Monday, May 2, 2016

Why Parents who Kill the Their Children may not be Prosecuted and Why the McCanns Won't Be

There are two kinds of parents of responsible for their missing and murdered children when it comes to prosecution: careless and careful, unsympathetic and sympathetic.

Careless and unsympathetic parents get charged with the crime because a) the evidence is clear, and b) a jury will hate them. For example, a meth-using five time felon beats the living crap out of his little baby girl while the mother is at work. The girlfriend comes home and finds her mashed up child barely breathing and rushes her to the hospital where she dies. The father claims at the hospital, that the one-year-old got out the door of the apartment and fell down the steps. However, all the damage is consistent with being beaten and x-rays show previous damage to the child's body. Police arrest the creep and he is found guilty in a court of law.

Parents of a missing a murdered child who are more careful to cover-up after the crime and a bit more sympathetic don't get charged with a crime because a) the evidence is not totally clear, and b) a jury won't necessarily hate them. In other words, unless there is overwhelming evidence of guilt - overwhelming - no prosecutor will take the case to court and have a jury not be totally convinced of the guilt of the parent or parents; after all, imagining condemning the innocent mother and father of a missing a murdered child to prison, further torturing the victims of a crime, and taking them away from their remaining children so that they effectively not only lose one child to the crime but all of them. And think about the remaining children; they not only would lose a sibling, but then their parents as well.

 Sabrina Eisenburg, Lisa Irwin, Gabriel Johnson are still missing and many do not think they were abducted by strangers. These children have never been seen again and their bodies have never been found. The Eisenburgs claim their daughter was taken from her crib although there is no proof of an abduction. The Eisenburgs were never charged. Baby Lisa went missing from her crib. Her parents were never charged in spite of the fact cadaver dogs hit in their house. Gabriel Johnson's mother actually told the father of her little boy that she killed the baby and threw him in a dumpster. Later, she told the police that she actually gave the baby away to a couple in the park. In spite of the confession to the father of the child and the fact there is no evidence of an abduction, Elizabeth Johnson (a pretty woman who came across as a stressed and emotionally disturbed mother) has not been charged with the murder of her child; she got five years for custodial interference and unlawful imprisonment and she was released from prison in 2014.

And this is why the McCanns won't be charged with any crime, even neglect. Rarely is a parent of a missing child charged with neglect because, even if it is true, the police and many in the public feel they have already received enough punishment for their carelessness; their child has been kidnapped or murdered. As for the McCanns being prosecuted for the death of their child, barring an incredible miracle in the evidence department, the McCanns fall into the second category, a) the evidence is not totally clear, and b) a jury won't necessarily hate them.

First, let's look at the evidence for prosecution: the dog evidence is not admissible in court without something else to support it. So, there is no proof Madeleine died in the apartment. And, since there has been no body found, there is no proof the child is dead at all. There is no witness sighting of either of the McCanns removing the child from the apartment or disposing of her body. The Smith sighting is of a man who COULD be Gerry McCann, not proof that it was Gerry McCann. Neither of the parents have confessed and none of the others in the Tapas group have implicated them in harming their daughter or disposing of her body. So just as their is no solid proof of an abduction, there is no solid proof of the McCanns involvement in their daughter going missing. This does not mean there aren't many pieces of evidence that make them good suspects; my profile of the case includes many facts which support their involvement in what happened to Maddie. But, a profile (which is an analysis of facts) is not equivalent to the level of proof needed to prosecute someone for a crime.

Secondly, putting one's feelings about the McCanns aside, let's look at the couple in the eyes of the jury. The McCanns are not the scum of society; they are not welfare abusing, unemployed druggies who live in the slums, and have seven other children they neglect and abuse. What the jury will see are a respectable couple who are both doctors, who give their time to worthwhile projects, and one of them is even an ambassador for missing children. They have worked night and day to find their missing daughter (a defense attorney will make this seem true), went through the the process of setting up a fund to finance private investigators, and begged the government to sent in Scotland Yard to investigate the case. They have taken excellent care of the other two children (barring the one horrible night where their one poor parenting choice led to their daughter going missing). They have the support of their family, friends, and many in the governement, so they are upstanding citizens, people the jury can relate to.

So, without that absolute proof that the McCanns did something to Maddie, the jury is not going to take the risk of wrongly imprisoning an innocent mother and father, further punishing a suffering set of parents and leaving Maddie's brother and sister effectively orphaned. Even I, after having studied all the facts of the case and having traveled to Praia da Luz to analyze the area of the crime scene, and even after having written a profile which identifies Gerry and Kate McCann as the top suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, would have to find the McCanns "not guilty" in a court of law.

There is a big difference in believing someone has committed a crime and proving it. Scotland Yard can't prove Maddie was really abducted and we can't prove that she wasn't. Scotland Yard can give their profile of the crime, you can give yours, I can give mine....but, in the end, no one will be able to prove anything because there simply isn't enough evidence to do so, and, this case, like many other cases of missing and murdered children will remain unprosecuted.

