Wednesday, May 3, 2017

FOX News Joins the Lying Media Brigade on the McCann Case

Yesterday, I received a phone call from a FOX NEWS journalist, Christina Corbin, who know absolutely nothing about the McCann case. After I discussed the main issues with her, she thanked me and asked me to send her a succinct statement that they could use in their article.

I thought they would follow through with facts because just a month ago they allowed me to speak out. 

"Madeleine McCann was Never Abducted, Expert Following the Case Says."

This is what I sent her:

As a profiler, the most important investigative technique is to focus on the actual evidence and not create theories that have no origination in the facts. Scotland Yard has spent six years carrying out a remit that required them to view this case as a stranger abduction which clearly has tied their hands and forced them to ignore any evidence that supports Kate and Gerry McCann as having any involvement in the disappearance of their daughter. Rather than explore the findings of the blood and cadaver dogs who hit on the McCanns' vacation apartment and car, rather than examining the conflicting and changing statements of the McCanns and their friends, rather than questioning why the McCanns showed little interest in the sighting of the Smith family who saw a man carrying off a small blond girl toward the beach on the evening of Madeleine going missing...they are pursuing wild theories of child sex trafficking gangs, burglaries gone wrong, and, now on the 10th anniversary, a woman in the area wearing a purple coat. While none of the evidence at this point proves the McCanns' guilt in the disappearance of their daughter, the evidence does prove that they should be the top suspects and, if they are not, the Scotland Yard investigation is a sham.

Apparently, that didn't appeal to the editors of this FOX article and the journalist who called me. They went searching for another profiler who would give them what they wanted; they found retired FBI profiler, Mary Ann O'Toole who clearly had little familiarity with the facts of the case. This is what she said:

To Mary Ellen O'Toole, a former FBI agent, the case is "solvable" a decade later. 
O'Toole, who is not involved in the investigation, said authorities must carry out two actions: re-examine old forensic evidence using new technology and re-interview key invidivuals at the resort on the night Madeleine disappeared.
"I would have a group of forensic scientists look at the evidence to see if we could re-evalute it using current technology," said O'Toole, who is currently the director of forensic sciences at George Mason University.
O'Toole said she would also re-interview all who were questioned at the resort, as well as interview individuals who might have been overlooked at the time.
"I would want to be looking at everyone: employees of the resort, delivery people, guests, customers, vendors there providing music and other services," O'Toole told Fox News.
"It’s often not the straggly-haired, off-putting individual, but someone who looks regular, quite normal," she said. "You would not rule out anybody."
The passage of time, O'Toole said, can sometimes be key in cracking open an unsolved missing persons case.
"Ten years can do a lot to people and they may now feel they can come forward with information they weren’t comfortable coming forward with at the time," she said.
O'Toole noted that stranger abductions are rare, but cited such cases in the U.S. -- including those in which the kidnap victims were later found alive -- like Elizabeth Smart, who was 14 when she was abducted from the bedroom of her parents Salt Lake City, Utah, home in 2002 and found alive nine months later.
"We’ve certainly seen cases here in the United States where children have been taken and returned, so we know there’s a possibility," she said. "That is one of the possible outcomes and we can hope for that."
Another theory that police say has not been ruled out is a "burglary gone wrong," but O'Toole and others say -- though not impossible -- it's highly unlikely.
"It’s much more likely that Madeleine was the target," said O'Toole. "People don’t morph from a jewel thief into a child abductor."
"If a stranger went into that room, that is really high-risk behavior for an offender," she said.
Unless Ms. O'Toole comes forward and states that she was misreprented by FOX News than I guess she joins the many who don't bother with the facts.

Thanks, Christina Corbin, for allowing the public to learn, once again, that fake news is what the media is promoting these days and it is time they demand that they turn off worthless media outlets (which might be most of them) and tell them that they are not media outlets they trust. If the media cannot do true research and spend time working on factual news articles, they should close their doors and stop peddling this crap.  If you have no understanding of a complicated case, you should not be reporting on it without diligent investigative effort and your bosses should not be telling you to just come up with anything within a few hours if they have any desire to be considered a reputable news source. And they should not telling you to follow some agenda rather than the truth.

