joy, anything now, there is always a tinge its often the family things because Madeleine is not there with us.

Host: How has it affected your relationship?

Kate: Well we’re very lucky in that our relationship was very good very strong before this happened and I’m not sure we’d have survived if that wasn’t the case I mean I don’t think there could be anything more traumatic than what’s happened to us plus all the additional stuff on top of that.

Host: You said you’ve written the book for the twins, how much do they know?

Kate: Probably as much as we do to be honest now.

Gerry: Virtually yeah!

Kate: We did take advice from a child psychologist and he said to be as honest and as open with them but let them take the lead so if they ask you a question you respond as fully as you can and that’s exactly what we’ve done. So we’ve got to the point now where they understand that a man has taken Madeleine. They, they view it like burglary, that she’s been stolen and you shouldn’t take something that doesn’t belong to you but they understand ye know that there are lots of people helping us. They, they, understand why we are in Sweden today, the purpose of that is to ask for more help really...

Host: Can they really remember?

Kate: Well obviously they were very young, but they have re-counted things that happened prior to May 2007, which has kind of thrown me a little bit. Obviously they have been surrounded by Madeleine ever since. There’s pictures all around the house and Madeleine’s bedroom is still there, they’ve obviously seen things on the television and they know that my job really has changed from being a doctor to looking for Madeleine.

Gerry: And I think it’s important to say that they still see Madeleine as a big part of their life, and as parents that’s incredibly comforting and they’ll say things like “We’re going to go on a an aeroplane and we’re going to look for that man, and when we find him we’re going to...”and I’ll say we’ll give him to police, but they even talk about that. But I think if we don’t find Madeleine in the next...period we will face more difficult times as they get older and they are on internet and they start seeing some of the vile material which is there.

Host: In your book you mention that you have been perceived as, as cold in a way?

Kate: Well someone’s always got an opinion and I think we’ve learned how judgemental people can be and I mean I think its maybe part of human nature, we are all quick to judge from a position of ignorance.

Host: Is there a right way of grieving a wrong way of grieving?

Kate: Well exactly, I mean how should a mother or father grieve when their child is abducted and... erm...

Gerry: I think the other thing people probably don’t understand is that when we’ve done media and in particular in the early days you had to really psyche yourself up to go on there and deliver the message, you know we set objectives...

Host: Were you advised on how to behave?

Gerry: We...I mean the very initial things we weren’t, but when we did the first sort of direct appeal to the abductor, em Kate... we were... and I was told that Kate should speak as the mother, female voice and that she should not show any emotion in case that gave the abductor some sort of kick so that particular appeal, but I think as much as anything ye know Kate had probably cried 16 hours a day for 4 days, by time we did that, and we were just drained, you cannot physically cry 24 hours a day, I mean it’s impossible.

Kate: The day we did the appeal to the abductor which was on the Monday and I spoke to Alan the councillor and I said, I feel really numb and I felt really bad that I felt numb I just... and he said “Kate you can’t cry for 24 hours a day, you know this is, this is natural” but..(lets out sigh) it’s hard I mean if you laugh people will say how can they laugh when their child has been abducted if you don’t laugh you’ll either get called cold or you’re on the edge of a nervous breakdown or, it’s just hard, you’ve just got to be who you are.

Host: Do you have days that when you can forget, when you can sort of not think about it?

Kate: No I don’t think there is any day when Madeleine is not on my mind you know she is always there but... For 18 months/2 years I never thought I’d enjoy myself again I never thought I’d allow myself to enjoy anything again, and with time you adapt and I realised that actually it is okay to do that and it is important to do that, you need to get rest you need to enjoy life, and you have to be well and happy ye know for each other, for Madeleine when she gets home, for Sean and Amelie, and thankfully ye know, we are in a position now where we get a lot of enjoyment out of things, Sean and Amelie in particular.

Host: Today almost 5 years later what do you believe happened to Madeleine?

Kate: Well my view hasn’t changed you know since 4th May really, and that is, that a man took Madeleine. And that man was the person who our friend Jane Tanner saw carrying a child away from the area of the apartment. And sadly I don’t really know anything else since.

Host: How long can, do you think you can find the strength to continue this search?

Kate: As long as it takes. I don’t think any parent would ever be able to give up on their child and even the weeks where we are absolutely shattered erm or there’s another injustice that comes your way, you get up the next morning and think ‘right let’s go again’ because Madeleine is part of our family we all need her back and she needs to be with us...just need to keep going.

Gerry: I mean There are times when you just think - I cannot do this, any more, em its too much - and particularly the attention that’s comes through the media, but as Kate says that bond with us, and with Madeleine and for Sean and Amelie, and even if you wanted to I don’t think we could stop.

Host: Please know that our thoughts are with you thank you so much for coming here to Stockholm and telling us, reminding us about Madeleine is still missing.

Broadcast by STV, Skavlan Talk Sow, March 23, 2012


126 comments:

  1. I wonder if Kate and Gerry have started coaching the twins to "remember" certain things that NEVER happened. It is unlikely that the twins would remember anything from that age especially since, according to the Tapas Seven, the twins never woke up that night even when the apartment was full of people running in and and out searching for Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Keesh said:
    Yes there are NET curtains on the 5A window, these are described by Kate as going "whoosh" (Cutting Edge Doco)
    see News of the World pic
    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/14-May8/image005.jpg

    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/14-May8/11-05-08-NewsOfTheWorld-Transcript.htm

    The PATIO doors also have SHUTTERS to negotiate, which the Oldfields(I think), used, regarding their apartment, 5b, (see statements).

    Patio shutters
    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/42oct10/mail-2-10-10-flat.jpg

    Thanks for the above transcript. Here are some more interviews

    Annika Widebeck tv4
    http://www.tv4play.se/nyheter_och_debatt/nyhetsmorgon?title=foraldrarna_letar_fortfarande_efter_forsvunna_madeleine_mccann&videoid=2174055&utm_medium=sharing&utm_source=permalink&utm_campaign=tv4play.se

    http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=1650&artikel=5034568

    with Madeleine Hammarström and Maria Ekselder

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here they go again,same old,same old,do they really think people will think them innocent by trotting the same old sh** out.How much longer are they going to get away with this.I say get someone to interveiw kate or gerry on their own.lying scumbags,yer no like on the spur of the moment chat instead of this rehersed a thousand times rubbish. God Bless Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Joana,

    Is it true that the Mccanns always get prepared for all the questions before they will be on TV? They have to know all the questions and prepare all answers long before they will be on the TV???
    I've heard this from some swedes, becaus of this interview in sweden.
    I think the Host Skalvan was too afraid to ask the right questions, or ist it really that the Mccanns only answers some questions?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks @2, so basically it's "Please, Please buy my book", then Gerry actually distorts everything when he says that since Madeleine's disappearance the number of abductions have been incredibly low in Portugal, as if they weren't already before Madeleine's tragic demise. Then a bit of more bashing on the Judiciary Police work and on the the Portuguese. And obviously, any bets the next sighting is to come from Sweden? Folie à deux comes to mind.

    @4 They've used a script on the 3rd of May of 2007, why should it be any different now?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The saga of the curtains both cloth and net have always puzzled me regarding the patio door.

    Did they open the door fully considering it's probably 8 or 10' wide, so one door would be 4 or 5' wide, part the curtains centrally, enter then on exit close the curtains then close the door - that would have been an almighty draught!! and clunking & fiddling
    or
    Did they merely open the door sufficient to squeeze in, lifting & pulling the curtains aside, which would have required some light into the room from one source or another, to get round the television set, placed in that corner by the opening. How did MO manage all this on his first visit the apartment, and how did he know which bed M was in, not be alerted by the empty bed under the window, with the now open shutter & window and curtains flapping in the breeze - and how did he manage to close the patio door with those curtains ? did he leave it open whilst he checked or close it behind him and reopen again??

    Now consider, the speculation as always, that the abductor also entered this way, not knowing that Mr McCann was close behind him, would he have not left the door open and curtains open in order to get out? Therefore it would have been pretty obvious that someone was in the apartment, since potential abductor & Mr McCann were there at the same time. It was NEVER (if ever) the entry point for the abductor

    Neither was the window, irrespective of the cleaners being of the habit of leaving the windows unlocked, being able if possible (see articles by Pat Brown) to open the shutters, what luck to find also a conveniently unlocked window!

