Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Report: Arrest Made in Madeline McCann Case

Radar online has a report that claims an arrest in the disappearance of Madeline McCann. 

The article itself shows sensitivity. 

Police in the UK have arrested a man who claims to have seen Madeline McCann alive.  Note the article claims that the Portugese police have "completely" cleared the McCanns and "closed the book" on the case.


The arrest came after a British attorney told Scotland Yard he’d met a man who claimed to have seen Madeleine alive just this past summer, the Mirror is reporting.
The lawyer thought the man credible and turned the information over to authorities.
A police spokesman told the newspaper: “A man was arrested in September on suspicion of possession of drugs and conspiracy to distribute indecent images of children. He has been bailed pending further inquiries. An investigation is ongoing into this matter and it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”He declined giving any details to the Mirror, saying only, “I cannot risk compromising the investigation or the search for Madeleine. If she is alive but now but disappears again, I would never be able to forgive myself.”
Statement Analysis of the parents has indicated deception and knowledge of Madeline's death.  

72 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Radar Online article is incomplete. It is reporting off of an article from The Mirror. The Mirror article gives a lot more information. The man who was just arrested is not the same man as quoted by Radar in the "arrested in September" paragraph.

Two different men. The man who was arrested was arrested on Sunday.

S + K Mum said...

Peter, what is your opinion on Gerry McCann saying when Madeleine was born she was 'almost perfect'?
What would make him say 'almost'?

Penny Subbotin said...

Modesty maybe?

Skeptical said...

The McCanns must need money again. This latest action on the case also diverts attention away from the trial in Portugal.

s + K Mum said...

The new efits are intriguing, the Smith family later claimed to be sure it was Gerry they saw. Is SYard trying to rule Gerry out? What if they can't?

charlotte from denmark said...

Gerry has a peculiar way of carrying a child, and it was this that made the Smith family believe it was Gerry they saw that night.

And of course it was.

But I have to slow clap for a man like Gerry, an obvious psychopath. How well he has come out of this mess.

This is just my opinion.

Anonymous said...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-british-man-arrested-2366183

Apple said...

"The man featured in two e-fits released by UK police investigating Madeleine McCann's disappearance was seen carrying a child towards the beach."
EEK

http://mobile.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24513267

Anonymous said...

So they seen someone on the security cam at 9:15 and stopped watching the tape? Or did they see a man also at 10:00 way back when? They could not be sure it was Madeleine, but they went with the 9:15 because it fit the parents story time wise? How long would it take to sneak a child out of the building? Mom checked on her at 9:05 and she was gone, did they check the security cams before that time?
They obviously couldn't be sure it was Madeleine in any instance, so why not look into them all when it is a child's life at stake?

"If she is alive but now but disappears again, I would never be able to forgive myself.”
Is the first but a typo or sensitivity?
"but" usually weakens what is said after "but". This cop does not believe she will "disappear" AGAIN. He is lying about forgiving himself. He knows there will "never" be that need as that was said in the negative.

elf said...

The sketch they released yesterday looks like Gerry McCann. I wonder what the guy(s?) they arrested look like?

Shayna said...

Madeleine had a defect in the iris of one eye. It looked like the black of the pupil was slightly smeared into the colored iris. I can't recall the medical term, but Gerry, as a doctor, may have thought the defect made Madeleine less than perfect.

Anonymous said...

I noticed one of the parent's friends (who was present at the dinner) spoke about Madeleine in the past tense during her first police interview in May 2007.

"Madeleine Beth McCann WAS a sensible child, very loving, very active and fun. She likED to play. She "WAS" intelligent and the interviewee does not believe that if a stranger approached her that she would not shout."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id231.html

ME said...

Hobnob!!!! Wheres Hobnob!!!! I love Her analys on this case,Her and johns.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I noticed the new all out PR campaign in the news. I figured their $$$ team must be hard at work again for some reason. Their egos won't let go of this. When the dog smelled the cadaver, that was it for me. No one ever had to say another thing. They know she's gone.

sha said...

My son and I both had our jaws drop when we heard Gerry say "she was almost perfectly formed" when she was born. Who the hell says that "almost perfectly formed".

Anonymous said...

Peter, I would be interested in your opinion on the mother in the following child neglect case:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/14/twin-babies-found-neglected-brandy-dominguez-amy-castillo_n_4097373.html

Hobnob said...

Hi S + K and ME

i'm glad i'm not the only one that caugght that, i shouted WTH at the TV, scaring my puddytats.

I knew it was going to be a whitewas and it was.

Somehow they managed to find someone who might have been the guy tanner saw carrying a bundle (bundleman) even though she could never have seen him from where she was, no mention was made of her walking around wilkins and gerry ( she nust be the invisible woman) they had light shining onto Maddies bed despite the shutters being closed, curtains drawn and sodium lighting with cuddlecat in 3 different places in 10 seconds.

They have to clear gerry so they focused on the Smith sighting which allowed more time for an abduction. They completely erased david paybe's visit to kate in her towel with angelic toddlers dressed in white. They erased any mention of cadaverine and body fluids found in the apartment , clothing and hire car. This is actual physical evidence, it exists, it cannot unexist. How do they explain this with what is now claimed to be a pre meditated abduction?