As I have been trying to tell people for a long time, the news media is now about ratings and money and doesn't even attempt to provide facts to the citizens of their country. 

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
May 3, 2017


Anonymous said...

oh my head hurts, pass me the tablets.

D.M. Miller said...


In stating the facts, you denied Ms. Corbin the opportunity to continue to sensationalize a helpless child's' death on your reputation. She obviously only cares about ratings. Truth, it would seem, is a subjective by-product of her style reporting.

THANK YOU for standing up to her and Fox by writing this and taking the high road.

THANK YOU for being honorable and a credit to the legal community as opposed to a media-whore lapdog looking for the warmest lap.

I do not have all of the facts in this case but I believe that the body language of the parents alone tells a very tragic story.Factor in the other truths as you just did and it makes clear that she was "Expert Shopping", not attempting to promote actual facts.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, there are humans, you, then humanoids, fox, then tool and emeroids?

Anonymous said...

Don't you just love the hold the McCann's have over the media? They're too scared to say anything in fear of being sued! No wonder why they're always bloody smug they're protected as if they're royalty no one wants the truth all they want is lies and money

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, only stories of fiction will do fine ladies and chap's, HIC", remember what gerry said about trying to follow evidence, HIC".

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, i went to the the libary the other other day, to find a copy of kates book? In the none fiction section? I came across 2 books that werent by by kate? So i thought there must be a mistake by the libraian? So i enquired about this mistake? She replied the only books alowed to be published your after are in the fiction section, because the others are being withdrawn under notice there not fiction?

John mcgowan said...

O'Toole said she would also re-interview all who were questioned at the resort, as well as interview individuals who might have been overlooked at the time.
"I would want to be looking at everyone: employees of the resort, delivery people, guests, customers, vendors there providing music and other services," O'Toole told Fox News.

Two names conspicuously missing considering she says "I would want to be looking at everyone:"

Anonymous said...

