I was not going to post another blog about the Scotland Yard review/investigation, but when I see so many people still believing that this new round of interviews is going to solve the case, that somehow these people are going to spill the beans on the McCanns, that something must have been found in the searches, that sniffer dogs standing by is a sure sign that now the British are giving credence to the previous dog findings, I can't help myself; I have to address the issue.
Here it is in a legal nutshell: only if Maddie's body is found will anyone be prosecuted.
It doesn't matter that someone thinks they saw Gerry carrying a child that night.
It doesn't matter if Malinka says Murat is really in league with the McCanns.
It doesn't matter if the sniffer dogs hit on some rental car of these new suspects or their own car or on Murat's driveway.
Why?
Because if you add any new information (not proof) to the abundance of information already in the investigative files, it is next to nothing and will not provide anything of credibility with which to charge anyone; no prosecutor in his right mind would take such a mess to court.
Prosecutor: The new sniffer dog hit on Murat's driveway.
Defense Attorney: So what? The old sniffer dog hit on the McCanns' hire car.
No perpetrator of this crime is going to admit to anything seven years later when he himself knows there is not a shred of physical evidence existing to link to anyone. Anything these new "suspects" might say during the present interviews is going to be so limited, the case is hardly going to be blown wide open. No one is going to admit they kidnapped Maddie, helped bury Maddie, or turn over photos of Maddie in captivity.
Only, and I repeat, only if Maddie's body is actually located is there the possibility of this case moving forward. And, considering there is no good reason to implicate oneself after getting away with a crime for so long, none of these "suspects" is going to suddenly confess to where he buried Maddie - as a lone perpetrator, a member of some criminal group, nor as an accessory after the fact to the McCanns.
What is happening in Praia da Luz is orchestrated to coincide with the Amaral trial and to bring the case to a suitable administrative conclusion by the end of summer.
I have just been contacted by Anthony Summers whose new book, Looking for Madeleine, will be hitting the stands in the UK in September. He seems to have not an ounce of fear of being Carter-Rucked and his very-late-in-the-game shout-out to me to ask permission to use a few quotes from my blogs leads me to believe he is not going to spend a great deal of time in the book addressing Gonçalo's and my professional analyses of the case and the McCanns' possible guilt; it will be a book on the McCann search and the Scotland Yard review and a small bit about those people who question the McCanns' innocence.
For all of you who think there is going to be some huge public outcry when Scotland Yard administratively closes the case with a "reasonable theory" of what happened to Maddie, think again. Whether the McCanns win or lose in court, Gonçalo Amaral will still be portrayed as a "disgraced Portuguese cop" who traumatized the innocent parents of a missing child and the Scotland Yard review will be touted as a success in that England cares enough about any missing child to go the distance and find answers for the family. The media will also gush about how Scotland Yard did a spectacular job trying to catch the perpetrator or perpetrators and how they "solved" the case (if only in word). Finally, the Summers' book will come out and won't be pulled off the market by the McCanns, hence becoming the first "unbiased" and independent book on the case, the first book on Maddie to be published by a major publishing house, a book the public will accept as an intelligent and proper synopsis of what has happened over the last seven years.
Check.
Check.
Checkmate.
Sorry, mates. Sometimes it is what it is.
Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
July 1, 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.
very very cynical... honestly I think you are way off base regarding the Scotland Yard investigation being a whitewash... imo you have been jumping to some spectacular conclusions, which you have no proof off, because you have no idea what SY are thinking the same as the rest of us... answer me one question. Do you think SY would act exactly this way if the Mccanns were suspects? I believe they would...
ReplyDeleteGiven that Anthony Summers specialises in writing books uncovering the crimes and conspiracies of the rich and the politically powerful (Richard Nixon, J. Edgar Hoover for starters), it seems unlikely that he would take part in the whitewashing of the McCanns and the smearing of Amaral. If that is the case his story could only amount to "incompetent corrupt Portuguese detective wrongly accuses parents and ignores criminals under his nose". Nothing very interesting there - a policeman being bad at his job and failing to solve a crime - hardly worth sitting down to the PC for. Although maybe the Madeleine cash bandwagon is irresistible to Summers too.
