Friday, April 24, 2015

The Scotland Yard Review and Ad Hominem Attacks in the Madeleine McCann Case

I just wrote a set of responses to comments on my last post and I thought I should copy and paste them in a new post because I think they are important enough to restate in a place where more might see them. The comments I received where on my belief that the Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case is a whitewash and the recent ad hominem attacks on me that been quite vicious, mostly attacking my professionalism or the fact I am getting my information secondhand from the Internet (which is pretty much true for everyone commenting on this case except that I have been to Praia da Luz and investigated on the ground and I have met withGonçalo  Amaral). Here are my responses below:

I did not have faith in the Scotland Yard review from Day One. Why? Because they were not invited in by the Portuguese police nor were they looking for an abductor where the local police search for an abductor had failed. These are the only two reasons a foreign police entity normally involves themselves in a case. So what was Scotland Yard doing there? Only two possibilities: they are truly searching for an abductor in which case the antis including myself are completely off the mark or they are there to "find" an abductor which would put this is under a political corruption label. Since I do believe evidence points to the McCanns involvement and no abduction, this forces me into the second camp. I still have no clue as to why Scotland Yard would be brought in to cleanse the McCann name, but I can see no other reason for this bizarre investigation.

The second reason I have no faith in the Scotland Yard investigation is how inappropriately it has been handled. I have seen reviews before and they don't require this much time and money. Even if the detectives of Scotland Yard, including Andy Redwood, were sent in with the remit that the McCanns were off limits and the Yard was to focus on the abduction theory, it is hard to believe they would spend so many years and millions on the review without at some point, realizing that no evidence of an abduction occurred and the Tapas 9 behaviors and statements along with the cadaver and blood dog hits just might be where they should be looking. Since so much time has passed and so many abductors looked at, so much ground has been dug up that clearly was linked to the abduction theory, one can only surmise, at least I can, that the remit stands regardless of what anyone thinks. Who knows? Maybe Andy Redwood was only trying to do the job he was required to do and, maybe, he knows that it is hogwash and has tried to leave a few hints to the truth along the way. Maybe this was what getting rid of Tannerman and focusing on Smithman was about. However, since Tannerman must have been fabricated, this certainly can't be any kind of clever ruse to use against the McCanns because in court, the defense would shred the police for misconduct. The prosecution in this case had been dead in the water prior to the arrival of Scotland Yard and they have only made matters worse, if something can be deader than dead. ONLY if they find REAL evidence of someone having abducted Maddie (like her body being found buried under someone's cement porch or enclosed in the brick wall of their home) or Maddie's body being found in such a place and with such evidence to link to the McCanns, is a prosecution in Portugal going to happen.
As to the other cases of similarity, I can tell you along with those you have named, there are many more, cases of parents with children who have gone missing but no bodies. And, all most all of those have gone unsolved. JonBenet was unique because the body was still there but what happened in that cases was a horrible early investigation which compromised the evidence and the integrity of the department, leaving the case as a bunch of rubble.
So, the McCann case is really not alone in going unsolved. What really made it become so big was McCanns own use of publicity and the fund which is unprecedented in missing children's cases. Outside of the McCanns wanting money and fame, their attempts to "locate their child" or "clear their name" have failed dismally.

As to the public view of this case and the guilt of the McCanns, they matter little in the eyes of people who control things unless they are a real threat. Outrage is only so good if it has some kind of true power. The outrage against the McCanns is pretty much just on the Internet and in comments. This is not real power. When people take to the street in droves, then you have something, but even with the horrible waste of taxpayer money by Scotland Yard on a case that isn't even British or likely prosecutable, where is the real protest? There isn't one and that is why when Scotland Yard closes this case down with some dead creepy guy or a "we tried our best" the whole case will go quietly away except on the Internet where people who have websites and FB pages and tweet will believe still that the whole world is watching and not just some very tiny segment of it. That Sonia can make a difference with her documentary is questionable, although I appreciate her doing it. Unless she is really on a major MSM channel (which I find unlikely), I think her documentary will be much like Hall's; very useful to posterity but not so much still enough to turn public protest around and expose enough of the corruption to turn this case around.

As far as the ad hominem attacks on me for not buying into certain theories, my frustration is mostly at seeing things devolve from a clear focus on this case of the McCanns' involvement in the death of their daughter and a subsequent hurried coverup and support of Gonçalo Amaral and his fight for justice, to a dozen very convoluted theories that I believe only serve to damage the antis message that the McCanns are not innocent and the fund has been stealing money for years from unsuspecting people. In becoming so obsessed with creating alternative scenarios to the one Amaral had forwarded, the label of nutters and conspiracy theorists is going to cause the message to be killed. While I take issue with many of these theories, I have never made a personal attack on other antis because I don't want others to think ill of them and, quite frankly, I don't think ill of them for thinking differently than me, so I see no reason to not still be friendly and polite. I don't want to cause the antis to disband into camps that attack each other (which is what I am seeing happening) and give fodder for the pros to abuse us.

I feel bad for all because I know they mean well, but, sadly, along with what I believe will be closing of this case by Scotland Yard without any prosecution of the McCanns, the message going into the future which should be one of simple concern of mishandling of missing children's cases, abuse of the media, misappropriation of public monies, and political protection will be lost in all the ad hominem attacks and complicated, bizarre theories. The gleeful personal attacks on me add to this destruction because I am one of the few professional voices on this case and if the antis call me incompetent, then that is one less professional voice. Recently, some have even trashed Gonçalo Amaral which pretty much is just knocking the legs from under us all. I wish people would understand that you don't have to agree with everything someone says in order to appreciate their efforts and be civil.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

April 24, 2015

Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

By Pat Brown

Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
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.


trustmeigetit said...