    Then we come to the front (main door) highlighted yesterday on the mccann files. The magic of the front door lock, was it deadlocked or not? Are we now to believe it was also possible to enter if not deadlocked? More confused now, than there ever was

    The KEYS .......... the apartment keys, at last turn up on the kitchen top (saw that a few weeks back in one of the articles about Dr Amaral)

    So apart from everyone coming & going by the patio door (except the abductor since we don't know) who mentions in their statement how they manage fight with the curtains on entry and exit, ever tried closing a patio from outside when you have curtains on the inside!!

    Wherever Kate McCann searched that night, did she go to the front, look around the car park, since she claims it was obvious by the open window and shutter that Madeleine had been spirited away that way, did she actually look ! OR couldn't see get out, since she didn't know where the keys were and the door didn't open?

    And as, I've so frequently mentioned the patio doors in the past, they do not have an handle on the outside. HOW DO YOU OPEN THEM?
    > were they left slightly ajar, enough to squeeze your fingers through I(more prints everywhere)
    > to open these doors would have (IMHO) required a person to use the flat of their hand, as a sort of suction pad on the glass to get them open (normally doubled glazed in the UK so heavy)so would have been covered in hand, palm and finger prints!

    The door, windows, shutters and curtains seem central to the story telling.

    Puddleduck

    ReplyDelete
  7. Net curtains in the children room

    Yes if you look for some of the forensics photos, I think the one with the measure you will see a corner just showing through and certainly on this one:

    For example 2313
    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

    puddleduck

    ReplyDelete
  8. That new part on the helicopters was a bit hilarious. How ridiculous this Gerald McCann really is! Revolting!
    These public relations exercises have obviously something to do with the ongoing investigations and the court case against GA. As suspects, they should be barred from contacting the media or from expressing their opinions about the case, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Did you notice that they don't talk about Swedish people searching for Madeleine, "direcly or indirectly", the Host didn't show the book (which wasn't even on the table), neither did the McCanns, no close up on the pictures of the suspects,no appeal to the public to buy the book, and the Host didn't receive them separately, like they are used to be received?

    Host: "Which one of the speculations was the most SHOCKING, the must hurtful?"

    Was the host referring to the Gaspars? To paedoplilia?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Joana, I see you made restrictions about my last comment. I change it.
    The host did not receive the McCanns separately, something they are used to.
    He didn't show Kate's book which wasn't even on the table.People were not even informed about the name of the book.
    Kate nor Gerry didn't ask the public to read(buy) it.
    I have the impression the McCanns pushed themselves in that show and I suspect the host dóes not believe them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @9/10 What do you mean? Your comments were both published exactly as you sent them. Refresh your page. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What I found also interesting in that interview is the 'body language' of all 3:
    Kate looks old, very old, compared to Gerry and I think, that was intentional, created by an heavy make-up and a face-emotion trainning. if I take into accounts that just few days before that interview she was in shape and able to run side by side with her husband in one more Fundraising, her image degraded just before the interview. She looks more in pain on that interview, then in 2007. A contrasense with what she said when she admits their life over the time got some normalitty and they become able to enjoy their lives again. Then this hypothetical pain was Theatre once again.
    Gerry, who stills jumping on Kate answers, every time she picks a hot question, affraid that she couldn't make it (a good answer)is now away from Kate. No more seating side by side, no more holding hands, which appears to me also intentional. Probably an answer to the heavy criticism of people who found it odd the way they tried to fool with a lovely story when other cases have shown the public that a missing child normally cause the couple to split and divorce. But in one thing, Gerry didn't change- The way he reacts when the question is disturbing and he is forced to lie. HE HEAVELY BLINK THE EYES AND SHOW HOW UNCOMFORTABLE IS ON HIS CHAIR, moving much more then when the question is inoffensive. Wonder why he feels obliged to defend Kate with such story of being much more overprotective( to the childs) then him. An exercise to exorcise her part on what happen to their daughter?
    The way he criticise the searches done by Portugal is clearly offensive to Portugal and to the swedish public who had seen it on TVs and papers. As usual, his arrogance show up, trying to classify Portugal as a third country when compared to UK and the swedish public as people living so far from the rest of Europe that they were poor informed or not informed at all. He simple goes over other interviews they gave, where they appear thanking the portuguese police and the portuguese public for all huge effort they have done to search Madeleine and support them. He can't have it both ways- brilliant when interviewed in Portugal, close to the events, and very bad 5 years later- Obviously, he lies on that interview, AGAIN. Sophisticated boats and helicopters were used, some with night equipment, used by Portuguese and spannish police to control the coast against human and drugs traffic. He, again certifying the public with a stupid degree, didn't know or pretends to, that the portuguese and the spannish coast borders are the most controlled in Europe due to his extension and do to his natural condition of being the way to Africa ( one of the new routes for drugs traffic).Cont

    ReplyDelete
  13. Cont:
    The question that should assault every brain, is why after a so extense and so sophisticated search, the abductor or the girl was not found? perhaps, because there was no abductor and because the girl was concealed in a house, out of the possible targets for the police. The police could openly search fields, streets, all outside environments. Per contrary, to search a house, they need permission from a prosecutor and to have that permission tey need to show strong evidences ( a dennounce for ex) to support that search. They searched the flats and the houses close to the Resort, due to their natural condition of being close to the crime scene, but if a car was used on May 3 to take the girl to a house more far, only a quite and methodical investigation will lead the police to reach that house. That is what the Mccann's strongly prevented with their campaign to frame the police and bring a lot of entropy to the investigation.
    For the first time, I love the body language of the journalist/interviewer. Could not be only atributed to his country being part of the cold north of Europe. I think, he didn't buy Mccann's stories, lies. Even, while following a pre-agreement (no Mccann's interviews without agreements), his face while asking the most embarassing questions, such the ones related with twins, was telling much more then his words.

    ReplyDelete
  14. GM: and obviously you are on the Mediterranean, and one of the aspects of why we are campaigning internationally

    On the Mediterranean, really?

    ReplyDelete
  15. It was not a make up. Kate got really very old, specially when she laughs or smiles. In London, when she was running, there was no strong lamp projecting on her face like now in Stokholm. Gerry is looking well, dreaming of the moment that he will get rid of her.
    Probably they know that at least one of Tapas 7 will come forward and tell the truth. Because it would be very stupid if they keep protecting the McCanns whilsh they have nothing to do with Maddie's death.
    The Yard will come up with the truth anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I wonder if Kate's parents accepted already the truth. It must be a terrible thing for them, who believed that their daughter was victim of police lies.
    Most parents don't know their children well or even not at all. The refuse to believe they are cruel or bad.They are prepared to believe every excuse they hear from them.It must have been tough at the moment they realised the police were telling the truth.Losing a grand daughter and losing a daughter.
    They should have realised it much earlier, when they showed themselves surprised of the fact the McCanns had left the children all alone, every night, something that they did not expect at all.

    If Kate, leaving the children all alone every night, is considered as overprotecting by Gerry, I wonder how Gerry himself is...

    ReplyDelete
  17. http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/mar/26/mccanns-cameron-media-libel-legal-aid

    "Kate and Gerry McCann urge PM to save 'no win, no fee' for libel cases"

    I bet that Cameron is sooo fed up with the McCanns! GOOD! I hope they annoy him so much that he'll do evrything in his power to get them out of his hair!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I would love to see Dr Amaral do an interview on the same show and set the record straight. I feel sure they would invite him, much to the fury of the McCanns. For too long they have had it their way with these interviews and been allowed to tell a load of tripe.

    Kate McCann looks like she has aged considerably, but Gerry is looking perky and not aged at all, but yet I think he sounds so full of disdain and arrogance. It is a brave interviewer who would contradict him because I get the impression of anger not far below the surface. Could Gerry control himself in a witness box if cross examined closely? He did an angry walk out of an interview with that one question an interviewer asked about sedation earlier on when Madeleine first went missing. What was all that about, when he could have just said no? Will we ever get to find out if he could keep his cool, or will they do everything possible to avoid answering questions they can't approve first. Their refusal to answer questions may not go down well in a court of law, though it is their right not to answer.

    Now Gerry is bringing the rest of the Tapas friends into the equation of allotting a share of blame for what happened to Madeleine with that 'collective decision' to leave the kids. Bloody nerve of the man, when Madeleine was THEIR CHILD. Can't they make a decision for themselves, and take responsibility for it then? Always having to blame somebody else, even their pals who have been loyal so far. Or have they, or will they remain so? Can the McCanns be really sure of that?

    They are even blaming Dr Amaral and the PJ for doing their jobs of investigating. They have blamed so many people, who have they not blamed so far, except those dancing to their tune?