ReplyDeleteSummers knows how power operates, and how it acts in its own interest. He also seems pretty well connected and able to uncover truths most of us would never have the chance to get near. It would be very odd if he suddenly changed tack at this point in his career and became the voice of the establishment, but then this case is odd. I guess we'll see.
Anonymous 6:45
ReplyDeleteUnless Summers in collusion with Scotland Yard to tell all when they take down the McCanns in the next two months, I sincerely doubt he is about to expose the power base. When he emailed me, I also saw that he had dealt with conspiracy issues before but not in a way that put anything on the line. His choice of the few quotes he picked raised a red flag to me and I said I did not want those quoted out of context and as a representation of conspiracy nuts; I told him to just ask me what he wanted and I would answer. He asked two question and was only interested in a few sentences. That does not bode well for a book that would be exposing the McCanns. Outside of Amaral (who he has not interviewed), I am the biggest professional voice on the case. Now, agree with me or not with all my conclusions, a book that is critically analyzing the case would include an in-depth look at the profiling theories. Summers totally ducked my questions as to what the aim of the book was, saying it was going to be a thorough coverage of "the story." If it turns out he surprises me, I will call him up and thank him roundly and I will write a blog praising the hell out of him. I will do the same if Scotland Yard comes through. I don't think those surprises are going to make my day, unfortunately,.
SergeantDoodles,
ReplyDeleteIf you have read my many blogs on Scotland Yard, you would know that I am not jumping to conclusions; I am basing my conclusions on their behavior and my experience with 20 years of experiences with how police departments deal with cases.
And, no, if they were after the McCanns, Scotland Yard would not be spending so much time chasing down ludicrous suspects and pointless leads. It is not a proper strategy; one does not waste years and money searching in all the wrong places, delaying justice or possibly leaving a child in a dangerous situation. Also, spending so much time on other suspects and leads only allows a defense attorney to tear your case apart. It is not about the prosecution being able to say "We eliminated all other possibilities" as that is a ludicrous and false statement; it is about the defense being able to make the defendants look like such a weak possibility that the police had to spend years looking at other possibilities.
Therefore, the only thing I see as the purpose of this review is to appear to be searching for Maddie and her abductor and coming to a conclusion the McCanns and the public can accept.
the purpose of this review is to appear to be searching for Maddie and her abductor and coming to a conclusion the McCanns and the public can accept.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with this, except for "appear". OG was given a mission and really tried to do a good job.
Of course the dice were loaded since their review wasn't based on the Portuguese investigation but on a McCann's theory without much evidence if any.
Now which kind of acceptable conclusion will they find that will not only satisfy the McCanns as a last resort but prevent the informed members of the public to take it for a whitewash and last but certainly not least fit with the AG report according to which the crime was undetermined ?
There will be lots of books, Pat. Summers and his wife are good writers and I don't see them doing a 'The Death of Innocence' type book.
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to see how they approach it. But it won't be the last book.
So we have come down to the level of pure conspiracy theories have we not? I could even say hey maybe Amaral planted the scent of cadaver at the scene and then was subsequently taken off the investigation, but this information was kept from the public by the Portuguese government and the British as an act of diplomacy. To put it in another way I think you are claiming to have finished a jigsaw puzzle with some of the crucial elements missing and perhaps arriving at the wrong conclusions.
ReplyDeleteYou think Scotland Yard is corrupt? Maybe they are to some extent, but claiming they are running a corrupt investigation where a little girl has gone missing is really out there imo. There are many possibilities/theories I think to explain why they might be questioning these individuals or being made suspects which would not indicate a corrupt investigation at all. One being of course that the Mccanns are innocent. Another being they are guilty and had local help. Another being the police aren't sure and are pursuing several lines of enquiries. There are countless contrived scenarios I could imagine and I find it interesting that you settle on just this one especially when we don't know the complete picture from Scotland Yard and the Portuguese police more enlightened point of view assuming of course there is information not out there in the public domain.