The problem with a premeditated abduction as claimed is there is not one atom of evidence to show it took place, there would be something such as fibres, prints on the floor, skin cells, hair etc. Hell they were hard pushed to find evidence of maddie and the twins being there is was that cleaned.
if we go with alleged abduction and kate thinking they did a dry run (yeah really all this for a toddler not a vip) why not take her when they had the chance the previous night? why break in look at her and say yep we a re good abduction tommorow and leave. it isn't gonna happen, they would have grabbed her when they had the chance since they had no idea if the mccanns would continue with the non checks, the sedation etc or if they would saty in the last night or take the kids with them.

It simply isn't believable.

There was lots of you knows and indifferent shrugging from kate and gerry's classic she was born almost perfect, which i had been there i would have asked wbat do you mean by almost perfect?

The show last night was farcical, i called the met today and after a crash course in SA told them wahat was concerning and examples ( 48 questions, pressing the button etc) I also said if you seriously want to solve this case and not be part of a white wash, contact Avinoam Sapir and let him have a look.

Anonymous said...

"She likED to play. She "WAS" intelligent and the interviewee does not believe that if a stranger approached her that she would not shout."

Past tense noted, but also what about "interviewee" ? Is she referring to herself? How's that for distancing? And is she saying she believed Madeleine was not abducted by a stranger?

Buckley

Anonymous said...

Buckley, the statement is written by police ABOUT what Jane Tanner (interviewee) told them. (it says: " Jane Tanner in a statement to the Policia Judiciaria 4/5/07" )

Other people's statements were put in similar form by police for the report, but all of them referenced her in present tense.

john said...

The McCann Files:

Everything you need to know.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/

S + K Mum said...

SY going back to the beginning....the parents have to be ruled out first I assume, so with that in mind I think the Smith sighting efits could go either way....they could get another witness claiming to be sure it was Gerry or be able to rule him out if someone else is ID'd.
I don't think it's a coincidence that very little has been mentioned in the past by the McCanns about the Smith sighting.
The McCann's released the Tanner efit - why didn't they compose an efit of the Smith sighting?

Anonymous said...

Missing 27 year old in Milwaukee. Read the roommate's statement

http://www.wisn.com/news/south-east-wisconsin/milwaukee/search-grows-for-missing-milwaukee-woman/-/10148890/22433850/-/1034c7ez/-/index.html

kmn

Anonymous said...

Well, if Tanner's statement isn't a direct quotation, I don't see how it's very reliable for analysis.

"but all of them referenced her in present tense."

Nope. Two men, a nanny... That's just eyeing the page quickly...

Buckley

GetThem said...

What is going on with law enforcement in these other countries? Just pathetic.

Anonymous said...

"Nevertheless, she reports that Madeleine was calm but active and energetic and well brought up."

Witness states that as she was an intelligent child, timid at first contact, and who later felt more comfortable, was a child who conversed normally for her age, and was of a calm demeanour. She adds that it was usual for Madeleine to be called "Maddy", as this is how she [Madeleine] presented herself to the witness.
- OC nanny Charlotte Pennington in a statement to the Policia Judiciaria 7/5/07

john said...

The pathetic thing about the E-fit is.It is based on a sighting 6years ago..

What they have failed to do is,apply age progression to the e-fit..People change from day to day,be it a beared,a haircut etc. 6 years is a long time. Can you remember someone you briefly seen in the supermarket the next day,never mind 6 years later ?..

# puts head in hands and gives up #

S + K Mum said...

I know John! I mean look at how much Kate and Gerry have aged in 6 years.
Anyway I'm sorry, that's not nice of me.

I believed them in the beginning you know, but the more I saw them, the more I felt uncomfortable. Too many contradictions, too much control.

My youngest left the dance floor on holiday and I couldn't see her. This was 6 years ago and I can tell you every detail - what I shouted, the first place I looked, the second place I looked, the people who were there, what they said to me, everything. She had walked up to where my husband was at the bar to ask for a drink. It probably wasn't even 2 minutes but it felt like hours in slow motion. I was a complete wreck, my husband had to take me back to the room because I was shaking so much.
I can't help but compare.

dadgum said...

"She had walked up to where my husband was at the bar to ask for a drink"

lol

I hated losing my kids. One in a pizza game area, and one at an air show. We were all looking up. Of course. The grand finale. We look down, the 4yr old is not there.
150,000 people leaving all at once, crying kids in tow..no one would notice one more.. No cell phones back then.

My oldest headed to one area, husband to another..I ran with the baby to the control tower. Middle kids stayed put with a toddler. We found him chatting casually with a helicopter pilot group. I thought I was going to die. 28 years later, I remember each detail, and the frantic panic..

Peter Hyatt said...

Get Them

What has happened to Law Enforcement in our country?

deals with lawyers;
FBI sexting with druggies
low solve rates...
Poor training

police are reduced to speed trapping for money, rather than protect the public; even from dangerous drivers.

john said...

Hi S + k Mum,

Myself personally thinks Kate is on the brink,She does not look well at all..And there is a part of me that feels for her.She has to live with what happened for the rest of her life for one reason or another..

Maybe its my paternal side coming out,i don't know..As for him,well, i will not express my feelings towards him here...I think you know what i mean.!!

Anonymous said...

