Wednesday, December 7, 2016

The Case of Madeleine McCann: Part Two


The disappearance of Madeleine McCann continues to draw strong interest in the UK and the United States.  The case is in headlines today, with more investigations into child sex rings.

In the original analysis, the conclusion was "deception indicated" and in content:

  Madeleine died in the apartment and the parents conspired to cover up the unintended death by hiding her body.  This information came directly from the parents.  This is the sole source of information:  the words of the parents.  

But since this interview was years later, and since time for processing information impacts language, what about statements and interviews made immediately after reporting Madeleine kidnapped?

This is the second in a series of articles of analysis of the statements made in the immediate aftermath of reporting her "taken" from their apartment in Portugal with the question:

Will the earlier statements affirm or contradict the analysis conclusion? 

Here is the 2nd statement made by the McCanns shortly after they reported her missing. 

Will this statement affirm the original analysis?  

Will it affirm the analysis of the initial statement?

Or, will they now tell us that Madeleine has been kidnapped, and give the public the tools it needs to recover her?

Objection:  police may have helped prepare the statements. 

Answer:  

1.  We analyze the statement itself; this is a basic principle in statement analysis.  

We also look for additional authors (it is not here), particularly with law enforcement "lingo" to enter into the statement.  This would be seen in "height, weight", etc.  

2.  If police had assisted, we would likely see a direct plea to the kidnapper for Maddie's return and care, and we would see a description for the public to help find her.  

May 5, 2007


"We would like to make another short statement related to Madeleine's disappearance.

"First of all we would like to thank everyone here in Portugal, the UK and elsewhere for all your support during this extremingly... extremely difficult time for our family.

"We are pleased that the family liaison officers from Leicestershire are now working closely with the Portuguese Police, and in keeping us informed. We have no further information regarding the investigation but appreciate the significant efforts everyone is making on our behalf.

"We would again like to appeal for any information, however small, that may lead to the safe return of Madeleine.

"Finally we would like to thank the media for respecting our privacy especially that of Madeleine's little brother and sister."

"We would like to make another short statement related to Madeleine's disappearance.

"First of all we would like to thank everyone here in Portugal, the UK and elsewhere for all your support during this extremingly... extremely difficult time for our family.

"We are pleased that the family liaison officers from Leicestershire are now working closely with the Portuguese Police, and in keeping us informed. We have no further information regarding the investigation but appreciate the significant efforts everyone is making on our behalf.

"We would again like to appeal for any information, however small, that may lead to the safe return of Madeleine.

"Finally we would like to thank the media for respecting our privacy especially that of Madeleine's little brother and sister."

The first statement released showed a priority that did not include kidnapping, or recovery of the victim.  This showed agreement with the original analysis of the interview.  Here is the 2nd statement made by the McCanns after reporting their child, Madeleine, kidnapped.  


We would like to make another short statement related to Madeleine's disappearance.

In the language of the statement, Madeleine has not been kidnapped; she has "disappeared."  This distances the statement from the assertion of kidnapping.  Please see analysis about the window in original. 

Next, we note that not only do they avoid a commitment to kidnapping, changing it to "disappearance", we find further distance to it by seeking to make a short statement that is only "related" to, not about, the "disappearance."

From the statements, we should not say that the victim is kidnapped because the parents will not.  

We now see the introduction of a numeric, with "First", calling our attention to priority: 




"First of all we would like to thank everyone here in Portugal, the UK and elsewhere for all your support during this extremingly... extremely difficult time for our family.

1.  The priority is in thanking everyone; not in the kidnapping.
2.  The order has "Portugal" first.  Recall that Portugal police are first responders.  
3.  This is called the "ingratiating factor" where guilty parties wish to "make peace" with law enforcement, the public, or anyone who might question them. 

With the numeric, this "public relations" message is the priority; not the victim. 

4.  This continues with the suffering of the family, while avoiding what the victim may be experiencing.  



"We are pleased that the family liaison officers from Leicestershire are now working closely with the Portuguese Police, and in keeping us informed. 

Parents of a failed recovery rarely show "pleasure"; instead we have displeasure due to the failure of the police to locate the victim.  

The family liaison officers and police are not working together:  the family liaison offers are now working "closely" (unnecessary) "with" police.  The word "with" between people shows distance.  The unnecessary emphasis of "closely" combined with the use of "with" between people show the psychological distance. 

No word of concern for what the victim is experiencing in the hands of kidnappers.  



We have no further information regarding the investigation but appreciate the significant efforts everyone is making on our behalf.

Here we have a very strong signal of guilt, found in truth.  They are pleased and they appreciate...

the failure to locate Madeleine.  

We find this in the language of guilty parents of missing children--they are grateful for the failure to find the victim.  See DeOrr Kunz for samples as he heaped praise upon those who failed to find his son.  


"We would again like to appeal for any information, however small, that may lead to the safe return of Madeleine.

The distancing language continues.  This is something they "would" again "like" to do, rather than do it.  Here there should be two things:

1.  A direct conversation with the kidnapper... pleading for Madeleine's treatment and return; 
2.  A direct description to the public at large to spot Madeleine 

Parents of missing and kidnapped children seek to gain as much media exposure humanly possible and become panic stricken when media attention dies down:  

"Finally we would like to thank the media for respecting our privacy especially that of Madeleine's little brother and sister."