The truth may come to light sometime in the far future and I hope it does. But barring a miraculous appearance of new evidence that will allow someone to be taken to prosecution, we will have to settle for documenting the case for posterity and hope that all of our efforts - Goncalo Amaral's, mine, and everyone who put so much time into studying and publicizing the case - will have done some good.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
May 2, 2016

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.


Anonymous said...

Correcto mundo!

Pat Brown said...

And this is why I stopped working cold cases. I could solve the crime, point out the top suspect and the evidence to support that person being a top suspect but because there was not enough evidence at that late date, the case was never prosecuted. It is a really frustrating thing to "know" who did it but also know nothing will come of it. For all those frustrated in the Madeleine McCann case, just think how many cases I have worked that haven't seen justice in a court and you can see how much more frustrated I have been in my career; the Maddie case times 10.

JB said...

It's a pity that Mr Smith wasn't interviewed or a statement taken from him. There was no trace of a break in at the property either. The window only had fingerprints of maddies mum. Mrs McCann gives "no reply" answers to police questioning. Surely you would want your child found and would give police all the information needed

Pat Brown said...

JB, mistakes were made in the investigation which is not unusual; I will address this in another post. But, let's not rehash the McCanns' behaviors here; circumstantial evidence is not strong enough to overcome the complete lack of physical evidence and that is the whole reasons why this case cannot be prosecuted.

Pat Brown said...

What's really telling is that those who believe the McCanns were involved with the death and disappearance of Maddie can't agree on when and how it was done and some have completely trashed me because I won't agree with their particular theory. Just think, then, how do you convince a jury just once scenario happened with the evidence at hand if already no one can agree on a damn thing?

thedogsboll said...

Also how would they find a jury that has not had some opinion on the case

Pat Brown said...


Well, the same way as in the US (although I am not exactly sure of Portuguese court procedure): dumb people who never read any news or liars who have actually read everything.

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton said...

A bit too cynical for me Pat. I cannot fathom why two police forces in two nations would open and re-open full live investigations into this case if there was no chance of it reaching a satisfactory conclusion. The Portuguese police had already shelved the files, why throw more money at it for it to end the same way as before?

I think Operation Grange are playing with the McCanns. Every press release from Scotland Yard turns the screw up another notch. A further £95k could be interpreted as 'we are closing in'.

I would also challenge the idea that Kate and Gerry would be sympathetic witnesses. While they may not be typical of low life child neglecting chavs, they are not in the least bit likeable. They didn't search for their missing daughter and they spent 3 months in the Algarve entertaining all their freeloading family, friends and newly acquired advisors.

The witnesses they took to Lisbon were hopeless, and some of these same witnesses would be called in criminal trial. They were not believable in the witness box then and it's doubtful they will be in the future.

If Operation Grange had opened without the fanfare and without the updates on the public spending, the scenario you imagine might just be possible, but this investigation has been far too public. As Sir Bernard HH said, the PUBLIC want to know.

Anonymous said...

Agree that to our knowledge there is insufficient watertight evidence, but surely enough circumstantial evidence, lies, inconsistencies, suspicious occurrences etc. to justify a sustained, rigorous, even aggressive interrogation, in the hope that they might eventually crack or make a fatal slip. Apparently this has never happened. How is it possible to escape charges simply by refusing to answer questions?

Pat Brown said...


I am not cynical; I am a realist basing my conclusions on years of work with police departments. Police agencies don't "play" with top suspects by investigating everyone but them for three years to the tune of millions and millions of pounds. In doing so, they waste money and accomplish little except to allow the suspects more comforts (the more they investigate others, the better it is for me in the way of saying we didn't do it) and it is fodder for a defense attorney in court who would say that the police CLEARLY did not believe the defendants were guilty because they did no investigation of them but of everyone else. They could follow that up by saying because the team failed to find the real culprit they fell back on accusing the parents. It would kill a case.

The public does NOT want to know the McCanns are guilty; they want to know what happened to McCanns and Scotland Yard will give them a reasonable scenario (if you are not overly familiar with the case) and that will allow the case to finally be pushed to the back of the room.

If you really believe the police department have really paid attention to all the evidence and are conducting a real investigation, then I think you would also have to believe that since both police forces were looking at everyone but the McCanns, they must be right and it is anyone but the McCanns. The concept that they are excluding everyone and that will leave the McCanns is absolutely ludicrous because that is not how you conduct an investigation and it will never prove anything (except you still haven't found the right culprit yet). Let me give you an example:

The McCanns left the door unlocked and a child predator snatched up Madeline with a hand over her mouth and carried her off to his house right down the block. He wasn't seen by anyone. To this day no one has a clue it is him. Scotland Yard and the PJ can race all around questioning every creepy guy and still never know this guy is the guy. Happens all the time in such cases. Even if they interviewed him they may have no idea it is him. So, if they eliminate 2000 people they investigated, this does not mean the McCanns are guilty; only they still are overlooking this one guy.

