Thursday, May 29, 2014

Why is Scotland Yard Digging There?

I just don't get it. Really, I don't. I could pick a number of places in and around Praia da Luz for Scotland Yard to dig for Maddie's body or any remaining items that sniffer dogs might hit on, but that piece of wasteland is the one place I wouldn't waste my time with (no pun intended).

I could see the searching on the Rocha Negra, the large rock that soars above Pria da Luz and which is accessible from the beach. Kate said she had a dream that the abductor had put Maddie's little body up on this rock. It is also the location I believe Gerry may first have hidden Maddie on the night of May 3, in the sandy crevices between the rocks.

I could see Scotland Yard searching beach areas where on the night of May 3 there were overturned boats to temporarily hid a body under and a number of abandoned buildings and weedy areas one could hide a body for a time. All of these areas would be past the point where the Smiths saw a man carrying a child toward the beach.

But where Scotland Yard is looking is back toward the vacation apartment of the McCanns. This would mean the man the Smiths saw would have at some point, if he were indeed the "abductor" or Gerry himself, turn around and go back with the body of the child. Go back somewhere as in his own home or vacation flat because the man carrying the child wasn't also carrying a shovel.

(Update: I wrote this post prior to today's new. The search site is now  be at a location at the left bottom of the map of Abril 25), a location where Smithman would pass the Smiths. If this is so, still a bad location to try to dig a grave (open to public eye and difficult terrain) but more likely because an abductor could have taken Maddie, passed the Smiths, and gone to his home (there are some homes down that way). Then, later he could have dug a grave and buried her in that wasteland spot nearer to the beach. Still unlikely he would have bothered with a grave at that location rather than just using it as a body dump site, but if he were worried about being connected by DNA, I would think he would have taken the body out of Praia da Luz to some barren area where no one could see him digging the grave). (Also, this invalidates any theory that the sniffer dogs were right about the McCann vehicle because the car would be unnecessary and unwise to use to bring her body to that spot for burial. It could be a temporary hiding place for Maddie and then she would have been moved to someplace like the Rocha Negra and then out of Pria da Luz, but I don't know what the police would find of use there now).

Then, after the police started crawling the area, the man would have had to go back out and start digging a hole in an area completely open to the view of anyone passing! Who in their right mind would choose a spot to spend time burying a body where everyone can see them do it? The standard rule for even body dumps is to go to a place you know you won't be seen. When it comes to burying a body, you really need isolation; either you bury in your own backyard (the Murat theory) or you find a desolate place like Monte do Jose Mestre (my theory of where Gerry may have buried Maddie) but you sure as hell don't pick a place that is open on all four sides to the street where anyone walking by will see you. I have walked by that spot and there is no way I would ever chance burying a body there.

So, unless this is simply a public charade of looking for a body near where some local abductor lives (maybe one of those burglary gang guys), I have no clue what could have led Scotland Yard to the one spot in Praia da Luz no one would even consider as a possible grave site to dispose of a missing child.

Also, for those who think that Scotland Yard is looking at the McCanns, if Scotland Yard were following the sniffer dog evidence (that hit on the McCann's hire car), they would be looking outside of Praia da Luz for a body, not right in it.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 29, 2014

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

The McCanns and the Magician Trick of Misdirection

We have a new documentary, The McCanns and the Conman (read: another criminal gets paid by the media to lie to the public) airing June 4 on Channel 5 in the UK.  It appears to be about Kevin Halligen's "abuse" of the McCanns and their fund, how he lived the highlife on money designated to find their daughter. The twist in this show is this; although the conman was ripping off the McCanns, he inadvertently did some good work, identifying the man the Smith's saw as the abductor (yeah, like the PJ hadn't already done that) and getting the Smiths to give a description that ended up as the now publicized e-fits, and somehow getting the Smiths supposedly to retract the statement that the guy was Gerry McCann (oh, wait, no, that won't be explained that way). Scotland Yard is said be basing their investigative strategy on Halligen's leads on this man (who, of course, is not Gerry).

I am sure we are going to hear in this program about how the emotionally fragile McCanns were taken advantage of by this snake oil salesman....blah, blah, blah....something that seems to happen a lot to the McCanns  (considering they also hired the Metodo 3). But, one question I am sure they are not really going to address in this documentary is why the McCanns chose this crook; why they needed a man who claimed to be a superspy and not someone with proven skills in investigating missing children's cases, perhaps a profiler or PI or an agency with solid recommendations from missing children's organizations who would charge only 1/10 of the price Halligen got, something they should clearly have kept in mind since they were supposedly using the donations of well-meaning people; they had a responsibility to use the money wisely and honorably. Also, regardless of their own theories of what happened to Madeleine, parents of missing children usually put their trust in seasoned professionals, experts who really know how the abduction of children works, who took look for, and where. But, no, the McCanns chose whack jobs, flamboyant showman who seemed to have no prior experience for the job at all. How badly did the McCanns really want to find their missing daughter?