Guilty parents act one way, they stall, they seek to stop the flow of information, they misdirect. Innocent parents react very differently.
You react swiftly. Madeleine McCann was discovered missing at 10 o'clock. At 10:10 the hotel security was alerted. By 10:30 the hotel staff and guests were looking for her and the police called. The McCanns were on TV less than 24 hours later pleading for her return.
Speaking of the missing person in past tense indicates knowledge that they are dead. In their Christmas interview, some 8 months after Madeleine’s disappearance, the McCanns speak of Madeleine in the past tense only to relate events that had occurred in the past. All current talk of her is present tense, she is, she has, she likes. Even in the interview analyzed here on SA, which was conducted 3 years after Madeleine went missing, they are still using present tense. There is one exception “She played tennis.” The day she went missing, Madeline had played tennis for the first time. I think we can safely assume she has not played since and past tense is appropriate.
You call out for the child, use her name. In the first public statement Gerry McCann says Madeleine's name 3 times in a 92 word statement. In another interview, 100 days later, Kate McCann says Madeleine's name 22 times.
You are not satisfied with police while your child is not found. You pester the police and keep asking questions. The McCanns hired private detectives after the Portuguese police declared it a cold case and stopped working on it. Every year they show up on TV still searching and still asking everybody else to continue to search. They've asked for reinvestigation. They've asked for DNA testing. They've asked for the timeline to be looked at again. They’ve sent around new composite pictures only this week.
You tell the truth. I cannot find any direct Q&A where either of the McCanns are asked if they killed Madeleine. The police statements are written in 2nd person format so there is no way of knowing if “When asked if he had any responsibility or participation in the disappearance of his daughter Madeleine, he peremptorily denies this.” was a reliable denial. However, when the police pressed her to take a deal saying Madeleine's death was an accident Kate McCann refused, saying "They want me to lie. I'm being framed."
The McCanns’ case was closed, the Portuguese police didn’t have enough evidence and let it drop. The McCanns could've gone away and quietly went on with their lives like the Selises, the DePietros and the Bradleys. Those families clammed up and the general public has pretty much forgotten them except for Peter Hyatt and the readers of this blog. The McCanns take every chance they get to plead for Madeleine's return, keeping her story alive and in the public consciousness.
I think the McCanns are guilty of making a terribly bad choice that night, but I do not think they are guilty of murdering their daughter or even accidentally killing her. I hope this new arrest will lead to some answers and hopefully Madeleine’s return.

Anon J.

Anonymous said...

But Greater Manchester Police have 'categorically' denied any link between the arrest and Madeleine, saying it had 'nothing to do' with the continuing investigation into the youngster's whereabouts.

A GMP spokesman told the M.E.N.: “I can categorically say that no one has been arrested as part of the Madeleine McCann investigation.

“It has nothing to do with Madeleine McCann, that's all I can say.”
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/police-deny-manchester-man-held-6180591

S + K Mum said...

They refused to do the reconstruction for the Portuguese police. It was requested by the PJ so that the timeline could be established as the statements given by the group contradicted each other. That would have been a great opportunity for them to have the timeline looked at again.
I say refused but it was avoided by them and their friends, lots of different reasons were given...all of which must have been more important than the search for Madeleine.

marietje said...

I'm stumped on this one but this from the BlogSpot Missing Information. Re: The Crimewatch broadcast about Madeleine McCann.

Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008
Cover note
Detective Branch
Drogheda
County Lough
Re – Investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

I took an additional statement from Mr Smith as requested. His wife does not want to make another statement. I showed him the video clip and he stated that it was not the clip that alerted him but the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007.

He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor’s letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.

I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.

Forwarded please

Sergeant

L*** H****

Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008

I hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if I state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

I would like to state that the statement I made on 26th May 2007 in Portugal is correct. The description of the individual that I saw on 3rd May 2007 carrying a child is as follows. He was average build, 5 foot 10” in height, brown hair cut short, aged 40 years approximately. Wearing beige trousers and darkish top maybe a jacket or blazer. He had a full head of hair with a tight cut. This individual was alone. I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise. A clip I have seen before on the Internet. In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person. It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him. It may have been the way he was carrying the child either. I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child. I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane. After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.

Here is the BlogSpot with links to Police investigation and news articles. http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/missing-information.html.

ME said...

John,HobNob.....Reading your input is like watching an episdoe of a great crime thriller.,,.,.the clues get "exposed"I love it!And Peter for "leading"the way all i can say is THANKS.

marietje said...

I'm stumped on this one but this from the BlogSpot Missing Information. Re: The Crimewatch broadcast about Madeleine McCann.

Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008
Cover note
Detective Branch
Drogheda
County Lough
Re – Investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

I took an additional statement from Mr Smith as requested. His wife does not want to make another statement. I showed him the video clip and he stated that it was not the clip that alerted him but the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007.

He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor’s letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.

I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.

Forwarded please

Sergeant

L*** H****

Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008

I hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if I state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

I would like to state that the statement I made on 26th May 2007 in Portugal is correct. The description of the individual that I saw on 3rd May 2007 carrying a child is as follows. He was average build, 5 foot 10” in height, brown hair cut short, aged 40 years approximately. Wearing beige trousers and darkish top maybe a jacket or blazer. He had a full head of hair with a tight cut. This individual was alone. I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise. A clip I have seen before on the Internet. In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person. It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him. It may have been the way he was carrying the child either. I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child. I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane. After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.

Here is the BlogSpot with links to Police investigation and news articles. http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/missing-information.html.

Jen said...

There's no security camera footage that I know of showing the suspects, unless I missed something?


The only supposed sightings I'm aware of are the ones based on eye witness reports (some being from others in the McCann's group). The one sighting from a bystander, (outside of the group) was a man who came foward and described seeing a man carrying a young girl. When the man arrived home, (Scotland I think) he saw some footage of the parents on the news and was shocked to see the same man he believed he had seen the night of the abduction...Gerry McCann.

MizzMarple said...