IF they were investigating the McCanns, we would not have seen all the riff-raff being rounded up and investigated. We would have seen a quick and quiet review and investigation of the Tapas 9.

Regardless of ANY of this, my statement about the evidence still stands. If SY and the PJ think the McCanns did it, they still have no evidence to prove it in court.

Why police departments do what they do is often political and the public is none the wiser. I have seen hopeless cases be brought up again and again in the media and by the police departments because the missing person is still missing and there is still pressure for a conclusion. I have seen police department reopen cases and dedicate a team and money to a case I have worked on and I know is dead in the water. Think about it; as long as everyone is making a living and saving their asses, it doesn't matter how much time and taxpayer money is abused. Tax money and manpower is wasted every day in so many ways.

Pamela Copetta said...

Wow! More clear impossible...
You just killed all my hopes for justice, my dream of seeing them rotting in jail, I hope to live long enough to see karma getting back to them :-)
Thanks for your magnific post, very clarifying, regards

Pat Brown said...

Sorry, Pamela. Maybe I will turn out to be wrong and everyone can rejoice (and I will be happy as well; floored, but happy). However, being a realist and having work many a case with law enforcment, I don't see that happening.

Of course, there is the one in a million chance, too, that true new evidence will come to light, but if the police are looking in all the wrong places.....

Joana Morais said...

Agree with all, we've talked about this often, along the years. Why others prefer to believe differently is up to them, wishful thinking and very little reasoning, why the same ones resort to attack those who have a realistic, knowledgeable and substantiated perspective is a mystery to me. Without any active investigation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann - which effectively stopped due to political pressures, internal and external in October 2007 - there can be no results, no justice, no truth. The Maddie process is to be re-archived in Portugal, as soon as Operation Grange feeds the UK public some sort of "believable" thesis that absolves entirely the McCann couple, blaming the "inept" Portuguese police for something, anything if they can. The three burglars story is one of possibilities.

Just to add that jury trials in Portugal are very rare, usually composed of three court judges who comprise what is called the collective of judges, one of them will preside, 4 effective jurors and 4 replacement jurors. Legislation here in Portuguese

Anonymous said...

Pat where do you get the odds of one million to one. How do you know what's going on in the investigation. The vast majority of the information that you base your opinion that they are investigating every low life in Portugal comes from the media not from SY. As Ros points out why on earth would SY re open an investigation nvestigation to waste £12m+ just to create a whitewash. Only for SY reopening the case a good many of us would have left the case years ago. True the majority of people in the UK are not familiar with the case as us McCann case nerds are but SY and the U.K. Establishment know that what's not big news one day could easily become massive news the next day. You talk about the Hillsborough disaster being about 96 families. I am a lifelong liverpool fan. I turned out for the memorial every year and shouted every year for justice for the 96 and last week I was shocked to know how little I knew about how far the coverup went. Once the details became people reacted against the establishment and I personally believe it has provided a platform which will ensure that people in authority will think twice about lying under oath. Besides anyway what about the Portuguese are they tied to any result SY produce. These burglars have been named. In the biggest missing child case in history is SY going to blame them and they just continue to live contently in PDL. Low life bugulars are people too. I'm afraid you attitude that SY could come out and blame them is akin to the attitude South Yorkshire police thought they could do against Liverpool supporters. Look how well that worked out for them

Pat Brown said...


Thank you for your sensible take on the case; you have always kept a level head on the matter. As you know, I have said very little in the recent years because my earlier comments on the Scotland Yard investigation being a whitewash caused a lot of very vicious attacks to come my way. So I have refrained from posting until the news of the civil court case and of Scotland Yard talking of ending their investigation came out. What I thought would happen, has happened, and what I think will happen, we shall see. But, when I see so many talk of unlikely outcomes, I feel a need to share what I know of how investigations work and what my experience of dealing with them in the past tells me about how this case will end up. You and I both wish, otherwise, and I am sure both of us would like to be surprised but I prefer not to have false hope when all the evidence points to an unfortunate end to the case.

Btw, I DO like the Portuguese system better. Our jury system sucks. So, if the McCanns were not allowed to request a trial by jury, the chances of a judge or judges understanding the evidence (if there were enough) would be better than a bunch of folks who couldn't figure out how to get out of jury duty.

Pat Brown said...