Still amazes me that just some ordinary couple has the power to have support from the police department. I mean it's not like they are politicians or royalty.

And one note on the Jon Bent Ramsey case.... The grand jury voted to indict the parents. But the DA refused to allow it to proceed. So..I think they could have faced charged had that DA not shut it down.

So sick of these people getting away with murder.

Pat Brown said...


I bet the DA, Paul Hunter, thought the case would destroy his carerer, win or lose. Can you imagine the hostility his way should he win (after all, a lot of circumstantial evidence in the case)? He felt he had a good chance of not proving it beyond reasonable doubt and with the juries of today, I believe he would be right about that. And if he ended up winning, the hostility toward the police department and prosecutor's office would be even worse. Lose/lose situation.

This is why it is so terrible important to have the finest crime scene analysis from detectives and proper crime scene handling in the first 48. When thing start going wrong and evidence vanishes, then so does the chance for a successful prosecution.

trustmeigetit said...

If we only had more Juan Martinez (Jodi Arias DA) types out there and like you said, better detectives.

And I think you are familiar with Statement Analysis… I think having experts with that would also help in interrogations. Like with Peter Hyatt, I think if he was able to interrogate them, we may be able to get more confessions. I don’t think it would be the answer to everything, but I really think he would get more results than the way interrogations are done now. But that’s just my opinion. In the least, they would be able to see deception more readily and know when and where to ask more questions.

It’s the whole package that is lacking.

And like with Casey Anthony….. The one thing they missed, that even Jose Baez himself said he was shocked about…. Was the search history for Foxfire. Which was the preferred browser for Casey…. They had Internet Explorer but just forgot about Foxfire.

So George had left the home, Cindy was not home and Casey’s cell phone pinged at a close tower and using Casey’s password to log in did a search for “fool proof suffocation”.

To me, that one missing link may have got her convicted. Now, I could be wrong, but that to me was the most damming piece of evidence and was just simply missed. So again, backs your point of needing better investigations.

Until then, reading what you and Peter Hyatt write on your blogs gives me some peace of mind that not all is lost.

guerra said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Pat, I think you've hit the nail on the head with that statement!! I always suspected the parents knew more than they're letting on, and feel so sad that Sr Amaral is still suffering.

I just hope this case, if not solved soon,does not set a precedence for future cases of a similar nature.

I'm so glad there are people like you who are not afraid to speak up, a bit like "Wendy Murphy" who is also not buying the McCann tale. I can't stand listening to Kate's whining voice for much longer, and also Jerry's smug controlling face, thinking they are of superior intelligence to have got away with fooling the nation for so long.

Pat Brown said...

Guerra and Anon, I have removed your posts because I don't want mudslinging in return on this blog. This post was not aimed at any particular person as there are quite a number of person the issue of ad hominem attacks can be connected with. Likewise, I don't want ad hominem attacks on my blog even if the person being mentioned is an offender himself or herself.

Guerra, you did make some really great points about the Scotland Yard review and I am pasting them below.

It makes you wonder is it because we express our opinions in English unlike Mr. Amaral? Is this just a fanatic or fanatics who can’t tolerate a different opinion or is it something else?


I don’t believe that Mr. Redwood has accomplished anything that will lead to a prosecutable case in fact I believe Scotland Yard has done irreparable damage making this case very difficult to ever be tried in the future. This is the fabled Scotland Yard which the majority of the public, the public who hasn’t followed this case closely, will believe whatever it divulges. What has it divulged? Well, that the McCanns and their friends are not suspects nor persons of interest and that anyone who thinks otherwise is a conspiracy theorist; that there were 195 leads still to be investigated; that there was someone on the loose in the Algarve who had been sexually assaulting girls for years, that Jane Tanner had seen a father carrying his daughter back from the crèche. What does this accomplish? Nothing more than reinforcing the public’s belief that the Portuguese police were incompetent; that Mrs. McCann was right when she said girls had been targeted in the Algarve; and that Jane Tanner had been honest when she said she had seen someone; to summarize Scotland Yard has reinforced the story that has been disseminated worldwide for the past 8 years, that the McCanns are innocent and the Portuguese are bungling fools.

Am I a frickin idiot for not believing that a father, given all the media coverage, would only come forward after 6 years to declare that he and his daughter were the people whom Jane Tanner saw; that he had kept his daughter’s pyjamas after all these years; that despite the father deeming it necessary to wear a jacket he chose to go into the night with his daughter clothed in pyjamas? Am I a loser because I believe that any officer coordinating an investigation would not invent a scenario involving a person who doesn’t exist if indeed he had intention of having the case go to trial? When the defence calls up crèche dad to testify who is going to take the stand? Am I wrong to believe that local authorities in Portugal are being truthful when they say that they are perplexed, that no one came forward to declare they had been sexually assaulted?

Vallor said...

I wish they would give you your own TV show you would be amazing love your work thanks!

Pat Brown said...


Statement analysis indeed is a fabulous tool for investigation. Peter Hyatt has done a lot for bringing statement analysis into the public view. In my new program that I am designing for detectives, I have a scaled down version of statement analysis that I am including in the seminar. One of the biggest problems is not that detectives aren't proficient in all the ins and outs of analyzing a statement, but that they often miss red flag statements; they do a great interview or interrogation and then file the results, overlooking really great leads. So, I am including a Statement Analysis One in the basic course and in a second level of criminal profiling, more of what Peter Hyatt gets into will be included. My belief is that you have to address the major issues and get these under control before one gets to complicated. Sometimes cases go south because really important pieces of evidence get ignored or sideline often because the detective is following a theory that doesn't include them. In other words, the search for evidence to fit the theory rather than allowing the evidence to build the theory, much of what I am saying is happening with some of the theories being batted around in the McCann case.