I hope that an innocent person, or persons, do NOT go to jail for Kate and Gerry McCann ... that would be a travesty !

I believe that Maddie is dead -- the cadaver dog "hit" in the hotel room where Maddie was sleeping.

And what are the Portuguese Police doing ?

Kate and Gerry KNOW EXACTLY what happened to Maddie, but IF the told the truth, they would have lost their medical licenses.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rose said...

I am firmly convinced that the Mccanns were 100% responsible for their daughter's disappearance. There is no evidence that an intruder took their child, yet there is plenty of evidence that Maddie was dead inside the apartment for a time before her body was removed. KM herself cannot tell a reasonable narrative of what happened when she came in to discover her child missing. They instantly insisted that she had been abducted, even though the most reasonable conclusion would have been that she merely wandered off.

My theory is that Maddie died from an accident that was the result of the negligence of either Kate Mccann, Gerry Mccann or both. I believe this happened before dinner, likely around 7:30 or 8:00. The Mccanns, being intelligent people, came up with a fool proof plan. They would go to dinner, pretend all was normal, and check up on their children. They would both be seen the entire evening, which would give them an alibi. After dinner, Gerry took carried Maddie's body down to the beach, using the back way near a grassy knoll area where running into people would be less likely. It was at this time, at 9:55, that he passed the Smith family. He threw her body into the ocean, and was able to return to the apartment not much past 10:00, which is when Kate raised the alarm (10:10). Had the body been found, the Mccanns still would have been able to blame it on a kidnapper. After all, they were seen by many witnesses that entire evening. Their odd jog a couple days later was so that they could go up the hill near the resort and look out over the ocean to see if they could see if the body had washed up on shore.

They have repeatedly insisted that the 9:15 sighting of a man carry Maddie must have been the kidnapper. This was debunked today when the man seen that night came forward, proving it was his own daughter that he was carrying. The Mccanns are insistent that the man seen at 9:55 by the Smith family could not have been the kidnapper. If the kidnap story were true, then they would have absolutely no reason to assume that whatsoever. None. The reason they are determined to not focus on that man is because that man was Gerry Mccann.

JustMe said...

Sorry that this is extremely off topic, but can you, Peter, or anyone that's good at SA possibly analyze the contents of zetatalk.com ?? It's a site that has a HUGE following, including members of my family.
I'll give ya the gist of it.. Apparently the woman that runs the site claims that she is in contact with aliens that are supposedly trying to warn the earth's inhabitants, via telepathy through her, that our human race is about to wipe out due to Planet X or Nibiru (both names are of the same planet that so many are claiming is responsible for the earth's crazy/unpredictable weather/climate changes lately, and soon to be the dinosaur-like wipe out that is supposed to happen to us). I know it sounds silly, but from what my brothers have been telling me all her predictions have been extremely accurate. I haven't looked through the entire website, myself, because reading those kinds of things (doomsday predictions, etc.) really give me the creeps and can give me nightmares!
The site and all of it's believers claim that this is a natural phenomenon that happens every X (I forget the number) amount of years. It's supposedly what wiped out the dinosaurs.
But, please, no religion topics brought into this please?? That's a whole other ball game.

charlotte from denmark said...

What will an innocent mother do when her child is missing?

She will go searching. She will franatically search the streets, the beach, the woods, other apartments.

How much time did Kate spend searching? None. Nothing at all.

Here she is telling us:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YWCVSjIJk8

JerseyJane said...

It's super-great to see Anons taking names!;-)

If you're shy, pick a new one everyday, or stick with the one you got and be you! Welcome to ALL!!!

Anonymous said...

charlotte, that statement by the mother is so telling. Basically THEY got support, and they didn't search for her physically.

Jane Hill: "I met people who didn't go to work for more than a week because everyday they were down on the beach, searching the streets. Did you, as a mother Kate, just sometimes think 'I've got to go and be out there with them. I want to go and just physically look as well."

Kate: (Pause) I mean, I did. Errm... (Long Pause) Errm, we'd been working really hard really. Apart... I mean, the first 48 hours, as Gerry said, are incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning, I'd say, errm, but after that you get strength from somewhere. We've certainly had loads of support and that's given us strength and its been able to make us focus really so we have actually, in our own way, IT MIGHT NOT BE PHYSICALLY SEARCHING but we've been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can, really, to get Madeleine back."

LC said...

If that was My Madeline who had "gone missing" I would STILL be there in Portugal to this day, searching, waiting for answers, refusing to leave until I knew for sure what really happened......if I was innocent.

Shelley said...

I saw a show about Natalie Holloway. Her parents keep returning to Aruba to fight and actually search. They have walked the streets asking questions and at one point the dad brought some friends over and they were actually beating down doors of crack houses (that how the described it) to try to get answers. The mom also tracked Jordn down herself and got in his face and pushed him to admit he saw Natalie and they later went to his parents home and pushed them too for answers.

That is what you get with innocent parents.

Kate and Gerry are only worried about making sure the "look" innocent.

I do believe that the smiths saw Gerry carrying Maddies dead body.

And I think there had to be a reason if it was an accident, they didn't call police like the theory the were sedated.

I have heard others that think Gerry has a temper and hit Maddie too hard this time.

Shelley said...

I agree Peter! LE should be on the right side and more and more they just simply aren't. The JonBenet case is a perfect example.

The Ramsey's should have feared the DA. Not the other way around.

And these these attorneys that defend them must be evil inside on some level to live with themselves.

S + K Mum said...