The McCanns have repeated their call for less media attention.  

Analysis Conclusion:

The second statement made after Madeleine was reported missing affirms the original analysis.  

We cannot say that Madeleine McCann was kidnapped or "taken", as the parents will not say so.  

They express no concern for Madeleine, further affirming that the victim is beyond parental concern. 

The "ingratiating factor" is the priority of this second statement:  they wish to be on "friendly terms" with those who would investigate and be suspicious of them.  This is another signal of guilt.  

The parents were not truthful about what happened to Madeleine and continue to indicate knowledge of her death.  

If Madeleine was kidnapped, particularly by a sex trafficking ring, the parents' parental instincts would be evident.  Instead, they direct us to Madeleine's death, that they said took place in the apartment in Portugal.  

18 comments:

Samantha Gledhill said...

I'm not surprised at all that this analysis backs up your original. I believe that any statement given by the McCanns that you analyse, will inevitably bring you to the same conclusion; That Maddie is dead and the parents know this and where she is x

Anonymous said...

Peter, off topic but do you have analysts or investigators you work with from France? I would love to hear their take on this.

This is the talk of civil war:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9174/france-decomposing

is it accurate? under reported?? exaggerated I hope??!!

Thanks....

katy May said...

This analysis is true to its word.. I wonder what the analysis of the The other holdiday members/friends statements hold. They would be very interesting to decipher.

Randie said...

Marbles leaking out! I love analysis!

Anonymous said...

Interesting response from the Oprah Interview 2 years after the event...

Oprah: Do you believe she is still alive?

Gerry: There's absolutely no reason to believe that she's not alive and I think that's the key thing and...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Interesting response from the Oprah Interview 2 years after the event...

Oprah: Do you believe she is still alive?

Gerry: There's absolutely no reason to believe that she's not alive and I think that's the key thing and...

I believe that's a good example of when an "embedded admission" is not.

Ps..

I'm not saying you said it was , lol

Anonymous said...

OMG.......did you see this on Michael Moores twitter?

DisruptJ20: Call for a bold mobilization against the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017

On Friday, January 20, 2017, Donald Trump will be inaugurated as President of the United States.

We call on all people of good conscience to join in disrupting the ceremonies. If Trump is to be inaugurated at all, let it happen behind closed doors, showing the true face of the security state Trump will preside over. It must be made clear to the whole world that the vast majority of people in the United States do not support his presidency or consent to his rule.

Anonymous said...

The anarchists will cause a security stae.

Nic said...

Do you think after the dust settles, Hollyweird will finally learn that their (political) opinion doesn't pay? I am going to be so much richer at the end of the month on account of avoidance. On.Every.Level.

Nic said...

I've been watching Richard D. Hall's documentaries. I'm half-way through Part 3. He's done a fantastic job researching and presenting the case.

Anonymous said...

Michael Moorer wants the streets blocked with protests, but wants the entrance to Dunkin Donuts kept clear.

Anonymous said...

Agree with Nic.

Nic said...

Peter said,
1. A direct conversation with the kidnapper... pleading for Madeleine's treatment and return;
2. A direct description to the public at large to spot Madeleine


They can't even feign protective parental skills when given the opportunity to write the script.

Scarlet said...

I believe the McCann's know what happend to their eldest.daughter.

However, I struggle when I must think of any scenario which include seven other people, all of them parents and with good jobs, will agree to cover up such a thing.

Two or three close friends? Maybe, but even that is stretching it.

I am aware of the Gaspar statements, but they can't all be wired that way, can they?

Habundia said...


"First of all we would like to thank EVERYONE here in Portugal, the UK and elsewhere for all your support during this extremingly... extremely difficult time for our family."

Though Portuguese police was the first to arrive the statement didnt say police.....it says EVERYONE..in Portugal but also in UK and elsewhere.
If the pheadofile ring theory is taken into this....could it then be they also thanking those who the child was "dissapeared" too? (kidnapped)

Habundia said...

Why not? Then you need to know how they met one another.....ive red about kids thats are only conceived (and not reported as born) to use for "sale"....how horrible it sounds it happens.....and these people do have ways to find each other and to get together to use each others children or whatever.....though iam not saying this is the case here....but i do believe these "wired that way" people have 'friendships' with each other....how sick that may be, so i wouldnt say it could not be.
Who knows how many have "parties", when you look at victims there are many who use their kids to be abused by others for money or drugs or out of some sick pleasure. ....we have some sick people in this world unfortunately.

Scarlet said...

Well, yes. I know there are many sick people out there, no doubt. But I still think it is a bit of a stretch that all of them agreed to cover it up, and that all of them were pedophiles /letting their children be molested.

How possible is it that four women who condone such bestiality against their own children, should meet, marry and breed with four men who feels the same, and that these four couples would meet each other, and they all being from the same level in society.

Therefor, I do not think it happened as described. Payne and Gerry were part of it, no doubt, whereas Kate knew.

The constant bathing of the children by the men is so inappropriate. Was it only Payne who did that?

John mcgowan said...

OT:

Sherri Papini is lying about her abduction just like she did in 2006

In 2006 she lied about another 'ordeal' on a skinhead blog.

https://web.archive.org/web/20071030034941/http://www.skinheadz.com/docs/instruct/2003/060101.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/MarkMyWords/comments/5f8kpb/mmw_sherri_papini_is_lying_about_her_abduction/