So, yeah, why Halligen? And Metodo 3? Why them? Why not a sound, reputable fellow that would properly conduct his investigation?

I would say it is because the McCanns did not want any investigator who would focus on Praia da Luz and the evidence. Like Scotland Yard, I believe the Number One requirement for the person they hired would be 1) accepting the "fact" Maddie had been abducted, and 2) accepting the "fact" that Maddie was not abducted by a local Praia da Luz sex predator.

I believe the most important part of what appears to be a faux investigation by the McCanns is that the private detectives make the hunt a worldwide one, not one local to Praia da Luz, that all searches for Maddie be directed far away from the town and environs. Through this worldwide search into international sex rings and children stolen for adoption, the concept of what might have happened to Madeleine would become something all people fear might happen to their own children and that what happened to the McCanns had nothing to really do with the neglect of their children, their possible use of medication, the apparent death of a child in their apartment, and anything else that occurred in Praia da Luz on May 3rd, 2007. In other words, LQOK AWAY! LQOK AWAY!

Misdirection is a common magician's trick. Fool people into not paying attention to what is really happening. In this case, make people look everywhere in the world for Maddie, everywhere but where she really is and where things really occurred, look for a live child in every country money can be sent in to the fund from instead of looking for a child buried quickly on Portuguese ground. I think this is the misdirection the McCanns have been involved with for seven years.

Hence, you can't hire an investigator who is going to focus on the evidence because doing so will only accomplish one of two things: that he will be focusing in on Praia da Luz and the Tapas 9 or he will at least be focusing in on Praia da Luz and a local sex predator Neither of those scenarios keep the money coming in for the "search" fund and both of them narrow the focus down to the night of May 3 and what happened right there in town.

For the McCann's objective, an ethically challenged PI was LQOK the other way. Finding such jokers is not difficult. There is a lot of money, endless money, to be made in looking the wrong direction because this is one way to assure an investigation can go on for years and years. For that matter, looking in all the wrong places keeps the fund going for years and years as well.

The McCanns' refusal to acknowledge the Smith sighting as valid and their attempt to hide this information from the public can only mean one thing: they didn't want the man carrying a little girl toward the beach to be identified. Either it was Gerry or these parents had no interest in finding the "abductor" of their child. I would like to hear the McCanns explain that, wouldn't you?

I think the title of this new documentary should have simply been called "The Con Artists."

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 27 2014

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Monday, May 26, 2014

Why I Love My Fellow Madeleine McCann Fighters For Justice

Montel and I discuss Possible McCann Involvement in the Crime        

I have seen a lot of angry comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Message Boards concerning my last three posts laying out my reasons for why I think the Scotland Yard review is a whitewash, why I think Scotland Yard would be unlikely to spend millions and years on a probably unwinnable case for anything other than political purposes, and why I think all of us have little power in comparison to the McCanns and whatever politics lies behind this bizarre missing person's case. Some people are so angry they have come at me with ad hominem attacks or statements that they will never read a thing I write ever again. I think these volatile responses (and I am not talking about well-reasoned arguments to my analyses which I think are a good thing as it gives all of us more to think about and I, myself, learn a lot from opposing opinions) are an angry backlash that comes from fear - fear that I am right. And I get it. If I am right, it sucks.

For seven years, people interested in justice have studied every aspect of this case and spent way more time in analysis than Scotland Yard will ever put in. Some people have built and maintained websites and Facebook pages full of information about the case, sites I am thankful for and have used myself. I won't name them all here, but I appreciate each and every one of them, even those that might have issues with my take on things; they still spread the word.

So, why then my last three posts and my adamant belief in a whitewash? Why my strong belief that this case will never be prosecuted? Why my assertion that in spite of everyone's efforts, we have so little power to affect a good outcome? Why don't I just STFU?