    Constant bleating, begging, blaming, and always aware that so many people still don't believe them no matter how they tell it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Joana, is there a problem with the maddie case files please? I've been unable to access it for 2 days and can't find any mention of it being down for any reason on any of the other forums. It may possibly be my computer to blame but I have no problem accessing any of the others. Can you give me any information please?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hi Kerry, the forum is up and running, please use this how to wiki http://www.wikihow.com/Clear-Your-Browser%27s-Cache or this one http://kb.iu.edu/data/ahic.html to clear your browser's cache and cookies, if you still don't have access after taking those two steps email me, okay?

    ReplyDelete
  21. so the mccanns want cameron to keep the no-win no-fee in uk.
    people with no money would not be able to defend themselves
    otherwise.
    as an example of their commitment they sue ameral for libel
    and have his money seized,leaving him without the means to defend himself.
    double standards maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Joana - This question doesn`t relate specifically to this post, but do you know if Alipio Ribeiro gave Goncalo a reason for transferring him off the McCann case?

    Louisee

    ReplyDelete
  23. So, the twins have developed a false memory. Nice try Gerry. Sick of these two. Kate with her ' feel sorry for me face ' but looked perky doing her ' run '. They are sickening.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @ 18 chap i work with his dad had to see gerry at glenfield ,he discribed him as" very arrogant " ,and hes not the 1st 1 that ive heard discribe him so

    ReplyDelete
  25. 17, or Joana: what is that Guardian exactly saying? I don't understand it well.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Keesha said
    with thanks to Jon regarding Burson-Marsteller
    http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post232627.html#p232627

    Clarence Mitchell works for the above as does Fredrik Skavlan's PR contact, Grete Christine Kruse

    http://burson-marsteller.no/om-oss/menneskene/radgivere/

    ReplyDelete
  27. What curtains went woosh woosh I am confused, what are these 2 taking about, I watched the interview on the swedish programme.Its the same thing over and over again, she looks dreadful, mind you she must, have had recent surgery to separate, her hand from his. The Jane Tanner man was mentioned the man who took Maddie was mentioned the only men not mentioned in this whole saga, are superman or batmen they are yet to come.

    Mary Liverpool UK

    ReplyDelete
  28. @22 Though the competence of that removal should belong strictly to the Directorate of the Judiciary Police, in this case to the National PJ Director Dr. Alípio Ribeiro or to the Superior Council of the Police, ultimately, the decision was a political one supported by the at the time Justice Minister, Alberto Costa.

    Refs: Decreto-Lei n.º 196/94, de 21 de Julho - Aprova o Regulamento Disciplinar da Polícia Judiciária http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/leis-da-justica/livro-i-leis-sobre-a/organizacao-e/policia-judiciaria4512/ http://www.publico.pt/Sociedade/maddie-ministro-da-justica-aprova-afastamento-de-coordenador-da-investigacao-1306470?all=1 and http://www.publico.pt/Sociedade/pj-magistrados-querem-que-o-governo-explique-demissao-de-director-nacional-1327975

    ReplyDelete
  29. no win no fee

    what does this mean?

    ReplyDelete
  30. 25/29 A contingent fee (in the United States) or conditional fee (in England and Wales) is any fee for services provided where the fee is payable only if there is a favourable result. In the law, it is defined as a "fee charged for a lawyer's services only if the lawsuit is successful or is favourably settled out of court.... Contingent fees are usually calculated as a percentage of the client's net recovery."[1]

    In the English legal system, it is generally referred as no win no fee. A conditional fee agreement between a law firm and a client. The usual form of this agreement is that the solicitor will take a law case on the understanding that if lost, no payment is made.

    However, if the case is won, the lawyer will be entitled to the normal fee based on hourly billing, plus a success fee. The success fee in England must be as a percentage no greater than 100% of the normal fee. This contrasts with the contingency fee in the US, which gives the successful attorney a percentage of the damages awarded in favour of his client.

    in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contingent_fee

    ReplyDelete
  31. Nice Boden dress, by the way. I wonder if Kate is thinking that the audience will be thinking she should buy her clothes at Primark and put the extra pennies into the Madeleine Fund, like she said she thought people would be surprised seeing her buy Marks & Spencer strawberries when she could buy Aldi ones much cheaper. Maybe she should know that some of us think that the Fund is just an extra personal cash cow for them anyway, nothing to do with searching for poor dead Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Thanks Joana. How obviously political when GA had a valid point - that`s awful. We wouldn`t be in this position 5 years later if they`d listened to him in the first place. I know GA said it was political in his book, but I wanted to know the details - thank you.

    L

    ReplyDelete
  33. Mmm? Trying to negate my disgust with this couple's willingness to abuse their other children by forcing memories to suit their 'story'.
    As a therapist. my experience over 30 years is that it has been proven that we hold all our memories within us. And even if too young to express them verbally, children will show it in their behaviour as they develop and mature. Children know the 'truth' on an unconscious level and they will 'act it out' in many ways including overt displays of mistrust of their parents and other authority figures.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Vídeo (Justiça Cega.... ) roubado por mim.

    Obrigada.

    Bj.º

    ReplyDelete
  35. At least they were sitting apart,no chance of her holding his hand and rubbing his finger,and if the twins remember things from that time even though they were only 18months old,just think how much Madeleine will remember(after all according to them there's no evidence she's dead)she'll even know who she really is,and what happened in her short life prior to that holiday.Kate did the usual downcast doe eyed look i see,please someone, anyone in authority put an end to this disgusting charade.Poor Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I guess the english ran out of money and the fund needed to be fed, so they went and explored other markets. I can't wait for the day they will bow their head in shame.

    Does anyone have news about Mr Amaral's book? That book needs to come out in England and all over Europe again to stir things up the right way.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I don't understand why they insist she couldn't leave an unlocked apartment. As the Guest author has written a child of four could slide around the curtains and slide open the door. They would have no trouble doing the same to close it over and what child of nearly four couldn't climb over a safety gate if they wanted too.

    She still hasn't explained how Madeleine was supposed to come and find them if she couldn't do any of this either.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Kate over acts so badly, her silly puppy dog eyes, sighing, frowning, same old same old....and him, christ what an idiot the way he looks down at whoever is interviewing him, with disgust,silly silly man not a lot of intelligence there to say he is he looks at the heart scans (NO he isn't a heart surgeon or cardiologist), also I believe this sitting apart is too much too late.......................................THEY ARE FINISHED!!!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ah, curtains....

    Has anyone been daring enough to ask them who washed the curtains and why? I'm sure that one can't be explained away as a 'tea stain'...and even if it were a 'tea stain' then that's the job of blooming Housekeeping, isn't it??

    ReplyDelete
  40. @37 Exactly my thoughts. One of the greatest missed questions in the years of interviewing was Jenni Murray on Woman's Hour, after 'Was she asleep when you left?'. The follow-up should have been a gentle: 'Did you tell Madeleine what to do if she woke up and found you not there?'

    Possible answers to a 3 year old. Would it be:

    a) 'Lie quietly in the dark until we come back.'
    b) 'Come and look for us'
    c) 'Open the window/door and shout really loudly'
    d) 'Don't panic'

    or perhaps, as appears to be the case, none of the above.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Joana could you please clarify 'collective mistake' collective for Gerry and Kate or tapas 9. If it is tapas 9 he seems to be prepared to drag them with him

    ReplyDelete
  42. @41 I didn't write the article, but the "collective mistake" means the Tapas 9 group "mistake", if you call leaving children alone a mistake, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Very intersting that Gerry's 'strongest memory' is this same picture, it could have been something like I remember Madeleine running and laughing having fun with her brother, sister and friends.Bizarre...

    ReplyDelete
  44. I remember when I wasn't yet one year old and I could not walk yet.I remember my brother's birth when I was not yet 2 years and one month old and I remember it very well and the comments about the new baby.

    39, washed the courtains? Of the living room? I never heard of washed courtains, excepted for in Holland. Who said that?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Thank you for your clarification, I thought it was incredible that Gerry mentioned the 'collective mistake' it seems to me that 'their pact of silence' is threatened by a member of tapas 7, is he trying to intimidate his good friends?

    ReplyDelete
  46. THEY CAN RUN BUT THEY CAN'T HIDE

    Bravo Miller! Brilliant intro....thought-provoking deductions... so, now we know the patio's sliding doors were open (the attempt to create an alibi, gives it away) AND the curtains too, because common sense dictates so.

