Find a Burglar and Prove He Did It
A little while back, when I stated I believed this whole Scotland Yard investigation had zero focus on the McCanns, I said what Scotland Yard was likely doing was searching for Madeleine's body on land near where their key suspects either lived or worked. We have heard via the press (and although this information can be questionable, the Portuguese press seems to agree for once with the British press) that the scrubland area searched all last week was an area near to where at least one of the drug dealing suspects lived. Today, we get word that Scotland Yard has moved to a new location in the vicinity of a water and sewage plant four miles away in Lagos where dead heroin addict Euclides Monteiro worked.
There is actually nothing wrong with this strategy. It is a fact, for the most part, that killers dump or bury bodies quite near where they live or work, often within a mile of these locations. Why? Because when you get rid of a body, you want to make dead sure no one is watching you. Nothing worse than randomly choosing a little side road, pulling over, getting the body out of your trunk and as you go to dump it in the trees, you find a group of eight teens smoking weed staring at you; the spot you casually picked turns out to be a well-used teen hangout.
No, it behooves a killer to be sure that the spot he picks to rid himself of a body is isolated and witness-free. So, the killer goes to where he is very comfortable, a place he has been to or driven by dozens of times. And, naturally, the places you are most familiar with are locations connected to your own stomping grounds; home, work, relatives, friends, and pleasure spots. When you find someone going REALLY far afield to get rid of a body, it is almost always true that this is because he knows the victim and will become a suspect almost immediately. He wants that body far away and never accidentally found.
So when Scotland Yard started doing their scrubland search, in an area that made no sense if they were looking at the McCanns, I had to conclude they picked it because it had some connection to another suspect. And there is a big problem with their methodology - outside of the fact they are totally ignoring the evidence that points to the McCanns - and that is they appear to be digging up areas based on suspects that do not yet have any evidence connecting them to the crime.
Now, I am sure I am going to see some commenter below say, "YOU don't know what Scotland Yard knows; maybe they DO have evidence linking drug dealers/burglars/pedophiles to Maddie's disappearance." Let me respond to that. Yes, it IS possible Scotland Yard knows something I don't about these men, but it can have nothing to do with hard evidence. Anyone who has read the files knows what the physical evidence indicates: Maddie died in the apartment and there was no proof of an abductor. Even if one somehow thinks an abductor came into the apartment and left no evidence (which actually is possible, but not probable), this would still mean that Scotland Yard has no physical evidence to link to these alleged suspects. Secondly, since they have not even questioned these suspects, they have no physical evidence from their houses or cars to link them back to the crime. This only leaves two kinds of "evidence"; that they used their cell phones somewhere in or near Praia da Luz (believe me, Scotland Yard cannot pinpoint the location of any call down to the block of the McCann flat or any burial spot) on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance or one of these guys said something like, "Yeah, I grabbed that little girl" whilst he was drunk off his arse. And though these bits of information might be interesting enough to warrant further investigation into these men, this kind of information in no way constitutes enough evidence to dig up Portugal. So, then why is Scotland Yard doing so?
There are only two possibilities in my mind: Andy Redwood is a pretty daft fellow (he was told to rule out the McCanns before starting and ignore any evidence related to them and he did just that) and has put the cart before the horse; he has jumped to the conclusion that these burglars/drug dealers were involved in the disappearance of Maddie without any real proof, and following the "nearby burial rule," has gotten all excited about solving the crime and raced on to find Maddie's body. It won't be the first time in law enforcement history this has happened; there is some odd thrill about looking for lost treasure - it just might be over there! And one just can't resist dogging it down (pun intended).
The other possibility is that this is the end show for wrapping up the case in the McCanns' favor. Find a good-enough suspect, one that can't disprove his involvement (because he is dead, in jail, or just such a loser no one will believe him anyway), do everything you can to retrieve Maddie's body from near to where he lives or works, and then close the case with a believable scenario (to those who have never read the PJ police files) and go home having tried your darnedest.
Either way, I don't see anything good coming of this ridiculous excess searching in all the wrong places; if you don't follow real evidence, all the digging in the world will not find you what you are looking for.
Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
June 8, 2014
Published: July 27, 2011
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.
64 comments:
Would it be wishful thinking to assume Scotland Yard must do all they can to eliminate every possibility in order to make a concrete case against the McCanns? I ask this because it would surely be an extremely difficult case to put before a jury, due to the massive media exposure over the years. How could an unbiased jury even be selected now?
Anon 10:17
Yeah, it doesn't work that way, Anon, though a lot of people who have never worked a police case think so. A case is not made by what doesn't exist but by what DOES exist. It doesn't matter how many other scenarios might explain what happened because only one scenario matters. True, a defense attorney may come up with one that the jury will fall for (a la the Casey Anthony trial) and it may work (sadly) but, in reality, it is about the evidence connecting the defendant to the crime.