All I can say is experience. I have seen the inside of police cases, the inside of politics in police cases, and the inside of media. I know what I know and I have always called things as I see them. People expect that of me and it would not be right for me to suddenly go silent and hide what I think is true because the truth (at least what I believe is the truth) is not that palatable. I share my experience and analyses of the situation because many people have no idea how police investigations work and how media really works; they make assumptions from outside of these worlds. I have been in them and this is why I bring you my take. I have seen a lot of stuff and while I may be wrong about my belief as to how this case will turn out, what I say I base on inside knowledge of how these things have worked in the past.

My other reason for not staying silent about what I think is going to be a stomach-turning outcome of the Scotland Yard review is to help folks keep a more rational head about what might be coming down the pike, to recognize that the McCanns being arrested is something that should be a happy surprise, not an expectation, a major triumph that would come from actually having enough evidence to proceed to prosecution and having a political turnabout that would allow this to happen. What I fear for all those who have put so much time and energy into following this case and championing justice is that they are going to be crushed if this case is closed with a patsy abductor or a Scotland Yard "expert" conclusion that the Maddie was abducted by an unknown predator and her body too well hidden or disposed of to ever be found. Personally, I would rather be on the cautious side and not get my hopes up too high when the odds are against a pleasing ending.

I know the experience of being blindsided by the illegitimate closing of cases I have worked on with police. It isn't just one time that I turned in my profile and thought the case would eventually move forward properly to prosecution or at least a proper investigation, all to have nothing good happen at all. I have had detectives tell me that my profile was awesome (with each determination supported by convincing evidence) and that they now believed in my conclusions on the case. I would leave, spirits soaring; I knew justice would now take its proper course. And then nothing would happen and the case shelved or the agency would go public with America's Most Wanted or the local press and continue down the same erroneous road they were on before I worked with them. Why? Because it was too late to get a solid prosecution (a legitimate reason why they can't do anything with the case and why I gave up working cold cases) or they are embarrassed they had been after the wrong person for so long (and aren't going to admit it) or the new focus is a problem politically. I have learned the hard way that justice is often not what all parties are working for. Politics, egos, and incompetence play a big part in what actually happens with in a portion of police cases. We don't realize this because a good portion of cases are easy to solve and prosecute because the suspect is obvious; the police just need to do a solid job protecting the scene, evidence, and rights. The difficult cases are fewer and most don't get that much media attention. The odd ones that make headlines are special cases and often are a nightmare for police departments and are "put to rest" in whatever way works best. Reality bites and it is actually far worse than many of you think it is. There are certainly ethical and highly skilled detectives out there; I have worked with some that I think are absolutely the best (I am working with some now to forward police training in criminal profiling) and these guys solve cases and sometimes very difficult ones. But then there are the other detectives and other cases; not all goes perfectly. Real life is not Hollywood.

Regardless of how the McCann case turns out and regardless of how some folks feel about me, I still appreciate the hard work and heart all of you have put into keeping the truth about this case in the public eye. Even if I feel that none of us really have the power to change the course of this "investigation," I do think we all have the power to show others and the future generations that people care and that there are human beings out there who believe in truth and justice and will put themselves on the line to stand up for it.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 26, 2014

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Sunday, May 25, 2014

How Much Power do YOU Have? How Much Power do the McCanns Have? Take the Test!

After my last few posts questioning the validity of the Scotland Yard "review" into the McCann case, a number of people have responded with two issues: one, that the McCanns don't have that much power, and, two, we the people, have a great deal of power which means it would be ridiculous, with all the outrage about Madeleine not receiving justice, that Scotland Yard would try to dupe the citizens of the UK and the people of the world with a whitewash of the case. I say the McCanns have tremendous power and we have little to none.

Let's start with the McCanns: I cannot think of ONE case of a missing child in the world where so many huge names and politicians have stepped up to the plate to protect them from a police investigation. Yes, I have seen small examples of probably guilty parents of missing children getting some media attention (Baby Lisa's parents got a nice kiss-their-butt program by Dr. Phil, but, then again, Dr. Phil is an ethically challenged TV host who is all about ratings) but that is about it. However, when the McCanns made phone calls, people came running from high places to give them assistance. And they have continued to make phone calls and get assistance in the most incredibly huge ways.

Now, here is a test for us to take to prove both the power of the McCanns and our own power. As you are sitting here, tweeting with #McCann and commenting on McCann Facebook groups. close your computer and pick up your phone. Who are you calling about this case? one. While the McCanns have dozens of numbers to call, numbers to people with power, you've got no one. Even I don't have too many useful numbers to call (a few TV producers who are not going to put me on to talk about the case just because I called; it doesn't work that way in TV unless I really had some scoop) and I can call my agent (I already did that because  Gonçalo and I want write an english language book together on the McCann case: we couldn't get an American publisher to touch it as of yet due to lawsuit issues). Okay, so I have little influence; you probably have none. Every parent of a missing child I can think of to date - pretty much none. The McCanns - unprecedented and off-the-charts ability to get support for their cause. 