I just don't get why it is so important to protect the McCanns. If they were members of the the royal family it would make some sense, but they are fairly ordinary people, albeit upper-middle-class doctors.I don't understand why so much effort and millions of dollars have gone into protecting them. If anyone has a theory, I would appreciate hearing it.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, it will go the way you predicted, because you knew this farce had to end, because it has been, and still a embarrassement to a huge waste of money to the public, who have been insulted, to the way that fund has manipulated red herrings about abduction, or burgulary that carnt stand up in court? What is important to keep in mind is this contradiction, there is nobody guilty of any crime, because going by gerrys logic about evidence? Why isnt he concerned about the police fitting up a innocent person if he didnt trust the police? Or would it be more like the mccanns set out to frame anyone, and divert the case in such a contradiction? So you see the lie which the funds mislead a case against innocent people without evidence? Also proof the police were never going to frame the mccanns, since it was shelved, because of the mccanns behaviors, and could not proceed without hinderence. Infact the mccanns didnt give the police information about a credible abduction to work on, is suspect?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, what happens its gone full circle, and ended up back, where it started? Back to the people doing the checks, and where this child went missing on their watch, one thing gerry carnt dispute, he was the last person to see her that night, before the smith sighting?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, Its not normal to have this much pr around anyone that is supposedly innocent? Ive been more curious about why clarence has to pass on comments for the mccanns? Everything ive noted about this so far is pre scripted, or no comment? I also noted how in their tv appearence there are no dificult questions asked? So its reasonable to look at coached answers they give, and questions they wont answer without their guru clarence? In other words favored appearence, try to imagine one with you pat, without any pr in place? Now that would be interesting to watch the reaction to what you think, instead of them avoiding the harder questions with clarence. The mccanns would never agree to a open debate?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, some people have asked if it was a fatal accident, why hide a body? That depends what caused the accident to happen? Since its not known why the twins couldnt be woken up? Could suggest madeline had a stronger dose of what was given to make her sleep? This can lead to other problems of vomitting ect. Or hemerage, from internal bleeding, and shut down of organs, leading to death? Since no tests were carried out on the twins, the police dont know what was used? This has never been cleared up, and why the mccanns didnt offer evidence to prove abduction, in the smith sighting to a floppy child being carried? Infact the smith sighting is credible with a child that was drugged, not crech man? Again this is all knowing evidence this was never a stranger, if you observe the links, surrounding facts, the mccanns agreed on about drugging children, and contradicting amaral about what he thought? So where was gerry at a time he didnt see jane or crech man? And why did jane try to finger robert murat?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, you have to look at diversions towards evidence, and status in the group, and pecking order to what they represent, drawing rank over medical errors about drugging children, and not assisting the police to determine who did this in that group? After all we only know they did the checks in relation to what happend to this missing child? No proof it was anyone else?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, I think i know why amaral suspects the group, Not one have questioned the mccanns strange behavior, and even more odd stories about their missing child? At no point did gerry mention anything about the door, or a stranger hiding in the apartment on his return to the bar? Its important to think about this carefully before kate set off, you will understand why gerry found nothing to mention about a abductor? Note the same in other checks the others did prior to gerrys, no blowing wind to bang the door, and certainly none on gerrys either? This is a concocted story at its worst, and i will point out why? The door would of been shut before kate set out if kate didnt open it at any other point, during the time this alleged stranger left it open? This does leave evidence the inside window only had kates prints on it? Otherwise a stranger would of wiped the prints, kate left? This is odd kate brought attention to the window she must of opend? Realising the mistake she made the others didnt prove?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, i fully agree pat, this turned out to be a self serving lie, for them fleecing the public over what happend to this innocent child, ive looked at the gaps, and used common sense about why its remained odd, but never questioned by them who oppose what people think, no matter how genuine we search to get answers, to give madeline a better investigation she deserves, and not this bs they palm off as fact. I beleive in one way to determine the truth, rule nothing out, until evidence proves otherwise to be sure?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, Here is a lie kate carnt dispute, the dog hit on her bottoms, after being washed? But kate makes another mistake she carnt explain away? If kate took cuddle cat to work as kate alleged, why was there no smell of death on the toy, and only located on her bottoms? Kates lying about how the smell got onto her bottoms? After madeline went missing? Because the dogs would of hit on the toy, to confirm kates story? The other point, why did gerry panic over the hits the dogs made, if nothing involved them? No concern over a death in the apartment? He seemed only concerned in distancing himself, from what happend? Not the behavior of concerned father, that mocks what he dosent know? But behaves arrogantly ignorant.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, im not a body language expert, but kate dosent always nod her head in agreement, with what gerry says, and normaly when they do agree, they both nod together? The other thing about the questions being asked, is that gerry cuts across kate a little too much in relation to their daughter being missing, or areas of evidence surrounding their daughter? Gerry smirks at odd stages, where it isnt no laughing matter that his daughter could well be dead, and never found? Its possible kate didnt know as much as gerry seems to know about what happend? And kate fell foul of gerrys control their both as guilty, and kate carnt cut loose of the situation unfolding, and losing what she has left? I never understood why gerry didnt co author kates book? If the book was about their missing daughter? But takes preference in their interviews cutting in on tv? So it is telling us something is not as it seems, gerry is trying to sell the public.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, It seems the court actions have taken a toll on kate, and gerrys motives to carry on the saga with amaral, has become irresponsible to the fact there isnt evidence yet to clear them from the theory? Because the police still dont know what happend? Gerry has no ground in which to continue his personal spat? His time is wasted and continues to cause damage to kate and himself? What he hasnt done, is put effort into giving the police real evidence about his theory? But brings concerns over his behaviors, that look like guilt? Eventualy that behavior can back fire as being unrealistic and not reasonable, when considering the response it gets? This can change public perceptions this looks like stalking one man, looks like rage? Even the mccanns agree with amaral, the place wasnt broken into, does mean his book, is of value to the case, that is only in line with the police? Otherwise this means the police did have enough to suspect the mccanns?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, the last thing on this subject, why wasnt the tanner sghting removed after a innocent father came forward? This means the mccanns have no abduction theory for further funds? Because it was never based on the smith sighting that was witheld, and only based around their freind jane tanner to give gerry a alabi? Before being questioned about where he was? So the basis has gone to which a theory was based around, And gerrys alabi under question? Jane only saw the feet, and couldnt confirm the top this child was wearing? The smiths had a closer view and stated long sleeves? Kate stated in her book the sightigs are uncanny identical? In what way one must ask? The top she was wearing? The way the child was being carried to identify gerry, not a innocent father? Real concern over kates comment about what the smiths did see?