In fact, if Scotland Yard is really after the McCanns and this is all just a big effort to eliminate other suspects, a defense attorney will CRUSH the prosecution! Just think, if the police were that intent on the hunt for other suspects, that they had ENOUGH evidence to go digging up Portugal, they must not have been all to sure about the McCanns' involvement. This would hugely weaken the case and also open the door to other possible scenarios, scenarios it appears the police even give credibility to.
No, at this point, the heavy focus on other suspects means one thing and one thing only; the McCanns are "in the clear" barring some miracle.
The miracle, by the way, would be Portugal actually standing up and doing the job they shelved.
Pat, Redwood and the search teams can only go where the Portuguese allow him them to go. We're all forgetting this I think.
Isn't Monteiro the Portuguese's suspect?
Some People think, that Redwood just plans a big whitewash. Cause the whole british system and their representatives are corrupt.
This would be a very strong allegation i think.
But what about another theory - one that turns the table:
I assume, that some portuguese police officers were corrupt (for example previously convicted Tavares Almeida). On the strength of enormous internal political pressure (bad media, serious failures, extreme tourism-cancellations, fear of personal consequences etc.) some officers decided to place some smells for Eddie & Keela. And - oh wonder - from one day to the next all the bad pressure has gone. The guilty were found....clap clap
Such a measure would also explain the odor on absolutely bizarre places like cuddle-cat and Kates clothings (although her husband = Smithman allegedly carried little Madeleine through the night). But Kate was the more unstable part of the couple - and only she was the person, that has been required for a confession...
In this context i have 3 questions:
1. what was the really reason for Almeidas unpaid leaving? (he did his request BEFORE Amaral had his fateful call with a journalist?
2. why no one knows the name of this journalist?
3. where can i find the in this call discussed mail with the Madeleine-Sighting, that Amaral received a short time ago (ALL sighting-Mails are in the files, hundreds of them - why not this special one?)
Maybe it doesn't exist?
Maybe the whole story is not treu - and there were other reasons for their dismissal?
So think about that: if this is the truth - and the police forces know about that, they have no occasion to point the McCanns anymore.
My personal conclusion: you and all the other McCann-Sceptics have your conspiracy theory - i have another one.
Sunny Sunday all
Anon 11:36
Yes, Monteiro was supposedly the Portuguese suspect and now they say he isn't. Due to the claimed fact that he was why the Portuguese reopened the case does not exactly give me hope. So, that is why I say "a miracle."
Observer,
Well, your theory could be so (as all theories are possible, if not probable). I don't have an issue with the possibility of the Portuguese police being corrupt or incompetent (just as I believe Scotland Yard can be or any US police department can be). The planting or lying about cadaver dog evidence is highly unlikely, though (in the realm of police planting evidence, this is not the kind of thing they do).
Most importantly, the reason that I do think the PJ were trying their best (they did make some mistakes), is the TOTALITY of the evidence and the behavior of the McCanns themselves. I keep repeating in my blogs about the TOTALITY of evidence because it is the lack of understanding of this that causes the most problems. One can always find one issue or piece of evidence that is confusing and then say that this proves the whole scenario wrong; this is not correct. It is the totality of evidence that supports a theory and all evidence must be considered together, not individually. So it isn't just about the dogs or just about Tannerman or Smithman, or just about the timeline or just about Gerry's statements or just about Kate refusing to answer the 48 questions or just about Murat or just about Tractorman...it is about everything together. And everything together, the totality of the evidence, points to the Maddie dying in the apartment and the McCanns moving her body.
Likewise, it is the TOTALITY of the three years of the Scotland Yard review and who they want to interview and Andy Redwoods's public statements and the Crimewatch programs and the locations they are digging up, etc, that lead me to believe the Scotland Yard investigation is a sham.
Pat, thank you for another thoughtful post. If you had to make a bet -- not a prediction, a bet -- would you say that the McCanns will be officially off the hook by, say, Christmas of this year? Meaning, will some patsy (alive or dead) have been fingered by SY or Portugal, or will the case have been been declared (by wither country) unsolveable by then? (Again, I'm asking you just to make a bet, not to go on the record with anything as dramatic as an official prediction by you.)
The dogs were brought in at the request of the British police, not the Portuguese. If the PJ were trying to frame the McCanns there would be no likelihood of them choosing a method which required the intervention of SY.
There are easier and far more conclusive ways of framing people than to lay false trails of scent (the technique of which no one in the PJ had experience of).
False witnesses could have been bribed/blackmailed to come forward and testify against the McCanns. Blood and hair sample tests could have been retained and nominally tested within Portuguese borders (and thereby open to possible falsification).
None of this happened.
The DNA samples went to Birmingham (UK). No decisive witnesses came forward to finger the McCanns and the immediate environs of where the dogs alerted were forensically researched by UK authorities.
Mccann sceptics don't need to rely upon ideas of conspiracy. There are the obvious facts, coupled with an obvious failure in judicial process. It happens not infrequently. Criminal justice is not a perfect science - not in PT, not in the UK...not the US...nowhere.
Anon 12:37
Very well stated.