Anon 4:42 I really haven't a clue what you are trying to say. Hillsborough took three decades to have any "Justice" enacted and that was a huge home disaster where scores of teens and young people were killed, destroying dozens and dozens of families, tearing apart the community. The only real issues the UK has with the McCann case is a) the Portuguese police and that sardine eating, lying cruel detective botched the case and failed to find who killed the child of one of our British families, b) Scotland Yard sure has spent a lot of our taxpayer money to not find out who did it, and c) The McCanns shouldn't have left their kids alone. Altogether, some people dislike the McCanns but think they are innocent, some dislike the McCann and think they are guilty, and some like the McCanns and think they are innocent. All in all, this case is more an issue of personal annoyance than it is some travesty of justice for the British people. When Scotland Yard shuts this case down with whatever reason they come up with, the majority of people will sigh in relief because no more taxpayers money is being wasted and the news stories will dwindle to an occasional still looking for Maddie stuff from the McCanns. The case will continue to be discussed on the Intenet and maybe a couple of more books will bring up issues and maybe a television documentary that is balanced will finally make the air. But, the legal case will be over barring a major evidentiary miracle.

Anonymous said...

So what do you think SY have been doing for 5 years. Certainly it doesn't take 5 years to investigate a spate of burglaries. Have 37 police staff been sitting about concocting some story to feed to the gullible British public who will be just delighted it only cost £12m and not £20m. Again I would ask what the purpose of setting SY up. What are they going to do with the 3 guys who are to be made patsys. Again I ask are Portugal going to go along with the farse that SY are creating. The footballing world grieved for the victims of Hillsborough 27 years ago, they knew 27 years ago that the reaction of the South Yorkshire police had contributed to it. What they didn't know and what created the backlash was the coverup by the police and the British establishment regardless of whether it was one child killed or 96 people killed.

To use your words I really don't have a clue what your trying to say. Without you having any knowledge of the evidence gathered by SY and the Portuguese since the reopening of the investigation you have decided what the outcome is going to be and we are all silly people for not trusting your professional instincts. I would trust your professional instincts if you were involved in the investigation

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure what you mean by unsympathetic vs. Unsympathetic parents. Are these profiling terms or do you mean the public and jury don't sympathise towards them?
In this case I think the public's opinion at the start has helped the McCanns have legal leverage over the media and individuals but that is obviously not the reason they have not been prosecuted. If there was compelling forensic evidence I believe they would have been charged and not just questioned by the Portuguese police, so whether people sympathised with them or not they would have been charged. How can you say you have read ALL the evidence, not everything has been released to the public.

Pat Brown said...

Anon 6:16,

If I were involved in the investigation, I would be keeping you in the dark. If you can't accept that as a professional I might have a professional viewpoint of what is happening, I don't know what to say. I can only repeat again; from what I have seen, there is no investigation of the McCanns occurring and they are not going to be prosecuted.

Anonymous said...

So what do you think SY have been doing for 5 years.

- Diversionary tactics to fulfil the goal they were requested. Look here, there and everywhere except at the parents.

Certainly it doesn't take 5 years to investigate a spate of burglaries.

- It shouldn't, no. But that's their last lead, allegedly.

Have 37 police staff been sitting about concocting some story to feed to the gullible British public who will be just delighted it only cost £12m and not £20m.

- What was the remit of their inquest? One where everything is accepted, except investigating the parents and their friends.

Again I would ask what the purpose of setting SY up.

~Ask Cameron, he ordered the review to be set up after being allegedly pressured by News International.

What are they going to do with the 3 guys who are to be made patsys.

- That's only a possibility. They cannot do anything, but they can say something like they believe the three men to be involved in Maddie's disappearance, sadly there's no real/forensic evidence to make an accusation.

Again I ask are Portugal going to go along with the farse that SY are creating.

- Possibly, yes. They have done exactly that for the past nine years.

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton said...

You seem to have misinterpreted quite a considerable amount of my post Pat. By 'play' I did not mean that the police have accommodated the McCanns by investigating everyone but them. The truth is, we don't who or what they have been investigating for this past 4+ years.

We can take an educated guess and say that they are not hunting down paedophile gangs or even lone predators, because those kinds of investigations would not remain secret for long. We can also say they are not looking for a live child - where's the urgency?

At the end of Operation Grange they will have to account for the £12+ million of public money spent. The police are public servants, so too our representatives in the HOC. If the public wanted to take united action, all they would have to do is lobby their local MP.

I respect that you have much experience Pat, but there has never been a case quite like Madeleine's - Madeleine disappeared as social media began to bloom, arguably it was social media that turned it into a phenomenon. The parents made the story global - ergo the world is watching.

And on top of all this, as much as this case has destroyed my faith in human nature, that faith is restored by acts of kindness, especially the kindness of strangers. The donation of £1,000 by officers from the Met, said 'we're with you bud, hang on in there'. I don't believe the good men and women working on Operation Grange would give up on the victim anymore than Goncalo Amaral would.

Anonymous said...