So, if you think the public - and our online blogging, tweeting, and Facebooking - is going to sway Scotland Yard into doing the right thing, you are sadly mistaken. Why even the media almost always blocks comments about the case and unlike early media, I am no longer allowed to speak on the case on television. Someone is controlling the message....and it isn't us. If the McCanns ever going to go down, it will be because the political winds have changed and someone more powerful than them and their allies has changed the rules of the game.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 25, 2014

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Friday, May 23, 2014

"Find the Body and Prove They Killed Her."

No Body Here, Scotland Yard
I have read some pretty good arguments from people who think Scotland Yard is gearing up for a big surprise ending in which they (and the PJ) bring down the McCanns. Extradition to Portugal is supported by the British government and the McCanns are found guilty in a court of Portuguese law. The case against Dr. Amaral is dropped, Pat Brown's book, Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann is returned to the market by Amazon, Gonçalo and I team up for our English language book on the case (we have already had this in the works with our agents but because of the lawsuit issue right now, no US publishers will touch it), and all who believed the McCanns were guilty of the death and disappearance of their daughter will be vindicated of being vicious trolls.

If you all don't think I would like to be wrong about my thoughts that Scotland Yard is going to whitewash this case, you are seriously wrong. I want to be wrong; I will be ecstatic to be wrong. I would rather be surprised by a police department doing some really new crazy style of investigation than be wrong about my profiling, believe you me, and, I want to see justice more than I want to be right about anything.

I have already written a bunch about why I think this Scotland Yard investigation stinks, but let me go further into why, even if it were well-meaning, it makes not a damn bit of sense.

A good many investigations are dropped, not because the police don't know who did it but because the chances of a successful prosecution are slim to none. And that is what we have here. Let's look at the issues:

1) It doesn't matter that the police ran down every possible child abductor in the area and came up empty-handed. Just because they can't figure out who "abducted" Maddie, doesn't have a thing to do with proving the McCanns were involved in her death and disappearance.

2) Not being able to prove there was an abduction is not the same as proving there wasn't one. Just because there was no evidence left at the scene that proves a stranger was in the flat, doesn't mean one wasn't one there. Even if Kate's story about the an open window and whooshing curtains is suspicious and can be used as supporting evidence that the McCanns were involved in covering up a crime if other solid evidence existed, alone it cannot be used to prove they staged a crime scene.

3) The cadaver dog evidence is not admissible in court. It is great for probable cause for further investigation and it is great as evidence of where to search for a body (since a car was used, the body would be outside of, not in PDL) but it is not proof in a court of law that Maddie died in the apartment and was disposed of by the McCanns.

4) That stories changed and were conflicting and the behavior of the Tapas 9 bizarre and concerning is but more information for future investigation, but alone is not proof of homicide (intentional or not) nor of body removal.

5) There is some DNA but it has been so questioned by "experts" that a defense attorney will shred this in court.

6) No confession. Unless one or both of the McCanns confess. 

7) No credible confession from any of the Tapas 7, especially Jane Tanner, since now Scotland Yard has publicly verified her sighting, so she couldn't have been lying for the McCanns (not only that, but if Scotland Yard can't produce Tannerman, the defense would wreak havoc with that lie of law enforcement). Unless they know exactly where the body can be dug up (and there is no way I believe if Gerry McCann carried Maddie's body off, anyone knows where she is, except possibly Kate), there is no way to prove what they say is true. More than one of  the Tapas 7 would have to testify in court in order for a defense lawyer not to be able to knock the claims down. And how are they going to get the Tapas 7 to Portugal except to charge them with a crime as well and have an arrest warrant issued for England to comply with is problematic (why the Tapas 7 would even talk at this point is also quite questionable).

8) Proof that Maddie was overmedicated cannot be proven without a body; that she fell and died of a concussion cannot be proven without a body; that the McCanns moved her and buried her cannot be proven without a body. This is a huge hill for any prosecution to climb.

9) No body, no case. Really, no body, no case.

10) With all the screw-ups, interventions, media, etc., the defense lawyer would have a field day tearing apart the case.