Utahagen,
Well, barring that Scotland Yard really had great intel, some fellow saying, "We accidentally killed that little girl and we had to bury her in a place we know well," and they actually unearth her body in one of those places near the suspects, I would say we shall see a couple more weeks of searching and then it will go quiet while they interview the suspects. I think they will then find more information which will not lead them to do more searching but wrap the case up. Yes, I would venture to say we will likely hear bits and pieces of how Scotland Yard is comfortable they have the right theory and suspects but they haven't enough for the Portuguese (their fault) to go to prosecution. Then, when all has settled down (people starting to forget how they came up with no body or physical evidence) there will be a public closing of the case. Timeframe? Hmm...hard to say but I would guess sometime maybe in the fall but definitely before Christmas.
It will be interesting to see if the McCanns THEN close down the fund or expand it to other children. I found it interesting that they didn't do so when Scotland Yard came on board. Why would they still need to take so much money from the public when their own PIs failed to find Maddie, seven years have passed which likely means no live Maddie, and now the premier UK police agency is spending millions searching for her? If I were the McCanns and the fund was legitimate (no comment) then I would open it to other missing children's families. So, that way, some money could still be used to look for Maddie (like keeping a hotline open for her AND other children) and her name could bring in funds to find all children. In fact, even if the fund wasn't legitimate before, if I were the McCanns, I would change that. After all, one can draw a hefty salary as the directors of a charitable org, so that is a win-win situation for them.
Thanks Pat, we crazy haters do still get the odd lucid moment! ;-)
Anon 12:37
Every single aspect of this review / investigation is indicative of a coverup. It is all a show for the public. Exchange of open letters in the Sun newspaper between Mrs. McCann and Mr. Cameron to let everyone know that the farce was starting. Mr. Redwood starring in a documentary, being a guest on numerous talk shows all for the purpose of telling the public that they have no doubt that the McCanns are innocent and to label anyone who thinks otherwise a conspiracy theorist, a nutcase.
Home Secretary Theresa May requesting SY's presence on Portuguese soil, just when the libel trial against Mr. Amaral was about to commence. The media being told which suspects SY was concentrating on next. And as the trial approaches ever closer to its end, SY's media antics go into overdrive.
SY's tactics are simple, give alternative explanations to the facts that are present in Mr. Amaral's book which point to the McCanns being responsible for their daughter's disappearance, her death, knowing all along that they don't have to prove anything, that the story they present will not face the scrutiny of a lawyer. When you're creating a story, you can come up with different plots, introduce new characters to facilitate the plot; that's what we are witnessing the creation of a fictional story.
The problem with a whitewash, as we know what happens eventually to all white paint it will turn yellow and decay in time, some quicker than another, depending of brand, type. I see no different with the potential of the MET's whitewash.
It will bite them in the bum in the end.
Meadow
Of course you are right, Pat. For building up a theory you have to consider the whole case. BUT - if i´m right in such an important issue - the manipulation of evidence - this would turn the whole investigation on its head. And referring to this, the question must be: which written und transferred "facts" can you believe - and which not? All the interviews, states and claims - true or not?
Another examples:
how could it be, that a later as suspect dated man (Murat) did translation work for nearly two weeks after the crime? Is this a professional way?
And why declares Amaral in his book, that he is the man who felt uncomfortable when he saw Murat for the first time? In chapter 7 he describes a single-trip to PDL in the morning of 11.5. (after a very hard and long night with interviews til midnight, bury his dog etc) - in PDL he saw a stranger with his mother (later the reader learns, that the man was Murat). And this man seemed suspicious to him. Why? There was no explanation in his book. For me it seems like a suggestion to his readership, that HE discovered everything and everyone in this case? For me this is the same self-publicizing manner, that you also accuses to the McCanns.
It should be added that in the described morning of 11.5. - Murat was not in PDL at all, cause he did translation-work for the PJ officer Pedro Varanda (Dianne Webster for example).
Does this episode mean, that Amaral didn't read the PJ-Files carefully, before he wrote his book? Although it is structured very meticulously.
So i ask you now - who can say with certainness, which persons are liar in this case - and which not? Are all liars?
For me it´s a fact, that from the beginning both parties (PJ and the McCanns) were against each other. McCanns hoped for a helpful Amber alert in the first night (helicopters, group of a hundred searchers with dozens of dogs, etc) - GNR/PJ gave them quite nothing. So the "war" started (also the media- and political) and by association of this a lot of lies, charges and bad feelings.
This is my opinion.
P.S. it would be nice if someone would to ask the three questions in my previous post. Thanks!
@Anonymous
i don´t believe any proof were taken for blaming the McCanns per 100%, but only to stop the bad pressure. And you are right, the request for the dogs come from british police, but the initiator was PJ (Ricardo Paivas statement after the alleged call between him and Kate about her "dead-dream").
Thanks for responding, Pat.
Observer, You clearly don't have any grasp of logic do you?
"The request for the dogs came from the British police.."
"..but the initiator was Paivas.."