    With so much wino running through their veins "positive thinking" took over and the motto became: "Que Sera, Sera" (...)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdhAfMor9BM

    Which brings me to a theory I read here sometime ago about the possibility of the McCanns' (one or the other) having an "unconscious death wish" to get rid of her elder daughter - now they had "designer twins" and Madeleine had become a surplus nuisance.

    I found it all a bit farfectching (the unconscious death wish that is) but in retrospect Sigmund Freud might have not. The commentator certainly didn't. I cannot find the posting now but "unconscious death wish" and "thought-materialization" is all that I remember.

    Naturally for a parent to have, much less admit, a "death wish" towards his/her own child is tantamount to swallow (literally) a Ronaldo's hat-trick which is the reason why (the commentator argued) the Unconscious is often referred to as the "Shadow" or "Inner Demon".

    "Unconscious death wish" or not, I always felt more inclined to the hypothesis that Madeleine had wandered into the night (through those sliding doors IF not a main door "accidentally" left opened) and met her nemesis outside - some piece of cake of some description. At one stage, I even believed Jane Tanner's human chameleon!

    The problem with my pet hypothesis was ONLY an accidental death at home made sense, in terms of the forensic evidence in general and Eddie's nose in particular.

    Now, when PhotoPinto (in the previous posting) suggests the parents would have called an ambulance instead, if there had been an accident, I am not so sure they would have done that if the child was dead by the time they found her.

    Why?

    BECAUSE the McCanns' (and their friends) were painfully aware they had left very young children alone and unattended and they might have to stand trial for that in a country they perceived as belonging to the "Third World" (racism kicks in)...

    So as smart, educated and "problem solving" medical specialists with a future ahead and two tots to bring up, they would rather hide the inconvenient truth. Obviously!

    I think what is happening here is VIPs (e.g. David Cameron) who identify and sympathize with the McCanns' dilemma, if nothing else because they too sit up high up in their culture's ideology, are well aware the parents are likely to involved. They have to - by the very same reasons Amaral arrives at the same conclusion. The difference is the VIPs feel a lot of compassion for the couple and Amaral (after all that has happened to him) does not.

    Personally, if that was in my power, I would let the McCanns' get on with their lives IF only they stopped their "image dry-cleaning" gagging anyone left, right and centre who disagrees with their stupid, "official version of events" AND worst, looking for scapegoats and attempting to destroy individuals and families like Gonçalo Amaral's - to quote but one (Robert Murat would be another). The McCanns' attitude is ugly not to say cynical and sinister.

    My advice to them is to "repent and you will be forgiven" by us people, if not by the Galactic Spirit or whoever is sitting in Mission Control, somewhere deep in hyperspace watching their every thought, noting every lie, each "reputation management" stratagem...

    They can run but they can't hide...

    ReplyDelete
  47. @46 The alleged "death wish" was something that Kate McCann said on an interview with a Chilean TV back in 2007. The program is called 'Informe Especial' [Special Report] with Mirna Schindler, broadcast by CTN, August 2007.

    «Kate said, "It really isn't easy," coping. "Some days are better than others. ... There's days when you think, 'I can't do this anymore,' and you just want to press a button, and we're all gone, and it's all finished, and we're all together and gone. Wherever. But you can't, you know. Just occasionally you'll have a -- if you're having a really bad day, which we do. And you can't help but think that."» in http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/05/earlyshow/main3334438.shtml

    Video extract http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAiWzkThkiA

    Full 'Informe Especial' here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ufMR6JcovQ

    ReplyDelete
  48. Joana at 30

    I know from personal experience with the "no win-no fee" system in the UK that you get all the compensation you are awarded (if you get it) minus a "success" fee (variable percentage - 5% in my case).

    We simply don't know the deal the McCanns entourage struck with Carter-Ruck or Isabel Duarte/Rogerio Alves. Incidentally, Marinho Pinto's "witness fee" will be dealt with by ID and/or RA on behalf of the McCanns'. My assumption.

    The lawyers fees are paid by the looser along with other costs.

    So with Carter-Ruck at least when the McCanns' loose (e.g. could happen with Tony Bennett) they won't have to pay Carter-Ruck (provided they followed their advice throughout).

    I am not sure about the compensation plus expenses they will have to pay Amaral in Portugal since that is no win-no fee for sure! The figure will be astronomical but again they could have been insured for that eventuality. There are insurance companies (usually off-shore companies) that do that.

    This is how it happened with me in the UK but mine was NOT a defamation case.

    In sum:

    In the UK under such agreement, you get ALL the compensation you are entitled to (minus a small percentage)IF you win. You lawyers fees and other costs are paid by the loosing part.

    If you loose the case you don't have to pay a cent to your lawyers provided you followed their advice throughout. My solicitors made that clear to me from the on-set. Likewise, any compensation due to the winning part (assuming you are the looser) will be handled by an insurance company.

    Now, I understand from your comment that such a system (no win-no fee) does not exist in Portugal which means the McCanns' will have to foot the lawyers bill as well as the compensation bill which could be astronomical - no wonder Kate is writing books and giving interviews to cover for that eventality.

    I mean even if Amaral gets only £2 million in compensation and Isabel Duarte & Rogerio Alves charge £500,000 each in fees (and Marinho Pinto gets £250,000, say) the revenue of the book "Madeleine" alone will cover that.

    The McCanns would still have had a good shot at dry-cleaning their image and no doubt the show will go on and the money will keep pouring in.

    There is no biz like showbiz!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Kate and Gerry are very different from each other.
    He doesn't feel comfortable when he lies, something he does nearly all the time.
    He touchs his head, nose, ear, his neck all the time. And you can see it in his eyes.
    Kate has a 100% hysterical personality: she acts, she suffers, she believes in her role. It is a psychopath with no feelings, imo.
    I wonder if she really ever loved somebody.
    And I wonder who insisted on hiding the crime, he or she?
    It could have been him with his "we can not change it". "we can not change it". (let us make the best of it?)
    Or it could have been her, planning an escape route through Brown and the British media.
    During the first years she was looking wonderfully on the interviews. That was before the Met got involved in the case.
    She is an old woman now.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Joana at 47
    Thanks for the links. What she said on record does seem to provide some psychoanalytical evidence of the presence of a "death wish" in her.

    The argument of the commentator however, if I remember correctly, was that unconscious thoughts often materialize as "accidents" as if on cue. These are usually of the kind in which the victim or perpetrator says "You can't blame "me"! (for what "I" did or happen) mostly because someone else does it and the person did NOT consciously wished so.

    Say X feels her child might have an accident but this does not necessarily mean X will cause it to happen. It WILL happen by means of another agent, Y say or the child herself. It is as if thought itself has an executive power of its own even if the body in which it happened is not involved in the outcome.

    Again this points to an Holographic Universe where all minds are connected at some level. You cannot possibly be charged for a "crime" of this type for it transcends our present concept of Reality, our understanding of ourselves and individual free-will. Free-will may be nothing but "white noise".

    This was my understanding of the commentator as I recall it. I must admit it struck a deep chord in me. I hope he/she is reading.

    Logging off now. Good night.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Besides her fear for the Met, Kate must feel guilty and I believe she misses Madeleine. At the beginning, after she went back to England, she started to look better and better. On the Breakfast video of the BBC, 2008, she looked perfect. Even last year when she launched her book she was not looking bad, wearing her expensive ring.
    It is unbelievable how she could get so old in such a short time.The pressure on both must be umberable. They can get the Met at their door at any moment, this will happen, for sure. No Clarence to support them, too expensive.
    The last time I saw him near the McCanns was on May the 12th, before Cameron's torpedo was announced. Now they have to economize, as much as they can, because they will need more lawyers in the future. Will Isabelita defend them in Faro or Portimao? They can choose Alves, who can convince better.I don't like him but I must admit he is competent.
    No leaks from the Yard and I regret it. Next Thursday or Friday we will hear if Isabelita brought the books back and, yes or no, I hope we will get a new interview with Amaral, with leaks. Not only we but the McCanns want to hear more too.

    ReplyDelete
  52. KM: "my view hasn’t changed you know since 4th May really, and that is, that a man took Madeleine. And that man was the person who our friend Jane Tanner saw carrying a child away from the area of the apartment"

    AMiller: "what possible reason could Kate McCann have for stating 4th May and not 3rd?"

    I think KM says the 4th because it was on the 4th that she first learned of JT's sighting.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Firstly to 46: This is all about accountability and responsibility. And a good dose of RATIONALISATION both for the inner psyche and the conscious conscience!

    What if Madeleine had exited the apartment, either via the front door (see JT's Roggie statement that they left their's was DEADLOCKED, so their eldest daughter could NOT get out) and met her demise.