So, prosecution is extremely unlikely to occur unless Maddie's body is found and found with evidence that links back to the McCanns or the body is found in a place that links to the McCanns (like where I want them to search at Monte do Jose Mestre, the desolate area just west of Praia da Luz where Gerry's phone pinged after he rented the hire car). Unless Scotland Yard is really looking in the right places (and not in the middle of Praia da Luz), then this case is unlikely to have a body to go to court with.

Let's go back to the beginning. The McCanns petitioned Scotland Yard to work on the case, something they would be extraordinarily unlikely to do if they really thought Scotland Yard was going to focus on the evidence. Only if they got wind through Clarence that Scotland Yard was planning a clever partnership with Portugal to bring the McCanns down and went ahead and pretended they wanted the an investigation because this would make them look innocent ...whew...yeah, it have to be something like this for the investigation to be other than a planned whitewash (unless they were truly innocent as the pro-McCanners would point out and will point out if Scotland Yard ends this case without naming the McCanns at least suspects).

Why would Scotland Yard, barring a whitewash for reasons none of us can seem to figure out, want to waste their time with a likely unwinnable case that won't even be prosecuted on home turf? Why would they spend millions and millions of pounds on this one case which has two neglectful parents and happened in another country? If Scotland Yard never got involved, the case would simply dwindle away as do all unsolved missing person cases and, in this case, it is even easier for the police to just let it fade because Portugal can be blamed and the UK police don't have to worry about the case affecting them. For that matter, they could have just spent a small amount of money sending a little team over to come up with limited results as happens all the time in cold cases.

Furthermore, it would be hugely embarrassing for Britain to admit the Portuguese were right and they were wrong, that their politicians and media broke their necks to support such a criminal couple and that due to this, they almost let them walk and they allowed them to bilk the public out of millions of pounds with their fraudulent fund. Would the powers that be in the UK really want to get their necks chopped off? I doubt it.

All of this is why I find it hard to believe Scotland Yard is planning a big coup. I think they are just following a prescribed plan which makes it looks like they tried real hard: they read all the files, did months of analysis, went to the public for tips, fought with the PJ for cooperation, found a number of reasonable suspects, recognized the child could have died at the time or sometime after the crime was committed, that she could have been buried by the perp, that they tried to find her, and now that they have done everything an investigating agency can do, especially one having to work in another's jurisdiction, and they can give the McCanns at least the most probable answer. The McCanns will thank Scotland Yard profusely for trying to find Madeleine, for finding out what likely happened to Madeleine, and for putting all those ludicrous rumors about their involvement to rest (regardless of the truth of that).

Time will prove whether Scotland Yard is on the up and up or not. Again, I really hope I am going to have the biggest surprise of my profiling life, but I am preparing for what I expect will be a major disappointment.

PS. Someone just tweeted that maybe the McCanns could be prosecuted in the UK under British law. I think that is a fine idea but they still have the problem of trying to prosecute them for a crime they can't prove as of yet. When I wrote my book, I carefully avoided libel issues (admittedly, I still got Carter-Rucked) by stating that there was as of yet no proof a homicide had occurred and no proof that the McCanns were to blame and no proof that Maddie's body was removed and hidden by the McCanns. All I said was the evidence pointed toward the McCanns making them the reasonable suspects. If I were a prosecutor, I wouldn't take the case to court unless I had a confession or a body or both.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 23, 2014

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'
Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Ten Reasons why I can't take Scotland Yard Seriously in the Madeleine McCann Case

Shh! Don't Tip Off the Suspects!
I have received a bit of heat in recent weeks for my opinion that Scotland Yard is not really doing a credible review of the Madeleine McCann case, that they appear to be involved in a whitewash of the McCanns' possible involvement in the disappearance of their daughter, Maddie.

First of all, I want to state that I am behind all hardworking detectives out there in the world. It has been my mission to improve criminal profiling and crime scene analysis methodology FOR law enforcement, so that detectives may have more success in solving difficult cases. I also am behind all law enforcement agencies as they work to solve the next homicide case that lands on their desks even if the department screwed up the last case through lack of training or incompetence on the part of whatever detective got assigned to the case and even if the department mishandled the last case due to political pressure (even if it was one I worked on with them). I wish them the best on the next case and hope they do a better job with all their future investigations. I recognize that law enforcement suffers the same problems as any other profession; they are not perfect nor successful nor honorable one hundred percent of the time. Knowing that does not mean I don't support them when they do a good job or want to improve their ability to solve cases and bring justice to criminals and the community. I don't hold grudges against any police agency; I just want to see a brighter future for all homicide investigations.