Here's a little clue...it's either one or the other..but not both.
Paivas had absolutely no experience of, nor knowledge of, cadaver dog handling. No PJ investigation had ever sanctioned nor considered their use. Dog findings had never been presented to a PT court. And that remains the case.
If the PJ had wanted to stop "the bad pressure" then they would have taken the easy route and framed up some lowlife. No one would have blinked.
Amaral did not take the easy route. He has far too much integrity for that.
one addition @anonymous
"Mccann sceptics don't need to rely upon ideas of conspiracy."
you speak about a terrible crime to a little girl, buried somewhere on a strange place - with a cover up by the parents and her friends, by the media/rupert murdoch, by different governments and finally the met. und you won´t call that a conspiracy?
Observer, did I talk about Murdoch, governments, cover up, conspiracy? Nope.
It's clearly not only logic that you can't handle but the truth too. You are a trolling liar aren't you? Of course.
I talked about a failure in judicial process. They happen all the time.
I'll happily leave you to your fantasies...and the moon is made of cheese :-)
@Anonymous
please don't be insolent. You also can use other words for your discontent.
English is not my native language, so it can be that i use some words mistakable. I´m sorry for that!
I didn't say, that Paiva himself called the dogs for the PJ-work.
Paiva declared as a witness in the libel trial McCann/Amaral in lisboa (01/2010), that PJ asked their british colleagues for a dog-operation (after Kate McCann allegedly told him about her dream of a dead Madeleine).
The conclusion from this is that they need to find a way out of the never-ending "where's Maddie" fiasco. This is the winding down in a way that absolves the McCanns, using a dead/alive patsy. As you keep saying Pat, they need a scheme which fits anything but the stark logical evidence that implicates the McCanns. The galling thing is, as you say, many will swallow this, hook, line and sinker. The secret-handshake powers-that-be cover each others backsides.
I agree with the totality idea that Pat suggests as a way to keep focused on the case. I really have doubts if we will ever get the truth. I don't know if this is possible? Perhaps some detective might want to continue the case on his own.....?? NO reward from the Maccanns, of course! However, if he were to get a confession from someone or incriminating evidence then I am sure Rebekah Brooks would be interested.
I love the statement of Guerra: And as the trial approaches ever closer to its end, SY's media antics go into overdrive.
Surely by now the public must be convinced that the SY investigation makes no sense. Is it true that Redwood is going to be replaced and they will be wrapping things up with a different superintendent and another team so that the sham and the shambles of 3 years "work" will not be noticed?
Now that team Maccann has to accept that their daughter is dead something that the British police force are now openly stating, by the fact they are prepared to dig up the whole of Portugal, surely this whole libel case in Portugal has become a farce. It was started up on the basis that the Maccanns felt Amaral's book and his theories were interfering with their money spinning activities. Well, now.....
I still think that with all that is happening now we don't pay enough attention to the reasons and motives as to why this couple have been able to get so much attention from the media and other very powerful people. This is the lead that I would like to see followed up once the case is wrapped up in tin foil or the papers of last week's Mirror. It is so sad to see that the child has never been the main issue right from the word go.
I notice that family members of the missing passengers from MH370 are going to raise money to give a reward for any leads as to what happened to the plane. They should be forewarned about Metodo 3 or Halligan just in case they pop up over there.
Addition
i don´t call u a liar, troll, etc.
There's no need to get personal!
I will not claim you - for saying, that the government, media, MET etc want to cover up this crime. But a lot of people do so.
So i better leave now. There is no place for people like me. I asked some normal questions - but i should have known better, that i only receive presumptuous reactions..
Observer, no insolence at all. You simply lied about what I had said. Why would you do that?
The *official* request for the dogs came from Paiva because PT retained primacy. The Portuguese themselves had no experiences of dog handling nor it's effectiveness. He made the request on advice... from SY.
As a method of framing the McCanns, as you suggested (and then backtracked from) it remains in the realm of fantasy.
If you believe that "everybody has lied" then it is impossible to debate from any position. It's what trolls do.
Here's a thought.....If the parents of Maddie, were from say, the likes of Benefit Street, I wonder if they would have been afforded the same rights as the Mc Cann's. The British public are liken to a hungry young seagull...They'll swallow anything, wake up and stop acting like media sheep.
pat id just like to say a big thank you for all you have done for maddie you have always stood up for her god bless keep up the good work
Pat, have they not tried to pin it on some man who died in a farm accident a couple of years ago. When this was looked at, all it did was slander a man who could not answer the mcscammers and his grieving widow was distraught with their allegations. Thankfully nothing came of this.
I to believe this is make or break . If nothing comes of this then the mccanns will have got away with it and the whole thing shelved and forgotten. Pete
Well..
I dont know where to hide a body.
Probaly in the river?
A few weeks ago a man was try to save someone in the river.
A big deep river with a lot off trafficships.
Well.. after 2 weeks they found him.
The river took him more than a 100 km away, across the border.
Well I dont know if Portugal have big deep rivers..