Pat you say "Hillsborough was a Hugh home disaster where scores of teens and young people were killed, destroying dozens and dozens of families, tearing apart the community. The only real issues the UK has with the McCann case is a) the Portuguese police and that sardine eating, lying cruel detective botched the case and failed to find who killed the child of one of our British families, b) Scotland Yard sure has spent a lot of our taxpayer money to not find out who did it, and c) The McCanns shouldn't have left their kids alone."............You would think that should have been the order of priority for the UK as a nation but it's not so.........those are not the issues that the uk have with the McCann case.......the uk public are completely obsessed with this case. Hillsborough got a mention once a year and occasionally when something of interest occurred. Everyday for 9 years we read some different crap in the papers about this case. Even princess Diana who the public were obsessed with couldn't maintain that type of interest. Go onto Twitter now if you don't believe me and see how many people are commenting on the Hillsborough compared to the mccann case. The footballing world has moved onto Leicester winning their 1st ever title go foxes. The McCann case never goes away. I think the UK establishment have tried to do as you say forget the case and move on. Let a few McCann case nerds discuss it away on the internet until it finally died out but by 2011 it was plainly obvious that this was going to blow up in their face......internationally the uk was damaged and Mrs McCann was writing books accussing a foriegn government of all sorts of things in relation to their child and there was a preception whether rightly or wrongly that Gordon Brown and the U.K. Establishment was complicit in assisting with these accusations. I think the review was ordered to try and get to the truth and hopefully that's where we are going. They may never be sufficient evidence to convict them in a court of law but I think the results of the review will be used to change home and international preception said about how the case was handled.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 6.51 where is your proof for your responses to all my questions. SY mentioned the spate of burglaries as one line of inquiry when they brought Smithman into the forefront of the investigation. Your quite happy to put this forward as an indication of SY whitewash but ignore the prioritisation of Smithman by them in the investigation

. For 5 years it's been look here not look at the parents I think it was obvious from the wide eyed ash face look of the mccanns on crime watch that they hadn't been eliminated and the fact that SY have not gave them one peice of made up evidence that they could present to the public which says look we are in the clear says it t all.

What is the remit of the investigation .........I don't think we were given one the remit of the review was as if the abduction took place in the UK. If a child went missing today and a missing person inquiry was set up would if the evidence pointed that way would it not become a murder enquiry. Has SY not in a number of times talked about murder, set the investigation within their homcide department.......but sure just ignore these things the way you lot jump onto the SY statement that the mccanns are not suspects but ignore that the Portuguese said that before they made them suspects.

Wise up if you think that the PM gave into pressure from RB to set up the review. He tabloid newspapers have been instrumental in creating the monster that is MCCann but they are by no means stupid where did they think any review was going to lead to only back to the 2 original suspects and their friends. I repeat its frig all to do with what the mccanns or the uk public wanted and everything yo do with their standing internationally.

I wish they would name me as a suspect and then say they have no evidence to back it up. I bet Carter ruck were represent me on a no win no fee basis. I could gave up working for a living. Might even join hacked off.

Yes Portugal have gone along with their farse.........sure when you had Gordon Brown and Mrs Blair having cosy chats with the McCanns GA and his team weren't gathering evidence and making them suspects. They didn't release the police files so the world could see for themselves the evidence against them........sure the Portuguese appeal court didn't throw out the rulings which went against the evidence heard in the libel trial.

It's a pity you couldn't highlight all your responses in blue. They make all your responses right when they are in blue.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, I think i can help a little on this, your correct on working cold cases, and working the evidence first? For example three theories, that have cropped up to explain why madeline hasnt been found, in the biggest search so far? Its not been explored if kates dream is a dream, or she did actualy give detail to something that happend? Because of what the dogs smelt, couldnt of been coincidence in any set up? And smell of death being on garments that belonged to kate? Perculiar to say the least is that kate only mentioned three checks on the orphra show? Not the ones listed previously before the police were called? Plus some bruises to kates arms that show some kind of struggle had taken place? Thats alot of information surrounding a dream, to dismiss? Circumstantial, but enough to think there was no abductor in that apartment? This is what made me doubt the version of events in the maccan stories, without other discrepancies. Without a body there is nothing concrete, or a confession?

Pat Brown said...

Anon, 9:15

There is no need to rehash evidence that still is not enough for conviction. You can come up with all kinds of interesting stuff all day long but it will not make a difference in the issue of going to court; only some extremely major evidence would make a difference as I keep saying over and over.

Anonymous said...

Professionally administered Polygraph Test!

They would crack like an Easter Egg!

Pat Brown said...


A simple couple of points:

" I don't believe the good men and women working on Operation Grange would give up on the victim anymore than Goncalo Amaral would."

Those "good men and women are police officers" and are like all other police officers I have worked with. Some are complete dolts and have no investigative ability, some do a good job but when they realize they can't get enough evidence to go to court, they just say they are still working on it (sometimes for decades). Sometimes they botch the case and that is why it goes cold and there is not enough evidence to convict; then they may simply pretend they were going down the right road all along and never let on that they have had the wrong suspect. And, then, there are some who simply railroad the wrong person, lie about investigating the correct suspect for a myriad of ego and political and economic reasons. I have indeed had this happen on cases I work and most of the families and community have no idea what actually happened behind closed doors; I do but I rarely can prove it publicly because the police tend to have the media in their pocket and the citizens tend to believe them. So, I DO believe if these officers in Operation Grange were given a remit to find an abductor that is exactly what they are looking for. Some may think the McCanns are guilty, but they are simply going to do their job and shut the hell up or they will throw their career down the toilet.