As to Scotland Yard, they have done great work in the past and also not so great work, just like every other agency. I am sure they will do some great work in the future as well as not so great work in the future. For the moment, they may be solving cases right and left, but something is seriously wrong with the Madeleine McCann case and here are ten reasons why I think this is not business as usual and there is a political coverup going on of some sort.

1) The amount of funds being allotted to Scotland Yard to investigate one missing person's case - a case which is not even  within their own jurisdiction, a case in which the parents' own neglect of their children and refusal to cooperate with the authorities is shameful - is unprecedented and outrageous.

2) Scotland Yard began their "review" by publicly stating that the parents were not suspects instead of simply saying no one  can be excluded from suspicion who does not have a solid alibi as is the usual statement made by police right out of the gate.

3) Scotland Yard constantly says they are updating the parents of the missing child, something that is only done if the parents are absolutely not suspects.

4) Scotland Yard did not do a reconstruction of the crime; they only did a reenactment of the McCann version of the crime for television.

5) Scotland Yard validated Jane Tanner's version of what she saw on a narrow street where she was not seen by two people as she supposedly passed by them.

6) Scotland Yard verified that Tannerman existed with a claim that was not credible.

7) Scotland Yard relatively large "Operation Grange" team has spent three years reviewing files that should have taken no more than a few weeks or months.

8) After reviewing all the evidence and leads in the files, Scotland Yard is investigating suspects that have no connection to the case.

9) Scotland Yard wants to search for Maddies's body (and, yes, they would be searching for a body as all other evidence would be long gone after seven years) in the most unlikely place to find her, right near the apartment in a very open-to-the-view-of-the-public location with hard-as-rock ground where no shallow grave could have been missed by the PJ or anyone walking by.

10) In spite of the fact the PJ has asked for there to be no press about the case, Scotland Yard has its own people still giving interviews.

Along with these ten reasons, if we need one more to seal the issue, it has to be AC Rowley's recent statement to papers:
"If you get any information ahead of our actions do not publish anything that may give suspects advance notice.” 
Since Scotland Yard and DCI Andy Redwood have been shouting from the rooftops since they started working on the Madeleine McCann case, I hardly think any suspect couldn't have covered his tracks over these many months if he hadn't done so in the four years prior to the beginning of the Met review. The naming of the first supposed dig location and Rowley opening his own big mouth hardly encourages me to believe that Scotland Yard is doing everything they can to keep their interest in suspects in the case under wraps, unless you believe they have spend millions of dollars and massive man hours in misdirection and their real suspects are the McCanns. I don't believe this because nothing more than a short case review and a reinterview of the Tapas 9 and reexamination of the physical and behavioral evidence would have been necessary to turn the investigation back toward the McCanns.
No, all the actions of Scotland Yard can only mean one of two things: the present detectives (especially Andy Redwood) are dumb as a box of rocks (which I find hard to believe with the amount of obvious evidence in this case) or they are just going through the motions of rounding up suspects and eventually assigning probable guilt toward one party so that the sad case of little Madeleine McCann can finally be put to rest and the McCanns can be removed from under the cloud of suspicion that has been hovering over them for seven years.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
May 22, 2014

Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann available at Smashwords and Barnes and Noble.

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'
Published: July 27, 2011
By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Monday, May 19, 2014

How I Became the Great Niece of Emmy Göring, First Lady of the Third Reich

My father, who died one year ago, had no middle least that is what he adamantly claimed throughout most of his lifetime. My sisters and I used to joke that maybe his middle name was Adolf. We reasoned since he was born a German Jew and was one of the lucky ones of our clan not to end up losing their life in a concentration camp, perhaps that fine Deutsch name was one worth dropping considering how Hitler rather ruined it.

But, then, in his late seventies, my father started drawing up a genealogical chart and, suddenly, he had a middle name; in fact, he had two of them: Philipp August. Now my sisters and I were even more puzzled. Philipp was the name of his mother's father and August was the name of his father's father. They are lovely names and my father never had anything negative to say about either man. Why, then, would he refuse to admit to having any middle name for more than half a century?

Then, just last week, my second cousin wrote to my sisters and me (upon hearing of both my father's and my mother's deaths) and along with her condolences, asked if we wish to exchange information about our ancestry, perhaps more about my grandfather Leo and our famous great-great uncle, the famous Leopold Sonnemann, publisher of the Frankfurter Zeitung and a champion for Jewish rights and social and monetary reform.

So, this email inspired me to toss a few search terms into Google and there it was:

Emmy Göring , wife of Hermann Göring - who not only was a top dog Nazi but the major thief of European art (watch the movie, Monument Men)  - was said to be the great niece of the famous publisher, Leopold Sonnemann,...which would make her my great aunt. Oh. My. God. Yikes!