But after the man try to save that kid, they try to find the man.
Anyway..a sad story.
They didnt find him then.
The kid and man both died..
So if Madeleine was dropped in a river,the sea is a big place.
So if I read the lokal or national news well..
The river is a dropping place were they find killed animals or people dropped in a bag or something.
To get rid of it fast.
Also even cars can be in the river for weeks before found.
I do not know statistics on hiding a body.
But there are many rivers here..
Whatever happened with Madeleine..
I dont think they will find something.
Even if they do so..
It does not prove anything, or cannot be proven anymore..
Only fact is she is missing.
The Mccann even told there was no prove that she was harmed.
So not a even criminal case then?
No abduction proven.
The 'abducter' was not seen with a bag of drugs or diggingthings.
He must have digg a hole before then..
Really??
Does the SY think a burgler steal a body to give it a funeral?
If.. the Mccan was warned the abducter enjoyed their pain..
Why then??
Do the parents expose their familyLI(f)E to the media?
Hi all ,just like to remind people that as a dog owner I am aware of different emotions he can display. He displays a range of emotions from ,happiness ,guilt,anxious,excited,trepidation,etc.Sometimes I believe he is almost human as he is aware of other peoples emotions too.However of course he is not human ,he has no sense of self,and he has no ability to TELL LIES ,Because he doesn't understand that concept.He doesn't understand coincidence either.Thats no conspiracy theory it's fact!
A not so small point about Paiva:
His account of Kate McCann's phone call (her dream that Madeleine was dead) goes beyond a mere allegation.
He mentioned the call under oath. The McCanns and their lawyers were present. Had Kate wanted to instruct lawyers to object then she was free to do so. The call took place. Has Paiva faced perjury charges in light of the claim?
In the relatively early days of the review Redwood issued an apparently bizarre statement requesting that "dreamers and psychics" might come forward with information.
Understandably he got a lot of flak for this. However, in light of Paiva's libel testimony , it may not have been quite so ridiculous.
Redwood has increasingly struck me as a man who is pretty much hog tied by limitations placed upon him (albeit a singularly unimpressive man). This looks like his exit strategy.
Further reading for newer readers of this case
http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/
Mccanns are so guilty and when the poor little girl is found, all you can't think for yourselves, naive followers will be sick to the stomach.
Why ban the book if they're innocent???
Why before ringing police did they rip a book of madeline s so as to write two accounts of their comings and goings.
I think we should set up a fund for the poor policeman who's lost everything due to the lies.
And the mccanns other two children should be taken away from them. They are at risk after all'!!
Everybody should be allowed to read the banned book's!!!
We also should maybe start finding a few big celebrities who will help us expose the fact that poor madeline is dead and how the parents are sick, and not very good at lying.
Portuguese policeman was and still is more intelligent, less corrupt and willing to fight to have the real truth exploited.
British police officers should try it sometime.
No they not brave enough to speak out.
Well we can't clearly trust our own police force, except of course the two amazing dogs who assisted the case.discovering madeline dna
Interview with Goncalo Amaral
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/goncalo-amaral-there-was-no-breaking-in.html
Very interesting and soooo true !!!
...
For what Gonçalo Amaral said the three "suspects" aren't even burglars, but drug dealers. So, drug dealers decided one day to become burglars, but by accident they become killers, and then to hide their mistake they become abductors... Very credible!
Gonçalo Amaral - There are English journalists who speak of a farce, of something that is being staged for the media, and perhaps there's nothing more than that. What is risky and very serious it's this attempt to produce a new thesis - the thesis that was divulged recently - of someone who commits a theft, gets scared by a 3-year-old child, murders the child for that reason and then whisks the body away, that to me sounds rather preposterous.
Here is a short summary of some of the things Mr. Amaral said in his interview with a CMTV News Anchor.
He believes that the searches that are taking place are nothing more than the police acting out a scene in a movie. He said that there are some English journalists who are calling it a farce.
He said that SY is trying to promote the theory that Madeleine was killed by a burglar that broke into the apartment. According to Mr. Amaral this theory is not new, it was suggested by a member of SY in 2007 that was part of the investigative team. The theory was dismissed because it made no sense.
There was no sign of a break-in into the apartment, the only thing that was missing from the apartment is not a thing but a person, Madeleine.
He believes that SY is trying to conclude the investigation because they have already spent too much time and money.
He believes SY's latest efforts make people forget the evidence that exists. While people are being entertained by these digs, which are on the borders of the terrain so that the media can film, no one is discussing the evidence, the simulation of an abduction.
He says you have to believe that these burglars are extremely intelligent to have decided to remove the girl from the apartment which they killed by accident, to leave no trace of a break-in, and to simulate an abduction. But then for some reason the burglars had a lapse in judgement, their intelligence ran out, one of them carries the child on foot to a field nearby and deposits her body there.
He was asked how the latest 8 suspects turned up: He replied that all one has to do is have access to a list of the calls made in that locale during a day or two and pick the names of those who have criminal records.