    The whole issue of accountability and responsibility changes, ball back in the McCanns court. Since it was their neglect even within the bounds of responsible parenting that Madeleine sufficiently old enough to exit.

    Before people take a leap into the higher realms of British Society that accept the McCanns style of parenting, i.e. Cameron, Rebekah Brooks etc, just think of the path they have trod before, Blair, Brown, Branson, Beckham, Kennedy(Everest) etc

    But who stands alongside them on any platform that they chose to speak from? Where is the line up? Where are the seven who shared their holiday and ''collective'' decision making? Where are their family, friends and colleagues?

    What are people so afraid of ?

    One might even ask where is the face of the McCanns, Clarence Mitchell.

    The former Justine McGuiness, Ester McEvy (now MP and former Fund board member)

    Fast now approaching the fifth anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance and of course the children’s Spring break, only a few opportunities for the hype, then the respectful silence

    PS: I don’t think children remember very much about anything, particularly before they can actually talk. What most of us remember when we are young, that happened when we were younger, that is say you are eight and remember something when you are two; this usually is reinforcement by family, with photos or if you are fortunate video. Notice how you really only remember important events that are reinforced. And of course you can only ever remember & subsequently recall that you experienced in the first place, unless reinforced. If the twins were asleep when Madeleine disappeared, THEY HAVE NOTHING TO REMEMBER. In subsequent years their recall will only be the traumatic events of what happened around them over the passing of time

    IMHO the only information that twins might have held would have by now been told to the parents, through play and casual conversation. Everything else they now experience is what they have learnt since they were older; exactly what do 7 year olds make of a sister's bedroom that is a ‘time capsule’

    As for the MET & the future, sorry it’s still down to the LUCKY BREAK. Too much water under the bridge

    PUDDLEDUCK

    ReplyDelete
  54. @ 52

    'I think KM says the 4th because it was on the 4th that she first learned of JT's sighting.'

    Morning,

    Thank you. I think you are absolutely correct.

    As I said I did not believe her stating the 4th May, to be a mistake - not in an interview where generally, in case of McCann couple the questions are pre-prepared, their responses rehearsed. It had to have been introduced with a specific purpose in mind. The reason though eluded me.

    What you say makes perfect sense.

    They are very much at the moment (ahead of the libel trial) going 'all out' to promote, not only their innocence, by way of introducing the Prosecutors Final Report, making damning statements against the Portuguese Police, but highlighting Tanner's sighting, proferring as absolute proof of an abduction.


    GM:

    "The Prosecutors final report was very clear, actually unequivocal, there was no evidence Madeleine was dead. And there was no evidence that we were involved but certain people have chosen to ignore that information."

    KM:

    "My view hasn’t changed you know since 4th May really, and that is, that a man took Madeleine. And that man was the person who our friend Jane Tanner saw carrying a child away from the area of the apartment"
    ----

    What is interesting though is that on 3rd May 2007 Kate McCann "knew" instantly that Madeleine had been 'taken' Not a thought to the child perhaps having wandered, but that she had been 'taken' (we will assume she is referring to an abduction by a stranger, and not taken by someone Kate knew, someone she was aware was going to 'take' Madeleine, remove the child from Apt 5A)

    In which case her 'view' that Madeleine was ABDUCTED goes back to the 3rd May 2007 when she "discovered" the child to be missing, but her view/opinion as to the who/why/when/how she is attaching to the time she supposedly became aware of Tanner's sighting - 4th May 2007.

    Therefore:

    On 3rd May 2007 her 'view' then and to-date, is - that her daughter Madeleine was abducted.

    On 4th May 2007 her 'view' then and to-date, is - that her daughter Madeleine was abducted by the man/person seen by her friend Jane Tanner.

    It would seem then, this statement was carefully crafted, the purpose of introducing the '4th' to the mix was no more than a ploy to promote the Tanner sighting. And, in so doing she/they completely dismiss that of the Smith family!

    Kate did say in reference to Tanner sighting:

    "And sadly I don’t really know anything else since."

    This current campaign smacks of desperation.

    Spooked perhaps by the SY Review, the upcoming libel trial? Or, do this couple, for whom it seems, ‘money is their master’ simply have another book to sell, and any publicity, any tactic will do to further their aim?

    Kate's response in interview to a question posed -

    "All I can say to people is please, please, read my book."

    Whatever drives this couple to behave in the manner which they do it is clear to me at least it has not a thing to do with finding this child...

    One would have imagined they could not sink lower... but it seems their descent is still in progress new depths yet to be reached...

    Thanks again @ 52

    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  55. @52, but wasn't it on the 3rd of May, that she knew immediately that she had been taken.

    ReplyDelete
  56. 48@ as far as I know, books bring very few profits to the writer. It is between 8% and 10% and the rest is for the editor, stores, costs of material, transport. Nobody becomes rich by publishing anything unless he is Rowling himself.Check on internet, please. That's why Kate will publish her Errata. She will make more money if she becomes a milk woman or a baker.
    If it happens like you describe above, I don't understand how could they burn such a lot of money (2 and a half million) in such a short time.Probably 48% of income taxes of the fund but still they burned a lot of money. Gerry staying in the most expensive hotel of Portugal, which he did, is not enough to empt the fund.

    ReplyDelete
  57. @52 "I think KM says the 4th because it was on the 4th that she first learned of JT's sighting."

    Except Jane Tanner might have told her straight away. You don't know that. If she didn't, then it may mean they planned it afterwards - as the draft plans on Madeleine's exercise booklet suggest.

    You may be right about the 4th in one respect. The plan was drafted after things quite down on the early hours (4th) when the "Reputation Management Team" first got together to plan events ahead.

    OK, anything is possible except you sound as if you have been influenced by the McCanns "Official version of events". You must try and remain lucid at all times least you end up being brain-washed like the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anon 51 "Alves, who can convince better.I don't like him but I must admit he is competent."

    Rogerio Alves you mean? Competent? All factors remaining constant, he would take quite a beating from Santos de Oliveira. Fingers crossed, for we know there are political strings being pulled via David Cameron-Passos Coelho-Cavaco e Silva-Marinho e Pinto...

    ReplyDelete
  59. I just read the letter to Cameron, on McCann Files.
    I think Cameron started his morning felling sick and vomitting, although I believe he is not pregnant.
    Again a signature of Kate and Gerry's, something that will not impress him at all. He has seen it so often!
    How come so few people signed that letter? I expected a long list.
    This all means Kate and Gerry know they will lose a lot in the future and they need their money for the trial. Let us wait and see.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The Guardian is publishing Kate and Gerry's protest against the new law in England.
    The McCanns'hobby is to present themselves as victims.
    If this new law is accepted in England, I hope the British media will tell more about what they know.
    And I hope Amaral's book will be publicised in England.

    ReplyDelete
  61. #52 wrote:

    "I think KM says the 4th because it was on the 4th that she first learned of JT's sighting."

    Sorry, I have to disagree! The Tanner "sighting" was included in the "written timetables", the ones that were written down on the cover of Madeleine's sticker activity book (which they ripped apart to do so), and were given to the police when they arrived. Those lists, which accounted for all the movements of each member of the group from 8.45pm to 10pm of the 3rd May, were "concocted" by the group BEFORE even calling the police, and I strongly believe it was a collective work, ALL members of the group(Tapas9) participated in their creation, Kate included! Gerry certainly was one of the "creators", would he keep Kate out of it? I think not...so, she must have known about Tanner's "male abductor" even before the police arrived.
    IMO, A. Miller spotted something important, another of Kate's "faux pas"...

    You can see the timetables here(timetable 2 is the one which includes Tanner's sighting):

    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id30.html

    ReplyDelete
  62. Who is Santos de Oliveira?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Sorry, in my comment to #52's, I forgot to add that "timetable 2" is signed by...GERALD!
    And also, a correction:- "timetable 1" also mention's Tanner seeing a stranger carrying a child, but it is in #2 that her "sighting" is stressed as something important, Gerry outlined it in a "box".

    ReplyDelete
  64. @58 Marinho e Pinto political colour is right on the other side of those three you've mentioned. Remember he actually defended Socrates regarding the Freeport case in a OA [Lawyers Order] bulletin - which I find extraordinary since the Freeport case is now on trial, and at the time of said bulletin was under investigation by DIAP. Oh, by the way, in that bulletim Marinho e Pinto accused the PJ, yes the PJ, of "framing" Socrates, of fabricating the Freeport case. Ref. http://www.dn.pt/inicio/portugal/interior.aspx?content_id=1182705&page=-1 For those who missed it, it was said at the time, in 2007 [post-arguido escape from Portugal], by some that Gordon Brown and José Socrates tit-for-tat exchange involved the McCann affair for the Freeport case. Ref. English investigation of Sócrates coincided with the height of the McCann case and the negotiations of the Lisbon Treaty

    ReplyDelete
  65. @62 search this blog and you'll find it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. The 3rd or 4th, well yep it's all written on those book covers. Was MRS McCann specifically informed that her assumption of abduction was confirmed by the sighting of JT before MIDNIGHT, who knows?