For what it's worth I'm 70% convinced the Mccanns know more then they are letting on, but I really do try and keep and open mind and just look at the facts since I have become interested in reading about this especially as a toddler's life has probably been taken.
Good point, Anne, although I don't think all are that thick. But, it is true when a department is given a mission, they tend to be very dutiful, following up on the work handed to them.
ReplyDeleteAlso, one must realize, that even in a good police department, not all detectives are competent in crime analysis and, therefore, may be easy to lead down an erroneous investigative path. Also in any department, there may be varying theories and detectives may be chosen to work the case depending on what their theory is. Those that go with the program, because they believe the program or because they want to enhance their career, are those that would work Operation Grange. It is complicated but the one thing for sure is that the history of how a case is handled is a clue to how it is going to end.
SergeantDoodles, it remains to be seen. Let's see how it all turns out in a few months.
ReplyDeleteI understand one of the "suspects" Scotland Yard's "crack team" have lined up is a schizophrenic man.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if he will "confess" to it all and "solve" the case to Scotland Yard's heart's content- which is of course the same heart as David Cameron's and Clarence Mitchell's and the McCanns'- to quote but three or four...
The schizophrenic person will certainly not be abused. His and the 3 other arguidos' presence is due to their exchange of phone calls shortly before and after the disappearance.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to know things others don't.
DeleteScotland Yard's behaviour has become quite predictable. The libel trial has been postponed several times and every time, a week or so before it resumes SY has released some story about their exploits to find the abductor.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the behaviour that you would expect from a police force conducting an investigation, a public relations campaign yes, but not an investigation.
@ That could give amaral the same defence then, that no evidence of a abduction has been produced in its theory?
ReplyDeleteThats all the maCcanns have used, because alot has been debunked about that idea, in relation to poor evidence to support it?
Redwood did state he needed to question persons of interest to eliminate them?
There is another clue in the way these suspects are to be treated fairly without abuse!
I seem to remember the case of barry george, and mental health issues he had, and many saying he didnt have the skill to pull off such a crime on so little evidence?
And here we are again with another idea on so little evidence?
I'm placing my bet on the schizophrenic and/or the deceased black drug addict being selected to "take the fall" for Madeleine's disappearance. Neither can defend themselves.
ReplyDeletei do agree with the last comment
ReplyDeletea drug addict or a schizophrenic will be the next Mccann's victim
they will use that type of individual as a scapegoat
@ Without a identification to anyone being in that apartment, the maCcanns are also libel, for being false witness, because gerry did not see jane or the tanner man, making gerry unreliable over any e fit?
ReplyDeleteAnd janes sighting?
There is also a very serious question about the tampering of janes statement?
In the scotland yard reconstruction, jane does not leave the table until gerry returns?
How then can the maCcanns carry on without noticing this manipulation in janes story about seeing gerry?
So is janes statement a lie about seeing gerry?
It seems to of gone by without notice, and more disturbing jane hasnt said anything about this change by scotland yard, or the maCcanns?
What I want to know is how come this review has been ongoing for three years and yet only now are people been interviewed in Portugal.?Why didn't SY start off with the searches and interviews earlier on.None of this makes sense !Sick of reading bs in the media about arrests that are imminent! Nothing will come of these interviews ,apart from SY looking like they are working hard at wasting tax payers millions!
ReplyDelete@ The question about the limited company has come under question again in the maCcann files, and what happend to the reward that was never claimed, from the news of the world?
ReplyDeleteThere is some serious thoughts why the donations were not split amongst other charity groups, over a unclaimed reward?
1.5 million?
It makes for a interesting read why only the madeleine company received payment on a pledge to be split?
Re are Scotland Yard corrupt?Corruption goes on everywhere our governments lie to us and only tell us what they want us to hear. We are drip fed lies on a daily basis , you only have to look what's going on in the world such as the Middle East etc.If we are constantly told something we believe it. However I don't mean to get all political here but this case has become political because of the influential people who have assisted the McCanns.Scotland Yard probably are not corrupt but maybe someone's pulling Redwoods strings!