He said that the theory that the child died in the apartment was shared by the English police that worked with the Portuguese police in 2007. What SY is trying to do now is undermine the conclusions of the original investigators, to make people forget the evidence that exists.
He said that there are indications which suggest that Madeleine's body no longer exists.
Mr. Amaral was asked if one day we will know what happened: he replied yes when MI5 makes their files public, which could be many years from now. He said that people shouldn't forget that the British secret service was in Portugal right from the beginning. He said that what he is saying is not some conspiracy theory, that when the dogs Eddie and Keela and a forensic team from Britain finished their work in Portugal that the English person responsible for those searches was taken to the airport by one of his colleagues. At the airport was an MI5 agent waiting to be briefed.
Pat,
Totally off topic, have you thought about writing about Hannah Anderson. I would love to get your take on her.
She has so many contradictions that its alarming. And the fact the police just closed the case and said she was a victim and moved on is very concerning.
The biggest thing was she claimed she was scared for her life if she tried to run or get help. Then on the today show states that Jim was signaling for help. Yet no one stopped and asked her about that.
Now Hannah has tried to cover for her changes in her story and even went back to her askFM account. Another blog that things shes more involved and was not a victim did screen shots of those questions to save them and its good she did since Hannah keeps closing the account. She was asked a few times to explain that and here are some of the answers.
And I typed this word for word so should be totally accurate. Hopefully I didn’t make any errors.
Q are the questions and A’s are Hannahs answers.
Q. how did you get hurt? That had to be hard not getting help? Was Jim trying to reach for help for your aid?
A. No why would he. And, I had the backpacks on and I have bad knees and I had to bend down under a really low branch and it like twisted it pretty bad.
ANOTHER Q&A
Q. why were you and Jim needing help? SOS? Why?
A. I was hurt and couldn’t help him get to the river anymore
ANOTHER Q&A
Q. I thought the gun fire was to get help for you?
A. Yes, the fire wasn’t working so mentioned the gun sos thing
So first she basically says “why would Jim get me help” then that contradicts with “I was hurt and couldn’t help him so that is why he did the SOS for help but the fire didn’t work so I mentioned using a gun”
HUH?
So was she in danger or was he trying to get her help
I think this case needs to stay open. I think she is way more involved.
This was a done deal some time ago. The case has gone on for too long and has involved the support of too many high profile politicians and celebrities to end in anything but a win-win for the McCanns.
This case is testament to the complexities and willpower of the human mind. I believe the McCanns have personality disorders which have enabled them, in the face of losing their daughter, to construct a smokescreen of lies that has in turn procured them a substantial amount of financial wealth. This personality disorder must lie in the realms of narcissism, as the actions of leaving their toddlers alone at night so they can enjoy their evening in peace and flatly refusing to accept they were negligent in any way, points to this.
Thanks again for your thoughts on this Pat. You are lighthouse in an ocean of sharks.
A copper without shame: Maddie's top detective blames everyone but himself for the lack of answers
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1038715/A-copper-shame-Maddies-detective-blames-lack-answers.html#ixzz34Fj0uqhv
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
That article about Amaral (from above post) is such BS. Granted it is VERY old. Its from 2008.
But they made a statement that I can only call the biggest double standard with this whole mess. This website/news reporters can sure dish out the insults and accusations yet will print the biggest bunch of BS every day.
SO HERE IS THE QUOTE FROM ARTICLE:
“It takes character to admit gross failure. Amaral has not done this in print. Instead, he petulantly dresses it up as a conspiracy against him while, without any hard evidence, placing blame on those who were hurt most.”
**************************
First of all, there was British interference from day one.. That is a fact.
Second of all, leaving kids alone is not failure? I don’t see anyone calling the Mccanns out for failing to admit they were wrong in leaving toddlers alone. In fact, they are treated like parents of the year.
And 3rd of all the most annoying part of that article was their claim that Amaral made his allegations "without any hard evidence" yet isn’t that just what they are doing with half of the nonsense they print. There is a robber. Scotland Yard is looking for the kidnapper. The Mccanns are victims. They have no evidence of any of that yet print it time and again.
This whole case just pisses me off to no end.
That man lost his job. Why, because he stated he parents were suspect when all the evidence and their lies point to that conclusion.
Mr. Amaral didn't lose his job; he wasn't fired. When he was handling the case, just before he was reassigned to another department, his superiors told him that some cases never get solved that he should take it easy. They were already preparing for the case to be archived and were basically telling Mr. Amaral to back off. He persisted and they took him off the case in the beginning of October 2007. It was his decision to retire from the force in July of 2008.
To my mind anyone who has followed this case from the beginning and refuse or cannot see the cover-up are blind or have vested interest.
It is that in your face.
So here we are 7 years on and still the bs continues regardless.
some will say ..that's life! its not a fair world...miscarriages of justices do happen these people will insist...life goes on....tomorrows another day.
I don't deny the above
Yet words do not really spell out the picture...there's people involved in those miscarriage's of justice, families, children who suffer...some take their lives.