    But wouldn't time have stood still from the moment of 10pm (ish) on 3rd May

    What does become important, whether she knew or not, we all assume she did, why the slip?

    PUDDLEDUCK

    Joana many thanks for keeping the blog open and taking the care to respond. Much appreciated

    ReplyDelete
  67. My goodness, I was convinced that the UK government had gotten rid of the McCanns and that all their politicians would work in peace, after the Yard got involved in the investigation.
    It is obvious that it is not the case. The McCanns wrote again Cameron or, at least, they signed that letter.
    I see them again approaching the media, complaining.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I woulod advise the McCanns to get divorced, like they demanded Amaral and his wife to do, and to safe 50% of their fortune for Gerry, who is not responsible for the death.
    Kate can go living with her parents in Liverpool, like Amaral is now living with his father, what about this idea?
    And Gerry could hire a room at the Payne's, till this mess is over and he and Kate would get two rooms for years and years in a prison in Portugal.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Joana - thanks for reminding us of the post from 2009 " English investigation of Sócrates coincided with the height of the McCann case and the negotiations of the Lisbon Treaty". It`s good to look back and see things from a new perspective after much water has flowed under the bridge.
    Louisee

    ReplyDelete
  70. Gerry has dyed his hair!!!

    ReplyDelete
  71. @44,

    http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/01/madeleine-mccann-facts-in-beginning.html

    See "Blood on the curtains"

    ReplyDelete
  72. anon @45

    Well spotted in the mire of McCann claptrap - you guys don't miss a trick. 'collective mistake' - heavily-loaded words and chosen very deliberately by the squirming doctors.

    Five years after the event, these are not the words one would expect from the father of an abducted child, IMO.

    The words definitely have the sinister ring of a not-so-subtle threat about them.It's an old trick. Rupert Murdoch used it to sublime effect in the Leveson enquiry.

    ReplyDelete
  73. The open letter (ref:McCannFiles.com/The Guardian 26/03/12 -
    "Dear David Cameron: Full text of the open letter on legal aid bill The Guardian") appears to have seven signatories:
    - Christopher Jefferies
    - Gerry and Kate McCann
    - Peter Wilmshurst
    - ROBERT MURAT
    - Hardeep Singh
    - Nigel Short
    - Zoe Margolis

    ReplyDelete
  74. Some marriages, are made in heaven, this one was made in hell, this pair are matched in every evil way possible. She I would say is the most mentally unstable of the pair, he may crack under pressure, she never will. She really believes this fairy story of the big bad man taking her child really happened.
    She from day 1 has played the victim its a role she loves attention at all costs. She is the worst of the pair, she has no feeling Maddie, it over and she thinks done with now. She has forgotten the wolves are waiting and are very hungry.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Just crossed my mind that Mr Ellis, mentioned here Good Riddance Mr. Ellis and here WikiLeaks cables: UK police 'developed' evidence against McCanns as well a few other English diplomats [McCann Case: Freedom of Information Act on John Buck former Ambassador] commissioned to Portugal in the period of 2007 to 2010 should be, if not questioned, at least talked 'nicely' with as to their action in May 2007, by those who are performing a full case review of the Maddie case.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anon 61 & 63 who wrote:

    "Those lists, which accounted for all the movements of each member of the group from 8.45pm to 10pm of the 3rd May, were "concocted" by the group BEFORE even calling the police, and I strongly believe it was a collective work, ALL members of the group(Tapas9) participated in their creation, Kate included! Gerry certainly was one of the "creators", would he keep Kate out of it? I think not...so, she must have known about Tanner's "male abductor" even before the police arrived."

    I was not aware the "master plan" they drafted on Madeleine's booklet was handed to the police on the 3td thus my wrong inferences (#57 on 27/03/2012 12:14).

    Your trail of thoughts is brilliant.

    :d Joana, could you please ask your administrative to fax this to Scotland Yard? Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  77. Thanks Joana!

    I saw the interview as I live in Sweden. What I reacted strongly to is when Gerry at the end says: "I mean There are times when you just think - I cannot do this, any more, em its too much - and particularly the attention that’s comes through the media, but as Kate says that bond with us, and with Madeleine and for Sean and Amelie, and even if you wanted to I don’t think we could stop"

    I think that means that he is tired of this circus, but can not stop the carousel. And you can see a little smile, that he can not keep from laughing. It's so macabre.

    ReplyDelete
  78. The first two Tapas 9 time-lines, that appear on Madeleine's ripped book cover pages in the process files, were written by Russell James O’Brien, according to his rogatory interview.

    McCann Case: Russell James O’Brien Rogatory Interview Part III-A

    “As a significant witness to assist the Portuguese Authorities in their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine MCCANN in Portugal on the third of May, two thousand and seven. I would now like to move on to some time lines and we have, these are copies of written documents or time lines written on the back of, looks like a kiddies book or something”.

    Reply “Mmm mmm”.

    1578 “An activity book. If we could just for a few moments go through these documents”.

    Reply “Mmm mmm”.

    1578 “Which one came first”?

    Reply “Erm as we discussed the other day, I’d forgotten these over the year but I think this is an attempt, this is a draft attempt, they’re both in my handwriting, this is a draft attempt, err and then I think I’m transcribing in a slightly more a neater writing, hoping that it’s more legible for other people to read as well, so I think this one came first”.

    1578 “So just to differentiate between the two documents”.

    Reply “Mmm mmm”.

    1578 “One of them has the word ‘Gerald’.”

    Reply “Mmm mmm”.

    1578 “Written towards the lower half of the document and the other one does not”.

    Reply “Yeah”.

    1578 “You’re saying the one with ‘Gerald’ written on it, was the final document”?

    Reply “Well it was certainly second one, I said I think I was writing this down in a hurry when I”.

    1578 “It came after this, this first one”?

    Reply “It came after this one yeah, yeah”.

    1578 “So the one that doesn’t bare the name of ‘Gerald’.”

    Reply “Is the earlier one”.

    1578 “Was the first attempt, the earlier attempt as you say. When was this drafted up”?

    Reply “Erm this was drafted er around the time that the initial pair of Officers from the PJ came to 5A (inaudible) early in the morning of the fourth of May, two thousand and seven so erm I can certainly recall writing some of this, I think perhaps the neat, maybe the neater version erm sat down at the table in Gerry’s flat with Gerry erm Dave PAYNE and at least at some stage of it, the two Officers from the, from the PJ”.

    1578 “What would have been the time difference between these two documents”?

    Reply “Er that I’m not too sure, I think what, what essentially I’m doing, is I’m, I’ve written something here fairly quickly for myself and then I’ve looked at it and thought it’s, it’s not actually gonna be useful to hand to anyone to read other than me, so I think they’re probably not that far, I’ve written that and then I’ve sat down, perhaps I was writing this with that being on my knee or something and never sat down, but I don’t, I don’t recall the time difference but, but we’re looking at from what I describe about my activities in the run up to this, to these being within you know, a short space of time, half an hour, maybe even less, I don’t think I wrote this, had it in my pocket for a night, the other thing that makes me think that is, is probably the front of the back cover of a book”.
    00.04.32

    1578 “Yes”.

    Reply “So I’ve probably, I’ve probably written it, thought that’s rubbish, even I can barely read it, let’s start again, I don’t think there’s much time difference”.

    1578 “If we look at the ‘Gerald’ one”.

    Reply “Yeah”.

    1578 “You have a recording at nine thirty”.

    Reply “Yeah”.

    1578 “Russell O'BRIEN in 5D”.

    Reply “Yeah”.

    1578 “What does that read”?

    Reply “It says with poorly daughter”.

    1578 “Oh sorry, with poorly daughter”.

    (...)

    ReplyDelete
  79. The Mccann couple i find very creepy and scary, an unfeeling cold as ice pair who are bound together in their web of lies and deceite,hopefully the day will come when the other decide's to come clean and tell all, until then we will have to put up with their bollox and begging bowl.