The photo-fits released by SY this week were composed in 2008 by the McCann's private investigators apparently.
Why did the McCanns not release it when they released Jane Tanners photo-fit?
'Leaving no stone unturned' does not apply to a photo-fit of someone (seen by many) carrying a child matching their daughters description on the night in question? Really?
I am sure they have explained it away and I would like to know what their reasons were, if anyone knows?

Shelley said...

The other thing that crosses my mind when I see the lack of sheer emotion of the missing child, not just Gerry but many other parents of "missing" kids is that my husband, born in a life of abuse, instability, was not loved, and crying was forbidden.

Yet, despite all this and being a man that played every manly sport, excessive levels testerone who worked out 2 hours every day and most people are fearful of him (he is like a sheep in grizzley best clothes) up first meeting him...


He is kind, emotional and loves our son. He teaches him it's ok to be emotional, cry and be a good person. If our son was missing I know he would fight to the death to find him.

He also lost a sister 6 years ago and he still shows to this day crys if he sees a photo, hears her name anything.

My point is just that my husband is the poster child for a man that would just not show emotions, so that these parents of missing kids that show little emotion... And everyone protests them saying people just "handle" things different... I just don't agree. Not in the way they mean.

Clearly these parents are not heartbroken. Which only adds to the question of why.

You don't care and/or are involved. Justin Diprieto and Sergio Celis for example.

A parent that cares of their child's welfare above all else never gives up searching and shows emotion every step of the way.

Add statement analysis and you can clearly see who is responsible.


S + K Mum said...

I think there was no bond between Gerry and Madeleine. When he talks about her - it's just odd. 'Almost' perfect. Missed 'only' at family events (by other family members perhaps?).

marietje said...

Is it normal that in a panic, having discovered Maddie "taken" that Kate would not scoop up the twins and run with them back to the tapas? Would panic overtake her sense of protecting the twins? Would it be normal for a mother to leave the other children, finding that she believes Maddie was taken? Because Gerry states that Kate came screaming back to the group,"They've taken her! They've taken her!"
(And especially because she says,"Well as soon as ermm I’d discovered that Madeleine had been taken it..it just hit me straight away what she said that morning and I just thought, my God, someone tried the night before.")

Also could it be they posed her in her bed to look as if she was sleeping? Kate says Maddie was laying on her left side the last time she saw her. Kate also said she was only going to give "a listen" to the children until she noticed the door was open. Even then, according to her, she was intending to shut the door without looking in on them. Could it be she couldn't bear to look? And what Gerry said about the last time he saw her. "I’d actually stuck my head around the door and I, I just lingered for a few seconds and thought how beautiful she was erm and that’s the last time I saw her." How beautiful someone looks. That's what you say about someone in a coffin at a funeral. That made my hair stand up a bit.

marietje said...

Of course, the dog didn't hit on the bed. Maybe she was posed on the living room floor the whole time. Behind the couch where the dog got a hit. (In photos you can see the couch in in the middle of the room.) I don't think the other parent who supposedly listened in on the kids ever really opened the bedroom door. Matthew Oldfield says he checked but not hearing any noise didn't go further. It seems odd that someone as concise and efficient as Gerry is said to be, did not look further when he felt someone was in the apartment the night before.

Hobnob said...

It seems the e-fits released were apparantly hiding in their PI files and not handed on to the police as required or as they were advising the public.

This begs the question why would they not pass on descriptions and e fits to the relevant police forces?

The obvious conclusion is that it pointed a finger straight at gerry mccann and that could never happen especially as it meant a drop in the funds.

If it was the same guy as bundleman ( with the ever changing height, hair, age etc) it ,eant questions would be asked as to if it qwere an abduction why was he wandering around for 40 odd mins?

It seems also bundleman was identified early on and cleared.

Why did the mccanns focus all their attention on bundleman and ignore the Snith sighting until they were forced to in their mockumentary whereupon The smith sighting who looked like gerry was morphed into bundleman.

This was strange given they were handing out e fits and sketches of every tom dick harry and victoria beckham lookalike.

Why the vague sketeches which included russell o'brian, gerry mccann and kate mccann with a dodgy moustache lookalikes.

They had to acknowledge it despite leaving themselves open to suspicion, 1 person could be passed off as mistaken id a large family couldn't be ignored.
it got better when a mccann supporter brian kennedy who vowed to fund their search got in contact with the smeiths and ' tried to come to a deal', fortunately the smiths refused to see him or have anything to do with the mccanns. a man with integrity.

The mccanns are currently in a difficult position, tanner's sighting has been explained away ( but not wehy 4 of the group identified him as Robert Murat. They still can't exaplin the changes in timelines and checks and cadaverine. It was interesting to hear this time when talking about Maddie crying this time they were going to be REALLY CHECKING. if this was really checking, and we saw how vague that was, does this mean before thus night they weren't really checking? are they telling that despite their claims they hadn't checked all week, which would explain the 75 mins of crying heard by Mrs Fenn. Oh dear that paints are horribly neglectful parents and puts paod to the claim their checks were better that that offered by the club ( no listening services were offered due to the layout) so their none listening were better than Mark Warners non listening)

S + K Mum said...

It's interesting about the Smith photo-fit isn't it?!

Have Scotland Yard called their (McCanns) bluff?

SY can say that the McCann's aren't suspects because maybe right at this moment they aren't - that position could change.

I don't think the McCanns are very happy with the situation at the moment. A reporter asked Gerry something outside the Portuguese court about something happening in the next few days....how did he feel about something...can't remember exactly what the exchange was but it alerted the public that something was going to happen...the Crimewatch appeal. Maybe the court drama was to try distract from Crimewatch not the other way round?

marietje said...