How would any of us feel if that happened to us or close ones? would "that's life" suffice?
in this case ..I believe the evidence has always been there and the truth is known....and to my mind that makes it criminal beyond words.
mojo
I feel so strongly about the guilty mccanns, I would like to set up a fund fund for the poor policeman to help financially support him through the case and in the fight for justice for the truth.
Would have to be something the mccanns and there crew cannot touch.
I wonder if all those celebrities have looked at the evidence properly.
I want to scream it from the roof tops, I am going to find a way that we can get the truth to be heard!!!
Thanks for clarifying Guerra.
From Trustmeigetit.
Just cant log on on this device
@PAT, There is alot that agree something should be done to balance the scales from this destruction of justice for this child that deserves better respect, and from them that truly care about the truth?
You have profiled many cases, where things are not as they seem, and the obvious becomes a stark disturbing truth?
At first i didnt understand how kate could forgive any suspect?
Drawing from the e fit, and what you said about the smiths sighting, does fit who kate was talking about, not a stranger at all, the gerry lookalike they have not used previously?
In all that time, i have never understood why kate said this until i look at the e fit they received?
Also gerry is the one who mentioned finding a body?
Has he realised what that statement suggests in view of the smiths evidence, and the suspect kate can forgive?
Its a telling sign of fear over that sighting they have discredited for too long, which comes back to amaral being right about their involvement over the sighting by the smiths, and why jane tanner was unreliable on the events, and why gerry never saw tanner man or jane at all, meaning gerry was some place else before the alarm was raised, his accounts have never made any sense, and his locations questionable?
The missing pink blanket went unexplained after amaral recalls seeing this item in the bedroom, and some mystery trip the maCcanns took to spain?
Then the missing blue sports bag, after the abduction?
Some one was very busy in removing items from a crime scene?
Note these items were never classed as stolen by the maCcanns?
Gerry denied owning such a bag, a tennis bag?
And the lies mount up about items that vannish along with their daughter.
GMcCann's involvement in COMARE suggests that the cover up may be more about a huge public health issue than about a missing child.
The nuclear industry makes Al Capone's mafia pale in comparison: they have absolutely no scruples when it comes to lying about and concealing from the public the health azards it poses.
GMcCann was a member of this State-funded committee appointed to officially clear the dealings of the nuclear industry in the UK.
The McCann receive unprecedented official and governmental support from day, or rather, hour one of MM's disappearance.
Does anyone else see the undeniable connection here?
Am I the only one fearing that the content of the report GM helped draw up must be totally, dangerously misguiding? And that the McCanns must be protected at all costs lest something might transpire concerning his participation in COMARE that would better be kept from the British people?
I don't believe that COMARE is the reason, it does however show a connection into the corridors of power... among others.
I have read that a similar study to the one undertaken by COMARE into suitable sites for Nuclear power plants was carried out in Germany and the results found were polar opposites.
it was very relevant for the safety of the public who would be living near such areas...the UK found safe what the German report deemed unsafe for similar.
Incidentally edf (French company) are a big player and Gordon Browns brother has a high profile job with the organisation.
All that been said..i don't believe this is the reason for the cover up, what is does begin to show is connection...and its the tip of the iceberg.
mojo
I just watched the news on the Portuguese channel RTP Informacao, in which they said that the searches have ended, that they found nothing and that SY will be returning home tomorrow.
oh they will/have found something ...be sure of that.
the case will be closed ..by hook or by crook.
(it likes like the latter .."crooks")
the movie has more twists yet...its in what I will call an ordered chaos phase. ...the big revelations yet to come.
get your tin hats on
mojo
The Met's official statement reads:
"At this time no evidence relating to Madeleine McCann has been identified. However it has given us an essential understanding of the activity on and people that have used this piece of land."
I'd suggest that the activity referred to will be drug use.
Big surprise. Especially after the heads up we may find nothing article they posted in think last week.
Surprising people had any faith that they were even looking for Madeleine at all.
Glad they spent so many hours and millions of tax payers dollars for nothing.
trustmeigetit, drug paraphernalia being found on waste ground at the edge of any town/village would normally be regarded as nothing. But in this case the Met might be trying to make something rather more of it.
Just my immediate reaction. Probably entirely wrong.
another legalise clear as mud
statement.
"At this time no evidence relating to Madeleine McCann has been identified...?
identified ? does that mean something found that needs analysis/forensic confirmation ?
has anyone ever notice how the wording always leaves movement.
I have just read the blacksmith again, I don't know why I do..its torture.
He just doesn't get it does he...waffling about no evidences thus no EAW blah blah..simple facts he insists.
I wished he would do an article on the FSS and their behaviour...or the British government on refusal to release basic information and generally obstructing the investigation from day one.
He seems quick to put down poor journalism ..maybe he should show them how its done on the above issues ive raised...see what conclusions he arrives at.
and that is the simple point the blacksmith misses.