Point Two: The McCanns asked for this investigation; this means one of two things: they are innocent and Operation Grange is rightly looking for an abductor or, they are guilty, and they knew Operation Grange would be given a remit that kept them safe from being prosecuted. There is no third option. If the McCanns were guilty and thought a real investigation would ensue, that they would have to submit to be questioned again as would the others in the Tapas group and all the physical and behavioral evidence linked to them would be reanalyzed, you can bet they would never have mentioned the idea of Scotland Yard getting involved. So either Operation Grange is above board and they are innocent or Operation Grange is a whitewash and they are guilty. You can't have it both ways.

Pat Brown said...

Anon 6:51

Totally agree.

Pat Brown said...

Anon 10:03

The McCann have no reason and no requirement to submit to a polygraph.

Anonymous said...

HI PAT, Correct, those few good men and women have tried to find madeline, one way or the other despite the theories about what may have been or not? I do hope she is alive, thats the result i do share if there is a possible chance, and that has to be followed also to find her, or the police would be failing in their duty, to miss that chance of finding their daughter? I can understand that also from pats point in question to follow that theory also to make sure all ground is coverd to make sure nothing has been ignored in a search to find this missing child?

Anonymous said...

As much as I want the Mccanns charged and found guilty - i couldnt stand the thought of another Casey Anthony ( farce ) outcome - Ty for all ur fantastic information and insight

Anonymous said...

I agree with all that you have said regarding this case Pat. I stopped following it myself after a few years, after seeing that there would be no justice or resolution at the end. For those who say that this can't be a whitewash investigation by Scotland Yard, initiated by David Cameron,they obviously don't realise just how much power Rupert Murdoch has in Britain.

There are only a few factors that would have helped prosecute the McCann's without a body in this case:

1) If the Portugese police had of been able to break Kate and get her to admit the
truth. This may have happened had the UK government not interfered.

2) If the Portugese police had of secretly bugged the McCann's villa and obtained
incriminating evidence on tape. Goncalo Amaral admits that this should have
happened,but that it was out of his control. However he does say that he was
told that the British Security Services had bugged the McCann's and their
friends, passed the information on to the Portugese police.

3) If the UK laboratory had of found forensic evidence that incriminated the
McCann couple. (It is suggested that the findings of the lab had been
deliberately obscured and even a British policeman was critical of the report).

I doubt that unless either Kate or Gerry McCann, or one of their Tapas friends ever break down and confess to the police as to what really happened back in May on that holiday, that there will never be a resolution to this case and there will never be justice for Madeleine McCann.

Martin Roberts said...

Hi Pat

You must by now be tired of repeating yourself.

Reading these comments to date is like listening to people who can just about play 'chopsticks' criticise Lang Lang's piano technique!

For Rosalinda (May 2 @07;32):

"The donation of £1,000 by officers from the Met, said 'we're with you bud, hang on in there'."

Whereas in fact it said: 'This is about as much support as our employment contracts/pension rights will allow us to give you.'

You (May 2 @10:09):

"The McCanns asked for this investigation. So either Operation Grange is above board and they are innocent or Operation Grange is a whitewash and they are guilty."

Now therein lies a tale.

Once we get our heads around the fact that only an idiot would invite assault (and whatever else McCann may be he's no idiot), we have to come to terms with the underlying reason for his hubris. It wasn't the couples' status as medical practitioners that's for sure (didn't work for Harold Shipman).

'As it was in the beginning, so it shall be in the end', with the government of the country taking active steps to keep the McCanns out of range.

We can speculate till the cows come home as to why that might be the case, but if I were responsible for the allocation of Portuguese resources in this matter I wouldn't waste money putting those goods on display even.

The entire fiasco is a British problem entirely - victim, suspects, accomplices - even the scene of the crime. The conclusion too will be a British one therefore and, for the sake of economy rather than justice, it shouldn't be too long in coming.

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton said...

Sorry Pat, I am not convinced 30+ homicide detectives would cover up the death of a child. They are human beings, many parents and grandparent themselves. You describe them as if they are units, cogs in a wheel, automatons without flesh and blood feelings or compassion. They would no more cover up the death of little Madeleine, than the deaths of little April or little Sara, and if they did, how would they live with themselves after.

As for thinking about their careers, would they really want to go forward with a bloody great cloud over them? Never knowing when the truth would come out and their own role exposed? And on top of that, how the hell can ANYONE put the lid on the Madeleine story? Whistleblowing is no longer the taboo it was once was and far too many people know the truth, and let's face it, sure as eggs are eggs, Gerry and Kate will have made a lot of enemies along the way.