CptKD said...

Hi Pat!
As a Retired LE Officer & Paralegal here in Toronto, Canada - I couldn't agree more, with everything that you have 'Investigated' & Have come to 'Conclude' & Further CONFIRM - Where THIS Case regarding McCann's is concerned!

My reason for writing you this evening, is simply with respect to the Book you Authored on the Madeline McCann Case.
I understand that it has been 'pulled' from certain Publishing Houses & Is no longer available for purchase.
I was wondering, however; if there are any other possible, or potential places where I may be able to get a copy of it?
I'm definitely interested in having a read & Really 'seeing' the investigative intricacies & deeper 'profiling' you did into this case!

I'm really hoping that I can still get a copy of your Book somewhere!

Looking forward to hearing back from you!!

BTW - I believe you ARE 'Bang-On' on THIS one!!

GREAT job!
A huge 'BRAVO' to you!

Pat Brown said...


My book, "Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann" is available at Smashwords, iBooks, B&N, etc., just not on Amazon from which it was removed.

This case is extraordinary, not so much in that it has failed to reach a courtroom, but that the Portuguese police were effectively forced to shelve the case through politics and then Scotland Yard came in and launched a faux investigation that refused to allow its investigators to actually allow the evidence to lead their leads. Colin Sutton, a retired Scotland Yard detective who was offered the opportunity to lead the case just spoke on television and said he turned down the job because he was not comfortable with a remit that eliminated the top suspects before even beginning the casework. I am thrilled he spoke out and that a media outlet actually let him say that and didn't edit his words out. Sadly, this is a rarity and the media generally does not discuss the facts; they just push agenda.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, colin sutton is correct about it never being solved, unless they can be free to go back to the start, i share that view strongly based on his experience in checking everything again, that raises question about contradiction ect. Items removed like the carpet from the rental car that wasnt washed? Or found for examination? Where water destroys dna evidence, who removed the carpet? Who removed a blue bag, and a pink blanket? This all vannished after the abduction claim, and to coin gerrys own quote, how did we hide a body with many people around? So one must ask the same question about the missing items, that were not taken by a burgular or abductor?

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, just a recap about the type of rubbish transported? There was no recycle materials taken to the mark warner plant, if the statements are true? The material described would of not been recycled? So it would of been disposed of by a service, as we all know in how rubbish is seperated in the uk? And diferent bins being used for hazordous materials doctors use, and no way have i heard such a poor excuse to transport such material with people being at risk in the way it was transported? Cars are not used for such a purpose, where there is no care taken in the safety of risk? This has always concerned me about their stories, why nobody independent removed that rubbish if it was as they described?

Anonymous said...

It jumps out by omission doesn't it?

Anonymous said...

I think Pat mentioned it in a previous blog and really when you think about it it makes sense. It turned into a media circus pretty quickly and the government of the day wanted to be in on it..the coverage was unprecedented. Everyone jumps on board.
It isn't until the PJ start asking awkward questions the British start getting a bit 'Now see here! These are pillars of the community' etc... And frankly lots of little political agendas snowball into what is now a massive mess. Who would want to come forward and say 'Hey guys we messed up!' It is beyond comprehension and makes it seem like they have immunity and there is a weird conspiracy... Just messed up politics.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for this. Have a look at his blog.