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeletePat.
what a depressing post ...the mess was created by an illegal intervention by the uk government.
the case will not be lost through mess but corruption from the establishment that is supposed to up hold law.
lots of cases get solved without a body ...come on ....are you telling any potential crooks out there ...get rid of body....get away with crime.......sure things become harder but not unsolvable if their is a WILL for truth.
its not some ...oh well ..you win some ..you lose some! it maybe that mind-set for attorneys or even police.
Some may think Truth and Justice are worth fighting for.
Pat ...Do you think this case is the epitome of truth and justice at work ?
Is it worth trying to achieve justice for a innocent 3 y/o child?
Anybody who looks at this case closely can see what needs to be done...its not lack of evidence ..don't make me laugh.
Its politics -----and that isn't above the Law....so lets find the blockers....arrest and continue.
mojo
ReplyDeleteI must add Portugal's establishment are making it all possible for SY to do all this.....are they not?
Lets see how the Portuguese judge rules.
Maybe All the corruption of the UK and SY will be corrected by the Portuguese establishments ......they are better defenders of truth after all.....look how they have defended Goncalo Amaral the last 7 years ...one of their policeman.
you all make me laugh....pull your heads out the sand folks.....2 peas in a pod.
mojo
"Portugal's establishment are making it all possible for SY to do all this.....are they not?"
DeleteIndeed they are - the Portuguese investigation was shelved after the refusal to take part in the requested reconstruction, and the Portuguese should have stood their ground and said to SY "No reconstruction - no co-operation".
Google "Stefan Kiszko."
ReplyDeleteSee how they work yet?
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/07/english-ask-for-dna-of-arguidos-at-all.html
ReplyDeleteA report from PT press :
"The British Police even asked the Judiciary Police to start collecting fingerprints and DNA profiles of the four suspects now constituted as arguidos. Even if it was done in a sneaky way.
The request appears in a letter rogatory dated of July last year, but was challenged by the PJ, since it is an illegality. At the request of Scotland Yard, and with the endorsement of the Portuguese Public Ministry, the suspects were formally constituted arguidos, Tuesday, by the PJ inspectors of the Southern Directorate in Faro."
The Met at work. July last year.
@ Out of interest, this makes for a contradiction about gloves in redwoods theory?
ReplyDeleteThere is no reasoning in this method at all, unless there was items stolen from that apartment?
Since he hasnt unearthed any new evidence?
What grounds has he got in that direction to obtain finger prints?
That is confusing.
I don't think that Redwood has grounds for any of this. It is all being done to pressurise the Portuguese and to play to the media narrative of their failure to cooperate.
ReplyDeleteHe will clutch at any kind of illicit connection that he can establish for an Arguido. It's all about the unfolding story - the perception of having built profiles and being able to make a tabloid case.
If the above report is true, then the most prominent feature to me is that these requests were made in July of last year. Redwood has waited until now (the libel trial) to question the 'suspects' that he was trying to finger a year ago.
Framing Malinka, not for the courts, but for the media.
ReplyDeletePat Thank you for an interesting post and thank you for the knowledge you have provided over the years. I know that untiminately if you are proved wrong about this that there will be nobody more delighted than yourself. Infact I would guess that a lot of your professional time over the last 7+ years has been devoted to the cause of bringing jutice for the wee baby. Like you I hope your wrong but am unable to put forward any evidence which contradicts what you say. I will only say one thing the truth will not stay hidden forever....in my home city this week we buried a man who as a young man was framed by the English police and served 14 years in Jail. At the time public opinion even from his own community was no existent. Policital powers who like the Portuguise Government should have supported him did not.There was not numerious blogs and internet sites dedicated to his justice, the british PM at the time made speechs in parliament about his guilt but a few good people continued to state the obvious like in this case and the truth finally had to come out. The truth will always come out and we will always be thankful for those like yourself who devoted some much of your life to a wee girl.