Here is the youtube upload of the UK Crimewatch show about Madeleine broadcast on Monday. Starts at about 4 minutes in after they publicize a couple of other cases. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyJwns_MTok.

Rose said...

Statement analysis aside, I think it is clear that KM and GM are not innocent in the disappearance of Madeleine. How could you not search for your child? How is that even possible? I would go into a crackhouse to find my child. In the worst neighborhood of Mogadishu. At 3 in the morning. How on earth could these two possibly stop themselves from searching?

The only logical explanation was because they knew there was nothing out there to search for. Think about this for a second. If you were in the same position as the Mccanns, you would go literally door to door and ask if anyone saw anything that night that might lead to Madeleine. For all they knew, their daughter had wondered off, fallen down, and broken her leg. You would walk around the town yelling out her name! The Mccanns were so obsessed with convincing the world of the kidnapped narrative, that they forgot to do the most logical things.

DaAggeAgneta said...

Yes, Rose, you´re right.

Several years ago on vacation in France, my then 6 year old son was gone for maybe less than 1 1/2 hour. i was sick to my stomach and ran around in the streets and (in my poor French) asked everyone I met: "avez-vous vu un jeune garçon? Mon fils a disparu!!" I figured I had to go inside every single house and search. I thought someone had snatched him and was doing awful stuff to him.

Fortunately my son had just decided to walk up to the top of a hill close to where we stayed, but he had misjudged how long time it would take so when the sun set and the dark hit it was hard for him to find his way back.

To not search physically for your lost child is contrary to all instincts you have as a parent - unless of course you already know where your lost child is.

Just saying.

Shelley said...

Anon J. @ 5:48 PM
Actually they were asked “did you kill your daughter?” Also, it was one of the "48 questions" that Kate was asked that she REFUSED to answer. Link to the video, peters analysis and just a portion of his analysis. Go to the link to see the rest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4Jzrpx-eM
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/11/statement-analysis-mccann-interview-2011.html
Interviewer: Did you kill your daughter?
Yes or No questions are the easiest to lie to, however, we are still able to analyze responses.
If the subject says, "no" and when asked, "Why should we believe you?" and says, "Because I told the truth when I said "no", it is a very strong denial.
Therefore, even though yes or no questions are low stress questions for liars, it is still a good question when followed up with "Why should we believe you?"
Gerry McCann: No. That’s an emphatic no. I mean the ludicrous thing is erm what, I suppose what’s been purported from Portugal is that Madeleine died in the apartment by an accident and we hid her body. Well when did she have the accident and died, because, the only time she was left unattended was when we were at dinner so ...if she died then, how could we of disposed – hidden her body. You know, when there’s an immediate [inaudible but sounds like he was about to say ‘search’] it’s just nonsense. And if she died when we were in the apartment or fell and di...why would we ...why would we cover that up?
This is an important question and a vital answer. Here, I have repeated his answer, and added emphasis for the analysis:
No.
"No" is a good answer, and is expected. Each word after the word "no" becomes important. It would be best to say "no" and nothing else because in innocency, there is no need to explain.
That’s an emphatic no.
This now weakens his denial, as he repeats it (any repetition is sensitive) and calls for emphasis (another weakness)
I mean the ludicrous thing is erm what,
He is answering the question for himself, and begins with the pronoun, "I", which is good. This connects him to the sentence. We want to see him stay in the first person singular, as truthful.
"the" is an article. Articles are instinctive and exempt from the personal, subjective, internal dictionary we all possess. He addresses "the" ludicrous thing", which is now important. What is "the" ludicrous thing?
I suppose what’s been purported from Portugal is that Madeleine died in the apartment by an accident and we hid her body.
"The" ludicrous thing is now weakened by "I suppose". If it is "a" ludicrous thing, than he might only "suppose" rather than know for certainty. Something is "ludicrous" when it is not only false, but obviously false. It is ludicrous to think a man comes down a hot chimney with gifts. "Ludicrous" means to accept as false, without question. Yet, he, himself, questions it by the weak, "suppose."
When we "suppose" , we allow for someone else to "suppose" something else.

Shelley said...

It is frustrating that people will still stand by these parents despite the obvious.

Like with Anon J who I did reply too with the exact information that he claimed did not exhist.

Parents who are looking for their child search!

I mean again, Natalie Holloway.... Her parents (we know 100% for a fact are innocent) were landing in Aruba 12 hours from the time she didn not show up to fly home. The police refused to help at all. So they went to the streets. Went to the hotel, watched footage. They are the ones that got Joren's name. Mom tracked him down and got in his face and hounded him when he tried to state he has never seen Natalie. When she didnt get enough from him, they went to his parents house and tried to talk to them (also worthless). They continued to look. Went back to the streets. Went to the beaches. They hired Tim the Equu Search guy who got a ship to do sonar searches on the ocean for free. Then Tim and Dad went back and dug in landfills for anything. Still nothing. Dad then returned with friends and with some more tips, were going around knocking down doors of crack houses.

A mom in Arizona whos 22 yr old son went missing refused to wait for police (since hes older they wait longer) and her and the family went to the club he was last seen at and each walked different paths. They asked everyone along the way if they had seen him, looked and dug in every garbage can. In canals.

********************************
This is so simple! Why does everyone not see past the BS.
********************************

A parent of a missing child who wants the child found will not stop looking.