Martin - another cynic! There is a natural affinity among police officers that crosses nationality. In fact, the same could pretty much be said about any profession. I am sure for many of the detectives working on OG, in Goncalo Amaral, they see 'there but for the grace of God, go I'. Every officer on OG knows how litigious the McCanns are, and they know that the McCanns could just as easily turn on any one of them.

Finally, if as you say Operation Grange will let the McCanns off the hook, then why on earth haven't they told them? Why are the McCanns going through such obvious agony if Operation Grange was always going to conclude with an abductor. What a huge sigh of relief that would bring to the family and there would be interviews galore.

As it is, this is becoming agonising to watch, the McCanns have nothing positive to announce today on this 9th anniversary. If the police are covering this up, but not informing the parents, then it is beyond cruel.

Martin Roberts said...

Rosalinda @7:55 (?)

"I am not convinced 30+ homicide detectives would cover up the death of a child."

You needn't be. They haven't. They've just spent 5 years and £10+ million doing what they were told, i.e.investigating an abduction.

"They are human beings...You describe them as if they are units, cogs in a wheel, automatons without flesh and blood feelings or compassion".

Psychopaths are alarmingly prevalent in the population. Some even wear uniforms when doing their day job.

"As for thinking about their careers, would they really want to go forward with a bloody great cloud over them?"

It's not about 'want'. They're not all in a position to relocate to Australia or the USA. Once you've got kids and a mortgage many decisions are made for you.

"Martin - another cynic!"

You bet.

"if as you say Operation Grange will let the McCanns off the hook, then why on earth haven't they told them?"

You don't win at chess by announcing your next move to the audience!

PB has already put it simply enough. The conclusion to be arrived at by SY will reflect either this world or Disneyworld. People are bound to be disappointed either way.

Pat Brown said...

Martin, thank you again for being a voice of reason.

Rosalinda, I think you are very caring person and that is why you so strongly believe that the police would allow emotions to dictate their behavior. I have to believe you have not spent a whole lot of time with cops. I have. My daughter is a detective. My brother-in-law who I lived with for four year is a detective. My son-in-law used to be a deputy in the sheriff's department. And I have worked with cops for two decades. Cops are caring human beings and cops are cynics. Do I care about the cases I have worked that involved children (and others)? Absolutely. Do I want justice for them? Sure. Can I accept that the case is screwed and walk away absolutely. Can I eat pizza while looking at photos of brutalized kids. You bet.

Cops deal with so much they know how to turn off the waterworks; if they didn't, they would go nuts My daughter is a child abuse detective. The stuff she has seen sucks. She fights to make sure cases go to court and when there isn't enough evidence or one of her fellow detectives screws up or the ass of a prosecutor refuses to go to court because he is protecting his win record, what does my daughter do? She accepts the bad outcome and does what she can for the next case. Would you call her covering up for the police department so she can save her career? Okay, but if she starts some big fiasco about such a case, she won't be helping any other kids gets justice. You win some, you lose some.

The detectives I have worked with on cold cases usually agree with my detemination and admit, while I am in house, that I am right. We go out and have beer. Then, I leave and the police tell the family and media I could not help them and they reshelve the screwed up case. That person and that family will never see justice. If you think those detectives who followed the wrong leads and lost time and evidence are going to admit I was right, tell the public that the department botched the case, you are out of you mind! All their career would be over and they have families to feed. I have been stabbed in the back many a time over these cold cases and that is why I don't work them any more. I am instead working on training detectives so they do better work on fresh cases. I don't hold a grudge, I am not furious that they didn't get justice for a murdered child or adult; I know they are human, did their best, and they are constrained by training and reality and politics.

Have you never heard of "The Thin Blue Line"? The police will hang together to support each other, have each other's backs because they are stuck within a system and the citizens really don't know what their world is like. If any British police supported Amaral, it is because they identify with him being screwed over. However, as you notice, if they did indeed support him, no one is giving their names or showing their faces.

So, back to square one. IF this entire investigation is above board, then the McCanns must be innocent. They ASKED for this review; put their trust in the outcome. So, if their wasn't some political collusion going on when the McCanns asked for this Scotland Yard review, I will say right here, I have been wrong about the McCanns and the evidence of the dogs must be undependable and all their weird behaviors are just odd behaviors of two very ununusual people, not two guilty people. As I have said before, my profile based on the known evidence leads me to the determination that the McCanns should be top suspects and further investigation should confirm that they are guilty or find evidence that they are not. So, I for one, could actually say, I can accept that the McCanns could be innocent IF evidence comes to light to prove so. Therefore, if the McCanns did not political manipulate the outcome of this investigation, if it is a tried and true investigation, we have to conclude the McCanns are innocent.

Anonymous said...

Let's hope that once Operation Grange ends, that the McCann's close that 'fund' of theirs. But pigs may fly...

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton said...