The EAW would easily have had the required evidences if the investigation was not deliberately obstructed and corrupted.
all aboard....the trains leaving the station.
mojo
Part of the evidence they collected were two cannabis plants, and I wouldn't put it pass these people to suggest that those plants are proof that that scrubland was occupied by drug traffickers. Mr. Amaral mentioned in his recent interview that if the English police had gone into the interior of the terrain, instead of restricting themselves to the borders where they could be filmed, they would have found more cannabis plants which are a favourite of expatriates who make Praia da Luz their home.
maybe that's what meant nowadays by a "joint" investigation.
mojo
Guerra,
Yes, it just struck me as a very leading suggestion from the Met. If the "activity" were nothing more than say a children's playground then why mention it?
Irrespective of any forensic links to Madeleine, they clearly want to suggest something relating to criminal activity on that land that might tie in with a "suspect's" profile.
Time will tell.
With some of the theories they've come up with, I sometimes wonder if Redwood and company hadn't already been to the scrubland of Praia da Luz to smoke the evidence.
I just listened to an interesting discussion on a Portuguese show where this gentleman, Mr. Sargento, said that he asked the bishop of the Algarve if it was true that the McCanns had visited the church in Praia da Luz on, I believe he said, Jan 14, 2010. Local people said they had seen the couple leaving the church at 5 in the morning through a side door on that day and Mr. Sargento wanted to know if this was true. The bishop didn't have first hand knowledge so he made enquiries and later confirmed to Mr. Sargento that that was indeed the case. He also told Mr. Sargento that Mrs. Hubbard, the wife of the Anglican priest Mr. Haynes Hubbard, had entered into a state of panic when she found out that Mr. Sargento was asking the bishop these questions. Mr. Sargento was told that the Hubbards are friends of Mrs. McCann's parents, they knew them before they arrived on the scene in Portugal 3 or 4 days after the child was reported missing. And apparently since day one to this day the McCanns have keys to the church, they can come and go as they please.
Also from the Met:
"This is the same as would be done in the UK for a murder or high risk missing person enquiry."
Except of course this had already been done by the PJ in conjunction with the Met. The UK's own Mark Harrison was the advising expert.
So in effect the Met have spent 3 years and several million pounds in order to replicate what the PJ had undertaken at the very begining.
*It would also be usual for a UK murder enquiry to interview those witnesses who were closest to the scene and to establish the coherence of their movements.*
Will this now be done?
Belatedly.
@PAT, i think its clear to why amaral is telling the truth about a mistake in not monitoring the maCcanns phone calls, but couldnt get permission from a judge, not sure if this was in connection to the deleted calls in the maCcanns phone records?
Just a point about the information put out about this case pat, why would mi5 have information regarding a case after the events?
On whos advice did the maCcanns delete them calls?
Gerry lied about abusive texts being received on his phone, that person has never been identified or named, and why delete such evidence if it is true?
I have wonderd for a while if gerry was blackmailing some one into silence about information?
If you look at this pat, one can follow the propaganda gerry has used to cover his tracks, but traces of that exist in what they put out, and what they dont.
We were mislead to beleive this was some form of elite organised abduction?
None exists because many debunked this as impossible, so they changed the tactic to being some one stupid?
Ive been following the maCcanns behviours over this information, they have gone from some of the most bizarre behaviors, to trying to be normal?
Ican say for sure, only their behaviours fit the pattern of what happend to that child, and the abductor is a figment of their disturbed thinking, because neither exist in reality to the evidence found, and yes pat the behaviors show alot towards what is obvious and what is pure fiction, there has been alot of innocent people caught up in this web of deceit from the main two manipulators, this never occurs in genuine abductions, you then have the silence surrounding a bigger odd group they were with?
Ive always had the impression secrets are buried after the chaos they attractd, all an act under the word con merchants.
We now see the group distance themselves from the main liars, a useful tool in drawing rank as doctors do in gross neglct, and using that experience to obstruct the process of justice in the propaganda they used.
Basicaly putting libel writs on what they said from the start to change evidence and their stories as time went by in that scam.
Only a opinion based on everything that is odd.
This SY investigation stinks.
There's nothing to see here, move on please.
I wish that SY would properly investigate the events of May 3rd starting with the parents. Why would they not answer questions?
Thumbscrews sound like a good idea ....
The MaCanns are now saying on Sky News today that they are satisfied with the excavations and that despite the fact that nothing has come of this investigation it reinforces their belief that Madelelein may still be alive!!
Time to take off the dust covers on the fund and it will be business as usual!!??? This is incredible!
I was already alarmed that the Mccanns had a key to the church while on vacation.
The fact that they STILL have a key is even more alarming.
I'm not a religion person so anyone out there that is, is this normal?
To me it just sounds like there is some additional support going to the Mccanns via the church. Not that I would be shocked given all cover ups the church's have done for child molestation.
But still. Who are these people.
I've never heard of any other family so protected outside of politicians.
The mc canns often use the word key in many of their interviews.The key piece of evidence etc ,interesting....
Post a Comment