*******************************

This is not a parent who is telling us they searched. She cant even give us a clear thought. The question was about "physically searching" and shes talking about the first 48 hours, and getting strength from somewhere"

Truthful people do not have problems answering the question.


Again, lets look at Kates response:


Kate: (Pause) I mean, I did. Errm... (Long Pause) Errm, we'd been working really hard really. Apart... I mean, the first 48 hours, as Gerry said, are incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning, I'd say, errm, but after that you get strength from somewhere. We've certainly had loads of support and that's given us strength and its been able to make us focus really so we have actually, in our own way, IT MIGHT NOT BE PHYSICALLY SEARCHING but we've been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can, really, to get Madeleine back."

Shelley said...

DaAggeAgneta said...
Several years ago on vacation in France, my then 6 year old son was gone for maybe less than 1 1/2 hour. i was sick to my stomach and ran around in the streets and (in my poor French) asked everyone I met: "avez-vous vu un jeune garçon? Mon fils a disparu!!" I figured I had to go inside every single house and search. I thought someone had snatched him and was doing awful stuff to him.

***********************************

And DaAggeAgneta,

Bravo!!!! This is what I would do too.

Even now, your child is safe. And look how simple it was to say "i did this, I did that'

Its simple.


Rose said...

I instantly thought the Mccanns were lying about Maddie being abducted. I am from the US but went on a trip to the UK in the beginning of June 2007. The Maddie case was not a news story in the US at this point. I saw all these newspapers in the UK with the headlines of a toddler "kidnapped" while on vacation in Portugal. As I was reading these articles, it struck me hard that the ONLY "evidence" that Maddie had been kidnapped was that the parents said she had been. I was totally baffled as to why the papers had "kidnapped" and "abducted" on the front page when I could find absolutely no evidence in any article I read that she had been kidnapped. I asked some UK friends if I was missing something; that maybe the articles were no longer writing about something obvious. They all said no, that is the entire story. And that was when I became very suspicious.

The whole story from the Mccanns seems like a fabrication. Kate and Gerry were determined to have everyone think that Maddie had been kidnapped. That was the most important thing to them, and that is why KM ran back to the tapas bar screeching that Maddie had been "taken." There as ZERO evidence of a break in and a kidnapping, so it makes no sense at this point why KM would have concluded with certainty that Maddie had been kidnapped. No, she was working hard to convince others that this was the case. Also there constant use of the phrase "has been taken" seems strange to me. That is the phrase you use when someones dies, i.e. "she was taken from us too soon."

One final thing: I think sometimes people forget how drunk the tapas 7 must have been when all this went down. I have never seen so much drinking in my life (among normal people) before I went to the UK. Let me put it this way: I was still a drinker back in 2007, and I have since quit because I consider myself to be an alcoholic. And I thought then that the UK had a serious drinking problem. The tapas 7 had already had an early dinner, where no doubt they were drinking. My guess is that by 10 PM, most of them were at least 5 glasses of wine deep. My mom and I were joking the other day about how drunks have a very poor concept of time. I think much of the time discrepancies can be explained by this. I also think that they were experience triple the confusion because they were all drunk.

Shelley said...

And I just have say one more thing.


Don't forget...


Gerry and Kate left 2 and 3 year old kids alone in a hotel room.


Why do so many see past this.

Even Scotland Yard (or the met)




Hobnob said...

Hi Shelley, Just a heads up.

They weren't staying in a hotel they were staying in private apartments outside the Mark Warner ( ocean club) boundries.

There was no listening service as in other clubs owned by the company because the aprtments were all spread out.

There was a day creche which all made use off and an evening creche which some families made use of (not the mccanns and chums)plus and 10 euros an hour babysitting service where a creche worker would stay in the apartment.

This was refused on the grounds they didn't want to leave their children with strangers ( apparantly it was ok during the day) The mccanns claimed their listening checks were better than the evening creche and babysitting and non listening service.

There are also allegations (unrefuted) that they were having a piss upat chaplins which was 500 metres away and had to be called back by the club staff due to crying children. The club was so cioncerned about this they offered a free babysitter which was refused, they also allegedly turned away the cleaner one morning.

Anonymous said...

He thought of it as a good marketing ploy

marietje said...

Here is an interesting site which features the Vanity Fair (UK edition) interview the McCann's did in January 2008. There are some very interesting examples of what I would call verbal leakage. Example: On regret about leaving children alone, Gerry says, "Of course we feel guilty for not having been there. And that is just something we will have to deal with for the rest of our lives." Kate when told by the police that she and Gerry were being made suspects, she immediately jumps to murder, "Do you honestly believe I would murder my own child?" Here's the link. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id63.html.

Anonymous said...

''The McCanns hired private detectives after the Portuguese police declared it a cold case and stopped working on it.''

According to the McCanns, that is which like virtually everything they say a lie.

The truth. The British govt intervened at the highest level both to get the McCanns out of Portugal before they could be indicted and to get the case shelved. The case has stalled because the McCanns and the Tapas 7 have REFUSED to do a reconstruction for the obvious reason that their stories CANNOT be reconstructed without it being obvious that people are lying.

The police didn't stop working on the case - what case - they already know who did it!

As for the private detectives, the McCanns used some of the millions they've conned out of the soft-hearted and gullible to employ a Barcelona detective agency who have never found a single missing person. Why? They specialise in business and political spying.

Don't drink the cool aid. They are both guilty and their friends are obviously involved in some way too.
I honestly believe they must be part of a top level masonic/ paedophile gang. Nothing explains so many inexplicable aspects of how they have got away with murder with the collusion of the British Government!