NOW it made sense why my father didn't want his middle name known. He didn't want his family name linked to Emmy Göring; after all, he had a top secret clearance and worked for the Department of Defense. He must have worried that someone might trace our family history back to the Nazi party and all the infamy of the convicted war criminal Herman Göring and of Adolf Hitler, who was best man at Hermann and Emmy's wedding.

He wasn't the only one in the family with this suspicion; I found out from my cousin that others had commented on "that horrible woman" being on our family tree.

But, then again, maybe not.

The journalists of yesteryear seem to be just as ethically challenged (anything that makes a good story) and as careless as our news reporters of today. Here is what appears to have happened: one journalist from the New York Post wrote a story which claimed Emmy Göring nee Sonnemann was Jewish and the grand-niece of Leopold Sonnemann and that her father was August Sonnemann, my father's grandfather. Then another paper, denying this story to be true, claimed that the first journalist erred in connecting her to my family because Emmy Sonnemann's father was a different August Sonnemann. But, it turns out, as far as I and my cousin have researched, that Emmy Göring's father was not an August at all nor was her father Jewish nor can I find her anywhere on the family tree! So, unless Hermann Göring really doctored up some good paperwork and our family managed to eliminate all traces of a black sheep, these 1935 journalists published stories without doing proper research or presenting any proof. The stories were good enough, though, to stir up a lot of gossip around the time of Emmy Sonnemann 's wedding to Hermann and served as a rather unnerving rumor that eventually affected my father and other relatives even though they should have had first hand (or at least second hand) information that would contradict these erroneous reports. But this goes to prove the power the press has upon people; there is a strange tendency for people to believe what they read even if it flies in the face of known facts or just seems to come out of nowhere. If a story is in a major newspaper, the journalist must be telling the truth or the editor wouldn't allow it to be published. Even I was taken aback by the story of my possible connection to Emmy Göring and I will probably research still more to be sure I am not missing something...even though there seems to be no basis for the claim at all.

So I say to everyone, don't just believe what you read in the paper; be sure there is evidence to back up any and all claims. Or like my father, you just might spend a lifetime hiding a "fact' that never really was one.

Friday, May 9, 2014

Why I am So Pessimistic about the Madeleine McCann Case being Solved

It has always been my secret hope that the Judiciary Police (PJ) had reopened the Madeleine McCann case with new leads that would bolster the original investigation and Dr.  Gonçalo Amaral's focus of investigation, that somehow Portugal would eventually fight back against the British faux review and bring a proper end to a seven year miscarriage of justice.

However, I am feeling ill this morning after reading Joana Morais' translation of a recent news report from Portugal, sick to my stomach, while many who read it are rejoicing that this rare news out of Portugal is a good thing. Here is the translation of the article (with thanks to Joana for her tireless efforts to keep the English world informed of Portuguese media reports):

PJ about to discard English Police strongest lead


PJ about to discard English Police strongest lead that a predator of English girls has abducted Madeleine.
Scotland Yard has asked for aerial photos of places in Praia da Luz and wishes to question eight “persons of interest”

by Marisa Rodrigues

The Judiciary Police (PJ) is about to discard the lead that has resulted in the reopening of the process in Portugal and that is Scotland Yard's main line of investigation. So far, there isn't any evidence to support the hypothesis that Madeleine was abducted by a sexual predator who attacked English children in the Algarve.

This is the firmly held position of the team of inspectors from the North Directorate of the PJ who has reviewed the investigation process that was archived in 2008. 

After naming as probable suspect the late Euclides Monteiro, a former Ocean Club employee, the Portuguese investigators now believe that the intruder, in the cases that were reported to the authorities, could be British and that he does not reside in Portugal, since there were no new reports and those that were disclosed [seeMetropolitan Police site] only targeted children of that nationality. “A sex abuser is someone who acts compulsively. If he only acted in the summer and has never attacked again it's because he does not live here”, explained a source close to the process.

Yesterday, the day was marked by an aerial photo-reconnaissance in Praia da Luz of the areas where searches and excavations are planned, using a helicopter of the Portuguese Air Force paid by the British authorities and by a meeting between the police forces of the two countries at the PJ headquarters in Faro.

One of the places where Scotland Yard wants to use the sniffer dogs and the georadar is on the 25 de Abrilstreet, in the vicinity of the Ocean Club and by the church. The area, which the helicopter overflew three times, was undergoing construction works when Madeleine disappeared seven years ago. If anything suspicious is detected, it will be excavated. 