    ReplyDelete
  80. 73@ Os McCanns não param de encher o saco, coitado do Cameron.
    E isso não vai passar, não.
    Deve ser super chato ser advogados deles também. É a expressão "mala sem alça", aquela peleja para carregar.

    ReplyDelete
  81. What a silence about the review. When are we finally hear more about it?
    How far are the Met now, what are their suggestions and ideas, we don't know.
    I believe that after reviewing everything they will write a report to the Home Office and it will take a long time.
    And then the Home Office will agree with the opening of the process. The blanket and Madeleine's drugged hair will be enough to open it, I guess.
    Not that she died of medicines but why was she using them and was the need of using them the cause of her death? Was she too tiring during the night? For four years?

    ReplyDelete
  82. I think tomorrow is the 10th day, warned by the judge.
    If Isabel Duarte is wise, the books are already being brought to where they belong.
    Isabel, remember Kate's words to the twins "you should not take things that don't not belong to you"
    ( Do as I say, don't do what I do).
    Bring the books back.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Excellent article - Thank you A Miller.

    Having watched the video of the Stockholm interview and Kate describes how far away from the Tapas they were - I kept wanting to say "but you couldn't even see the window of the room where your children were sleeping" so I am pleased you included a map showing just exactly where and how far away so it is obvious to readers. Why do they (Kate and Gerry) continually repeat these lies and why are they accepted, no matter how obvious they are? I suppose the answer is because they can.

    @1 Totally agree - the poor children will have been brainwashed - it would be foolish to believe otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  84. 83@ The UK Home Office can't open anything, the process is out of their jurisdiction, Portugal is not a colony of England - even though certain Portuguese lawyers, head of the LO bars (former and current) and a hand full of PR's bow to English interests. Only the Portuguese Public Ministry can reopen the process, and then only the Portuguese Judiciary Police has the status to make a criminal investigation to the Maddie case.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Joana

    86

    Scotland yard have been ordered by the Home Office to review the case using hard earned British tax payers money for absolutely nothing positive regarding what really happened to Madeleine . It's a scam that's for sure .

    ReplyDelete
  86. @70 "Gerry has dyed his hair!!!"

    So what? That's what you do when you are a celebrity prone to media gossip. Looks are important. The fact is Gerry has just won a contract to promote "Brylcreem". Because you're worth it!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anon 77 "I was not aware the "master plan" they drafted on Madeleine's booklet was handed to the police on the 3td thus my wrong inferences (#57 on 27/03/2012 12:14)"

    Sorry I stand for what I wrote afterall. I am "#57 on 27/03/2012 12:14" - after reading the following (PJ Files quote by Joana Morais above). I was right!

    "1578 “Was the first attempt, the earlier attempt as you say. When was this drafted up”?

    Reply “Erm this was drafted er around the time that the initial pair of Officers from the PJ came to 5A (inaudible) early in the morning of the fourth of May, two thousand and seven so erm I can certainly recall writing some of this, I think perhaps the neat, maybe the neater version erm sat down at the table in Gerry’s flat with Gerry erm Dave PAYNE and at least at some stage of it, the two Officers from the, from the PJ”.

    ReplyDelete
  88. IS THE TRIAL "GONCALO AMARAL VERSUS ARAGAO-CORREIA/ISABEL DUARTE/McCANNS' POSSE TOMORROW?

    Joana, kindly keep us updated on the outcome. Fingers crossed. Best of luck (and Justice) for Dr. Gonçalo Amaral!

    ReplyDelete
  89. If Jane Tanner hadn't been so handy to provide that supposed sighting of the 'abductor', then her husband might have have been looked at much closer, being as he said he was away from the table for some time tending his sick child just before Madeleine was declared missing.

    Tanner and he were also quick to jump on the bandwagon of pointing a finger at Murat saying he was around that night, which subsequently turned out not to have been true. Did they ever apologise for what they put him through?

    If Tanner's supposed 'abductor' sighting is discredited, what chance suspicion would then focus on her husband? Can he prove he was tending his sick child and washing sheets that night by providing 'independent' confirmation of this? It does not appear so from the statements, except by those of their pals, but would they count as 'independent'.

    Although not apparent on the face of it, of all the members of the Tapas friends, the two who had been closest for some time were Jane's husband O'Brien and David Payne, as these two had lived together. Jane and her husband Russell knew Fiona and David Payne better than they knew the McCanns.

    Jane Tanner certainly managed to steer suspicion from all her Tapas pals, including Gerry, by that sighting on hers, and there was David Payne sitting it out completely, and no checking at all of the children done by him that night, as on the previous night.

    A fair bit of short bouts of sickness amongst the group too, children included, though they all looked fit and active. Given they mention there was sickness amongst them, where was the common sense in leaving children alone when it would not have taken long for a child to have been sick and choked to death.

    Also, why the emphasis by Gerry McCann from the get go of a paedophile taking Madeleine. If the body of Madeleine had been found would it have shown signs of this to back up what he was saying? Why be so insistent on this? Then he went on to say something about 'a moment of madness, an accident'. Surely it can't have been both!

    I hope SY will be questioning the Doctors Gaspar as well as the Smiths.

    ReplyDelete
  90. @ 83 1:38

    I`m not sure we will get to hear anything officially because I believe the report SY make to the Home Office won`t be released into the public domain. So maybe it will only be the people that requested the review that will see the report, i.e. Home Secretary,David Cameron and the McCanns. I may be wrong but the only way we are going to hear anything is via the press and leakages.

    ReplyDelete
  91. 87/08.8JAFAR
    2º Juízo Criminal
    Processo Comum (Tribunal Singular) Autor Ministério Público
    Demandante Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral
    Arguido Marcos Teixeira da Fonte Aragão Correia
    Arguido António Pedro de Andrade Dores

    Julgamento ou Audiência final 29-03-2012 9:30

    http://www.citius.mj.pt/portal/consultas/ConsultasAgenda.aspx

    Faro - Tribunal Judicial de Faro

    ReplyDelete
  92. Joana... I well understand about what you mean when you say only Portugal can agree to 're-open the process'... But I'm pretty sure also that the case file of a missing child, in both the UK and Portugal, is NEVER CLOSED. It isn't really closed now in Portugal. It's only a shorthand when we all ask for a 're-opening of the process'... The case is merely shelved... which surely just means that the police and the judiciary are currently not willing, for good reasons, to do any more work on it. The reasons being that the process of investigation was brought to a halt... deliberately ... because of the lack of co-operation by most of the main protagonists... refusal to answer questions, refusal to take part in a 'reconstruction'... a swift high-tailing it back to the UK and so on. 'There is no new evidence' say the Portuguese police, and that is almost certainly true, especially if the lack of co-operation prevented any more new evidence coming to light. Of course... a reconsideration of the loads of evidence already collected, especially a re-consideration of whether certain elements of it previously excluded because of 'intrusiveness' into privacy (!) or something similar, could, after all, be admitted into the process, might mean both sets of police would agree to further delve into what really happened when Madeleine disappeared. Am I over-simplifying the position? The whole thing seems a mad waste of time and money for both police services if they are simply not allowed to consider the blindingly obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  93. @70,perhaps gerry thinks Sandra Felgueiras will be watching as i am sure he has the hots for her,lol

    ReplyDelete
  94. 86, Joana, if that is the case, I hope the Yard will talk privetely with the PJ, on the name of British authorities, requesting the PJ to reopen the case. Or requesting the public prosecuter. Maybe the British Ambassador would privetely request the public prosecuter.
    As you can see, the British government still did not get rid of the McCanns, they again signed (wrote)a letter to Cameron, complaining about something.
    I believe the English government are 1000% behind a future trial, supporting it, otherwise they would not have made that much money available for the review.

    It is not a whitewash because they were clean since 2008, no stains anymore on them put by authorities, no official suspicions, they are as free as a bird in the sky. A whitewash was not necessary.

    That Cameron's sentence "That you are so corageous, over such a long time, and don't give up, speaks volumes." (translation: you will continue being a pain in our anus, for eternity, if we don't find a way to eliminate you out of our lives). That is what he said.

    And we don't know what Theresa May wrote them. I'm convinced that it was not a very nice letter otherwise the McCanns would have publicised it.

    On the same way Brown pressured Portugal to liberate the McCanns, Cameron could now put pressure again, asking for a trial.

    Let all of the public prosecuters read Kate's book before they make a decision.

    ReplyDelete
  95. 86@Joana, a couple of hours ago I commented your reply to me (thank You) I miss it here. At the end of my comment I advise all of the public prosecuters to read Kate's book.
    Did you receive that comment of mine?