S + K Mum said...

It is confirmed that the Portuguese are to reopen the investigation on Madeleine and that Scotland Yard will be working alongside them. Thoughts anyone?

Anonymous said...

I have read a lot about the Mccanns case and am analysing different things told by Amaral's book and police files. The biggest problem at the moment for the Smiths' sighting is the time since Gerry had alibi that he was in Ocean club at the time of the sighting, thus it's impossible the Smiths saw him around 10pm on 3rd May 2007. But I have thought about it hard and suddenly, Eureka! I got it ... to be continued (this is the first time I post any comment here. So want to check if my comments come up before I spend quite a bit of time writing everything I thought of).

Anonymous said...

continued from the earlier post. I checked the map of th Smiths' sighting, and then found the map of Ocean Club and found out the rough distance between apartment 5a of the Mccanns and the sighting point which is about 300 m even using the roads, rather than a direct distance. The sighting point is about 250 m from the beach. For a physically fit man like Gerry, it would only have taken about 15-25 min for him to walk all this distance, and possibly much less time if he had been walking fast (probably 20 min for a return journey).
Kate alerted the tapas 7 at around 10pm. Then everybody at their table except Diane Webster went to apartment 5a. You can imagine the intial chaos. Everybody started looking for Madeleine and the parents also had to attend to their own young children in other apartments. It could be that during this time, Gerry could have gone outside the apartment, claiming that he was looking for Madeleine and carried Madeleine (who probably had already been transferred outside the apartment during the early rather long "checking time" at 9:05pm (when he claimed he had to stay longer because he needed the toilet, and also extra longer time of his chat that Jeremy Wilkins only claimed to be around 3 min, but GM claimed to be 15 min). It would have taken GM about 3-5 min to walk to the Smiths' sighting point which made the time about 10:03-10:05pm.

Now come back to the Smiths. They finished their meal at about 9:45pm (receipt time). They then went to have a drink at Kelly's Bar, about 100 m away from the sighting point. They were a large group of 9 people of both adults and children and did not walk that fast. Thus to walk from Kelly Bar to the sighting point would have taken them about 3-5 min. Earlier it would have taken about 10-15 min for them to walk to the bar after the meal, ordered the drinks and finished the drinks. So add the time, the Smiths would have arrived at the sighting point abou 10:03-10:05pm which could have been the time when GM would have arrived at that point, carrying Madeleine in his arm.
Now the Smiths only noticed Madeleine's arms falling on her side. If Madeleien had died before 9pm or even 1 hr earlier, her body would not have become stiff yet because the stiffness normally commence around 3 hr afer death. So it would have been possible for GM to put Madeleine's head on his shoulder and gave the impression that she was asleep on his shoulder.
The total distance of about 550 m from apartment 5A to the beach would have taken a fit guy like GM about 10-15 min at the most for a return journey, especially coming back would have taken even less time (without a child to carry).

To be continued ...

Anonymous said...

Continued from before.

Thus if GM had done all this as hypothesised above, when he returned to the Ocean Club, he would have only been away from apartment 5a about 10 or 15 min which would have been nothing and would not have raised anybody's suspicion if there had been anyone outside their group. Of course GM's alibi that he was in apartment 5a at the time of the sighting was from their own group. But it has to be taken into consideration that during the first 15 min or so, everybody was busy doing something, such as looking for Madeleine by going through here or there, going outside the apartment searching, checking their own children. It would be almost impossible for someone to be certain that he/she had had kept a close eye on who was where and therefore could say for certain that GM was inside the apartment within the first 15 min after the alert.
Interestingly, KM told Mrs Fenn from upstairs that she had already called the police when Mrs Fenn offerred to call the police for them after she came downstairs following hearing all the commotion. However, according to the police records, the Mccanns did not call the police until 10:40pm, which would have been 20-25 min after GM had had finished the return journey to the beach and back to apartment 5a.

I became interested in this case mainly because of rather abnormal behaviours of the people involved which of course have been pointed out by large number of people, ordinary and experts alike. There has been another suggestion that the body could have been hidden inside the freezer in the church. The church is about 250 m away from the sighting point too. So that also could fit into the timeline hypothsised above. But I have failed to find further details about when they got the key to the church from the piest there.

Please call me Inspector Justice. I would very much welcome comments on this theory. Of course there have been more formed, but I am still searching for evidence to support them. You can find all the details on google (smiths' sighting point etc and the time they reported to the police).

marietje said...

Anonymous, I totally agree with you that Gerry McCann may have taken advantage of the chaos to walk Madeleine to a secret place. He knew the beach area and rocks from daily jogging. That had also been my only stumbling block, but I definitely agree it very well could have happened exactly the way you describe it. Especially with the added info that Mrs. Fenn had offered to call police and Kate McCann turned her down. I just can't get past the the dogs alerting in this case.

P.S. Before I even knew about the Smith's sighting, it hit me how much the first e-fit looked astonishingly like Gerry McCann.

Anonymous said...

Hi, Marietje:

Thanks for the comment on my theory.

I totally agree with you that one of the efits looks strikingly like GM. I put GM's pic next to this efit and showed them to someone who has not read much about this case, he immediately said that's the same person. It's the first reaction of the people who have not had any pre-knowledge about the Smiths' sighting (like you or this person I showed eft and GM' pic to) that is normally the most reliable one. Cheers, Inspector Justice

Chris Hugh said...

It seems like the father told us what happened. "She fell and di"ed.