Besides the searches, which were already allowed by the Public Prosecutor of Portimão, the letters rogatory also request for eight people to be questioned. Some used to work at the Ocean Club resort whilst others are not linked in any way. With all these initiatives, it seems likely that Scotland Yard has more than one line of investigation, of which the latest and most visible action yet indicates the hypothesis that the child was murdered and buried in Praia da Luz. When questioned, in Faro, DCI Andy Redwood refused to speak with the journalists.

Tension between the PJ and the English 

The relationship between the police forces of the two countries is rather tense. The Judiciary Police has requested to the English police to stop disclosing information about the ongoing work in Portugal, otherwise they will not proceed with the steps that were requested. Scotland Yard wrote to the newspapers in the United Kingdom asking for “understanding”.

in Jornal de Notícias, paper edition (page 13), May 9, 2014

Okay, what excites others that is not exciting me is the news that the PJ is discarding Scotland Yard's main line of questioning, a lead about a sex abuser of English girls in the Argave, a lead that was the cause of the Madeleine McCann case to be reopened. In fact, this revelation has crushed my hopes for any positive outcome and this is why:

The fact that the PJ reopened the case based on some flimsy alleged weirdo in the area and not any real evidence is a sign that either the investigation by the PJ is politically influenced or they are incompetent (their incorrect profiling that  a sex predator acts out of compulsion is frightening  - sex predators are psychopaths and can control their behavior -and their conclusion that since he is compulsive and only strikes in the summer, he must be a Brit and not live in the Algarve troubles me: it could be that he is a teacher and only strikes during his months off or he only strikes when his wife is away or maybe he works in another country for a portion of the year - there could be numerous possibilities). This statement is a horrible blow to Dr. Amaral because this public admission that a sex predator is the reason the case was reopened only infers that the PJ do not believe  Gonçalo Amaral was following the correct line of questioning.

The fact that they are now discarding this because they found no link to Madeleine is no big surprise considering all the original evidence does not point to an abduction and the PJ should know this. This does not, however, mean the PJ are going back to the McCann as the focus because if they were basing their investigation on the evidence, they wouldn't have gone down this sex predator/abduction road in the first place.

Soctland Yard and the McCanns have just recently been running a media campaign of attacking the PJ which likely means they are going to claim that the PJ simply are giving up because they failed yet again to find the abductor of Madeleine McCann and now are preventing the British team from pursuing more leads (like searching people's homes without probable cause).

This "dig" in Praia da Luz where the McCanns, the PJ, and Scotland Yard know the body is not, is only going to be used to prove all was done that could be done by Scotland Yard and as fodder for a claim that Maddie was killed during or after an abduction and her body was dumped in the ocean or that she was removed from Praia da Luz and buried who knows where. With one scenario, the McCanns can have closure and the other, we can keep looking for her ad nauseum and the fraudulent fund can continue to operate. No physical evidence will be found to link back to the McCanns, so they will be "in the clear."

When enough fires are fanned touting that Portugal has not cooperated with Scotland Yard and has prevented them from pursuing solid leads (those interviews and searches they were denied), and, furthermore, that the media has compromised the "investigation," fingers can be pointed at all the uncaring others and the McCanns can play the victims again, only this time, the case can be administratively closed with some statement from Scotland Yard of what likely happened to Maddie; in fact, the case will be closed administratively by both police agencies - the PJ and Scotland Yard -but this time with the abduction theory as the last lead followed, not the McCanns. In other words, the McCanns will have been effectively cleared by both countries as having anything to do with the disappearance of their daughter; Britain and the McCanns will be the victors and Portugal and Dr. Amaral, the collateral damage in whatever game of politics this whole farce is.

The last tiny ray of wishful thinking for me is that Portugal is playing a totally deceptive game, that they lied when they said the series of alleged sexual assaults in the Algarve was the reason they reopened the case, that they only used that as an excuse to restart the investigation, that they planned to just play along with Scotland Yard until enough useless leads had been eliminated and then they planned to circle back to the evidence and the McCanns. I can wish that this methodology could be some big secret weapon, but my experience in working with police departments and their handling of cases and politics does not support this likelihood any more than the belief of some that Scotland Yard is playing a fantasticly expensive game that will end with the arrest of the McCanns or that the two departments are working together to accomplish a big coup in bringing the McCanns to justice.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 9, 2014
Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann available at Smashwords and Barnes and Noble.

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.