ReplyDeleteGuerra I just want to say one thing with regards your post. The trial in portugal isn't about whether GA lied in his book about the McCs of killing their daughter and there is in fact another abducter who SY are in hot pursuit. The case against GA (in part) is that it damaged the search and people stopped looking which everytime that SY appear on our TVs searching and interviewing people backs up the premise that the search continues and that GAs conclusions have little effect.
ReplyDeleteAnon 6:44
ReplyDeleteThe McCanns can still claim that the years before they got Scotland Yard to do a review were wasted time, that if it wasn't for Goncalo, maybe Maddie could have been found during that time.
Also, the Scotland Yard investigation into other suspects plants into the mind that Goncalo was wrong and off base to put out his information. The manipulation of perception is a valuable tool that can change the course of either a criminal or civil trial or the viewpoint of an entire population.
It all bodes well for future cases.....
ReplyDeleteIf anyone commits a crime, do not co-operate with the police, and counter claim everything is the new advice for suspects... they can argue to the police ....while your focussed on me/us the real criminals are getting away!....oh and by the way can you display this link on your website....theres good chaps.
It used to be sign of guilt ....and no its a form of defence, such is the irony.
I was under the impression that behaviour of that kind was not allowed and that Law enforcement had mechanisms to investigate crimes.
the McCann's could have had the investigation opened at any time.....there's only one side in this corruption that's wasted time amongst other things and its more than apparent without delving to deep.
I personally think people are forgetting what has gone on with this case.
Mojo
It's insulting to any police force for outsiders to come in and demand (sorry request) that all information is looked at again and I'm surprised that the Portuguese are being so cooperative. I agree with the poster at 4.04 who said "No reconstruction - no co-operation".
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 6:44 AM, you say that the trial isn't about whether Mr. Amaral lied, yet it has been labelled a libel trial and the judge has asked witnesses if there is anything in Mr. Amaral's book that is not found in the case files. I will say this, it does not seem like a libel trial since, to my knowledge, the people representing the McCanns have not specifically stated what they find to be libelous in the book.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of Mr. Amaral's book hindering the search for Madeleine was addressed by the Appellate court and it ruled against the couple. The McCanns subsequently went to the Supreme court and their appeal was dismissed. This trial shouldn't even be taking place. Don't forget that it was Mrs. McCann who requested the review in an open letter to Mr. Cameron to which he replied with an affirmative with an open letter of his own. Therefore SY supposedly searching for their daughter now has no bearing on their claims, however, like Pat said the perception that SY is looking for an abductor plants in the minds of the public, and hopefully not the judge, that Mr. Amaral's conclusions were wrong.
«The issue of Mr. Amaral's book hindering the search for Madeleine was addressed by the Appellate court and it ruled against the couple. The McCanns subsequently went to the Supreme court and their appeal was dismissed. This trial shouldn't even be taking place»
ReplyDeleteGuerra, the Appellate Court (and then the Supreme Court) ruled on the preliminary injunction (concerning the sale of the book), not on the main proceedings, which is the one still going on. The fact that the request for that preliminary injunction was dismissed does not mean that the claim made in the proceedings itself is unfounded, although, of course, to the best of my knowledge, it is a good indication that it might be.
V
"The fact that the request for that preliminary injunction was dismissed does not mean that the claim made in the proceedings itself is unfounded."
ReplyDeleteMr. Amaral writes a book, the McCanns seek to have it banned because they claim that it is libelous and that it is hindering the search for their child. They succeed. Mr. Amaral appeals. Three judges compare the book to the case files and find the couple's claims unfounded. The couple appeals to the Supreme court without success. Given the rulings the couple tries to settle out of court, but Mr. Amaral rejects the McCann's proposal. The couple goes ahead with the trial seeking damages from Mr Amaral. So what you're basically telling me is that because the objective of the trial has changed that the same claims now have a foundation. It makes no sense, but in light of some of the decisions that have been rendered in Portugal nothing surprises me anymore.