    ReplyDelete
  96. FORGET MURAT VERSUS TANNER TRIAL! THE "FUND" MUST HAVE SETTLED IT OUT OF COURT...

    Chances are Murat has entered a deal with "The Fund" and settled out of court. No doubt the deal must have been worth it...

    ...otherwise, how would you explain Murat signing the very same letter the McCanns' recently sent to David Cameron? Tribal loyalties pure and simply? Hmmm...

    Read:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/mar/26/mccann-open-letter-david-cameron?intcmp=239

    Whatever one might have to say about Clarence Mitchell's Tony Blair/Gordon Brown's "weapons of mass destruction" and all that Jazz, his global "reputation management" consortium (Burson-Marsteller/Lift Consulting) has successfully managed to transform two lucky, very lucky VIP suspects AND proven child-neglecters (Moita Flores) into a multi-millionaire couple with considerable political leverage and global appeal.

    SO MUCH FOR YESTERDAY'S NEWS; BRACE YOURSELVES FOR TOMORROW'S...

    ...outcome of Gonçalo Amaral versus Aragao-Correia - the McCanns', the visionary lawyer paid by Metodo3/McCanns to try and assassinate the character of Goncalo Amaral which he did - with a little "Photoshop" help from the President of the Portuguese Lawyers Association (Marinho e Pinto). I wonder who paid him for that? Any ideas?

    Aragão-Correia will be defended tomorrow by one of the very expensive Portuguese "designer lawyers" working for the McCanns - Isabel Duarte (...)

    Oh! And by the way these are not "no win-no fee" lawyers. It is all very well for the McCanns' to write to David Cameron to defend "no win-no fee" agreements and then prevent others such as Gonçalo Amaral from defending themselves when it is convenient for them (...)

    Best of luck Amaral!

    ReplyDelete
  97. Joana, I expect you to stand up very early tomorrow morning and to put your head out of your window and to watch if you see Isabel Duarte and Rogerio Alves passing by with the books.
    If they don't, wait till the GNR comes along, going towards Isabel's home.
    And please tell us.

    ReplyDelete
  98. 92, of course we will hear some few things. It is of public interest and besides there is the international dimension.
    If they do A, they will do B too.

    By now forensic laboratoriums became already a lot better than they were 5 years ago.
    What was still impossible in 2007 is probably very well possible now.
    Five years in science is a lot of time. Who knows those two British dogs have already learned to speak and they are about to tell what they found out four and a half years ago. We have to wait.

    ReplyDelete
  99. The interview mentions DNA traces in the car. It's not so much DNA as cadaverine in the car and the multitude of other locations, objects and clothes that cadaverine traces are alerted by British Police Dogs. This is what the interviewer should have asked.

    ReplyDelete
  100. "IT SAYS WITH POORLY DAUGHTER?"
    WOTS GOIN' ON?

    1578 “Russell O'BRIEN in 5D”.

    Reply “Yeah”.

    1578 “What does that read”?

    Reply “It says with poorly daughter”.

    1578 “Oh sorry, with poorly daughter”.

    (...)

    (No further comments)

    McCann Case: Russell James O’Brien Rogatory Interview Part III-A - as quoted by JM above. Thanks! Now we know for sure :d

    ReplyDelete
  101. Process Gonçalo Amaral versus Aragão Correia is postponned, April the 18TH.

    ReplyDelete
  102. 87/08.8JAFAR
    The defamation trial of Marcos Aragão Correia and António Pedro de Andrade Dores was postponed to 18th April

    http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/noticia.aspx?contentID=56438E9A-F2D6-42B5-827B-B5CFE50FD967&channelID=00000021-0000-0000-0000-000000000021

    Amaral is live on tv SIC now commenting some criminal cases

    ReplyDelete
  103. I am 100.
    Joana, did you put your head out of the window this morning and did you see Isabel Duarte walking by?

    ReplyDelete
  104. Is this normal procedure to postpone so often or is there a specific legal reason?

    ReplyDelete
  105. Progress made in more possibilities in forensic tests can be a reason to reopen a process. It seems there is a lot of progress since five years ago. Let us hope it will be reopened.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Anon 99

    The charge against Tanner of 'calumny' is a criminal offence, not a civil offence, and I would think there is therefore no chance of settling that out of court, though it would be interesting to see what the Portuguese have to say about that.

    ReplyDelete
  107. If a crime occurs in Portugal, and the accused and the victim are both UK citizens, would the trial take place in Portugal under the portuguese justice system, or in the UK under the UK justice system?
    It's interesting that a crime which took place in Albufeira has just been dealt with at Nottingham Crown Court under UK laws.

    ReplyDelete
  108. 100/106 We don't live in the same neighbourhood, her office is a few kilometres away.

    107 Marcos Aragão Correia and António Sousa Dores delayed the court trial, were they are arguidos accused of defamation, for the second time. My guess is that they're trying to force that trial to take place at the same time of the McCanns libel action against Gonçalo Amaral to create havoc and simultaneously to prevent Gonçalo Amaral's only lawyer to perform his job effectively. Even though there isn't a date set yet that action - the McCanns one - could take place from late April forwards, April inclusively, June, July, September, still this year, even if, in my opinion, the McCanns have lost all basis for said 'civil action' when they lost the injunction that banned Gonçalo Amaral's back in October 2010. April 18 is apparently the new date for the trial against MAC and ASD. http://is.gd/l7loUu

    ReplyDelete
  109. 109 There are no settlements out of court in Portuguese law.

    ReplyDelete
  110. @110 That was merely the extradition proceeding, the trial will take place at the country where the crime was committed - Homicídio na forma tentada, that is, Attempted Homicide.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Correction to my comment at 111 * when they lost the injunction that banned Gonçalo Amaral's book back in October 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  112. 107, often postpone can happen everywhere. I know a case that happened in Massachussets that was postpone for several reasons, during a couple of years.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Joaqna, what could happen to Isabel Duarte if she does not bring the books back today?

    ReplyDelete
  114. McCanns in Stockholm. But why?

    Why Sweden? Why now?

    ReplyDelete
  115. anonymous @110, Joana @113
    Remember Gunnar Dorries the german citizen who killed his lover and daughter in Algarve nearly two years ago?
    German authorities refused to extradite him and he was trialled in Germany a few weeks back.
    I remember some cases where crimes committed in Pt were trialled in other countries.
    The opposite is also true. Duarte Lima is one possible case.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Gerry McCann reinforced the 'last photo' as being genuine by saying this was his last memory of Madeleine.

    Being as many don't believe the photo to have been taken on the 3rd May when she was declared missing, perhaps Gerry was telling the truth about that, because if she had died earlier in the week, then that may have really been the last photo and his last memory of her.

    ReplyDelete
  117. I hope the McCanns will be trialled in the worst country, Portugal or UK.
    Bad prison, cold, not allowed to often receive visitors: maybe in the USA, great, of in Congo!
    Somewhere in Lima (Peru) there is a horrible prison. Let us try to place the couple there.
    Crime against children is punished by prisoners themselves, all over the world.
    This is known.

    ReplyDelete
  118. 110, yes.
    Now, there is a trial totally British, of a British gang who tortured a british guy in Algarve due to a case involving drugs. The guy was kept prisoner for 13 days, they chop one of his ears and some fingers. A story of horror to trow on Marinho Pinto faces when he says that a couple of British didn't went to Algarve to murder their daughter. Nobody said, they went to do that, but in fact, an evil behavior is transversal to societies and the British are not an apart society.

    ReplyDelete
  119. @Joana and @121 Crime location albufeira, uk perp, uk victim, yet all court proceedings and sentencing were in uk, maybe its because the crime was first reported to uk police rather than to portuguese police, but it shows it is possible. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-17548443

    ReplyDelete
  120. I honestly think that after nearly 5 years, that they actually now believe their lies. Maybe it's the only way that they can cope with the awful truth of what happened during that holiday?

    ReplyDelete
  121. Having listened to this pair for near on 5 yrs,i wonder what thier neighbours and the people at the twins school really think of them, having neglectfull or worse parents in their vicinity.

    ReplyDelete
  122. @124 i live about 7 miles from rothley and from what ive heard ppl cross the road rather than walk past them ,i cant imageing them being too popular ,these villages tend to be devided between those born there and outsiders, bet most of them are fed up of him

    ReplyDelete

  123. Hi there, awesome site. I thought the topics you posted on were very interesting. I tried to add your RSS to my feed reader and it a few. take a look at it, hopefully

    I can add you and follow.

    No Win No Fee

    ReplyDelete