The rulings handed down by the Appellate court effectively killed the libel trial, that is why the McCanns sought an out of court settlement. And if Mr. Amaral had agreed to settle we likely wouldn't have had Scotland Yard conducting an intense media campaign on Portuguese soil.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that a lot of people are wrong in what they think the public will see and perceive.
The attempt to whitewash the case has failed miserably....to coin a phrase , its been a disaster...the general public although not aware of the full detail, are nevertheless aware that the couple are been protected and the truth hidden.
All that is been achieved now is the complete destruction of faith in the Police and Governments, the damage is immense ....but they have passed the Rubicon and as such know no way out.
the end.
mojo
Gonçalo Amaral was in charge of the criminal investigation during only 5 months. When his book was published, 10 months later, the investigation had continued under Paulo Rebelo.
ReplyDeleteIf it was stopped it wasn't because of GA's conclusion, but because the requested reconstruction was rejected. It is very clearly stated in the AG report : the TP9 knew that the investigation couldn't and wouldn't go further without a reconstruction.
ReplyDeleteHello Ann.
Has the WOC been confirmed a technicality ?
or Point in law?
can we obtain a definitive answer to this.
Why is the libel/damages case proceeding?
Can you direct me to where this WOC issue falls into a "technicality" ? (I don't believe it does, I think that is a lie)
In my opinion the case LIBEL/DAMAGES or whatever it is supposed to be .....has NO GROUNDS in law.
What is going on?
Mojo
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Mojo,
ReplyDeleteThe judge herself announced that the WOC issue would have no effect on the judgement but only on the number of plaintiffs (they would be only 4 if the High Court didn't allow the parents to represent their daughter) contemplated by the judgement.
Guerra, concerning your comment yesterday 5:54 PM:
ReplyDeleteWhat I am saying is that what the Appellate Court and the Supreme Court (the latter only preliminarily, it would seem) ruled on was an injunction ("providência cautelar"), NOT the main proceedings.
For example: i am claiming damages from you for something you did. I bring an action against you but, additionally, I might also file a "previdência cautelar" requesting that all your assets be frozen (like in Amara's case, i believe); why? because if you go and spend or deplete all your assets *before* the judgment is out (and we all know that can take years in Portugal) I may very well win the action in the end, but where does it get me if you have depleted all your assets in the meantime?
In this case, *I think*, the McCanns filed 2 injunctions or maybe requested two measures in the same injunction: the first one concerning the freezing of GA's assets and the second one concerning the suspension sale of the book itself (allegedly to prevent the book from continuing to harm the "search" while the case is pending). The injunctions have been decided upon, but the main proceedings are still ongoing.
What I meant is that I would assume that the grounds for filing the injunction requesting the suspension of the sale of the book must naturally be the same grounds on which the main case itself, on the whole, was brought, i.e., the damage caused to the "search", and since the injunction was decided in favour of GA, I am very hopeful that the main proceedings themselves will also be ruled in favour of GA, but I may be wrong, obviously.
«The rulings handed down by the Appellate court effectively killed the libel trial, that is why the McCanns sought an out of court settlement»
Yes, you are right, and this is why I say I am confident GA will win the case. However in terms of the procedure, the main proceedings *must* continue until the end, unless there was an agreement or one of the parties withdraws or some other stuff I cannot remember now.
V
Mojo:
ReplyDelete«The attempt to whitewash the case has failed miserably....to coin a phrase , its been a disaster...the general public although not aware of the full detail, are nevertheless aware that the couple are been protected and the truth hidden.
All that is been achieved now is the complete destruction of faith in the Police and Governments, the damage is immense ....but they have passed the Rubicon and as such know no way out.»
I agree with you completely, but this case will help gauge exactly to what extent is this awareness of the public totally pointless and useless. Provided people's attention is not diverted (which is so easy to do...) this case will help people perceive exactly how the authorities, politicians etc couldn't really care less about the public opinion.
We'll see.
V