I could not and would not comment as I do on Madeleine's disappearance if I did not believe beyond reasonable doubt that the parents were involved. If there was a chance they were innocent, it would be beyond cruel. And from everything I have learned about this case over the years I most definitely would not accept it was an abduction, no matter who said it. I wouldn't have religion forced on me as child and as an adult I make my own mind up - the 'authorities' don't tell me what I have to believe. As if!

Of course police don't sit around crying, anymore than medical staff, but that is not to say they are not affected by the cases they handle. Bookshops and libraries are filled with books on factual crime written by detectives who have bared their souls, including Steve Thomas and Goncalo Amaral.

I study human nature Pat, since my days in the convent, I have been on a quest to discover what it is that makes people evil. Nature, nurture, environment, circumstances, etc, etc. It has been a fascinating lifelong study. Recently I have been glued to the true crime documentaries, mostly American, on YouTube. The police can and do 'play' games with the suspects, slowly slowly, catchee monkey.

No doubt it happens worldwide, it certainly happens in the UK, where details of operations have come to light, eg. cops going undercover, cops using subterfuge to reel their suspects in.

I agree, there are too many cases where cops have to accept there is nothing they can do other than wait. I would imagine that is the case with Lisa Irwin and Isabelle Cellis. With the Aisenbergs, they are still waiting. If the people directly involved won't 'fess up' there is nothing they can do, they can't force them.

You state that the McCanns must be innocent because they asked for the investigation. The McCanns as we know, are unbelievably reckless, they have taken wild chances over and over, and most of the time they have come up smiling.

The push for a Review came at a time when the Fund was running very low. In October 2010, the McCanns were desperately trying to raise funds. However, even they knew they could not fundraise without a clearly defined agenda. They started a Petition to have Madeleine's case reviewed. Most Petitions as we know, fade into obscurity after the initial publicity drives - if things had gone to plan, it would have taken years to get the 100,000 signatures they required.

And the Review they wanted was based on a report by Jim Gamble for CEOP, a report that pointed in the direction of an abductor and a report that had been given to the previous Home Secretary Alan Johnson(Labour) and that was being ignored by Theresa May (Tory). Had the Review been carried out under the previous government, they may well have got the result they wanted.

When they launched Kate's book in 2011, they may well have believed that the Review would follow the guidelines set out by Jim Gamble the previous year. But there was no love lost between Theresa and Jim, and he was no longer the head of CEOP, it is very doubtful therefore that the Review the McCanns got, was based on Jim's report.

For whatever reason, both Downing Street and the Sun newspaper helped Kate and Gerry to achieve their goal, they got their Review, but I think it was a bit of an oops, as in 'be careful what you wish you'.

Pat Brown said...


"You state that the McCanns must be innocent because they asked for the investigation."

Yikes! Where did you get that from my post? Actually, a bunch of other people say I have flipflopped and contradicted myself a number of times over the last years and this is another time....I am now saying the McCanns must be innocent.

I NEVER said they are innocent because they asked for the investigation. I said, IF there was NO REMIT, it would be likely they are innocent because they would have no control over the investigation. IF they had some control over the remit, then they well could be guilty because they could be assured they would not every be a focus of the investigation.

Now, what YOU are saying is that there WAS a remit and the remit has now been wiped out because there has been a turnovers in the politics. This is the one way I have stated that it could be possible that the review/investigation of Scotland Yard could do such a drastic u-turn and focus on them as suspects. However, it would still be hard for Scotland Yard to prove anything without stronger evidence and the question of who would go down with the McCanns if they were suddenly accused by Operation Grange of being responsible for the daughter's demise is problematic. I think even if there has been a change of political winds, it behoovers everyone (except the British citizens, but, hey, there are just common folk) to bring the whole debacle to an end and keep it sweet. I have seen many a case closed down with something palatable to the public and in spite of the fact that this case is far more well-known than many of the cases I have worked doesn't changed the basic rules of the game. Expediency wins.

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton said...

I wouldn't call 4+ years and £12m+ taxpayers money, expediency Pat, in fact it is the opposite.

You say they have not got the evidence to proceed. How do you know that? Operation Grange went from a Review to an investigation because they told us, they had enough evidence to go ahead. The Portuguese file was shelved and they were adamant that it would not be re-opened without new evidence. As it was re-opened we can only assume they have that new evidence.

In addition, the non abduction involves a huge amount of suspects, the police must build a case not only against the McCanns but all those involved. And the chances are, most of them are British - how many went out to assist the parents in PDL?

I think if you truly believe the abduction was faked you can begin to understand the scope of Operation Grange, this is a large spiders web and some of the strands run right into the heart of Whitehall. And it should be remembered of course, that the cover up sits squarely in the lap of the last Labour Government. Why would the tories risk their reputations for the opposition?

Pat Brown said...


I repeat, no body and no major physical evidence, no case. You cannot prosecute on a bunch of circumstantial information after both police departments have been advertising the abduction. That Redwood TV bit alone would be defense gold for getting the McCanns off. The police would have to have something SO damning that it could override all the stuff they have done so far.

And no one is really risking anything. When they shut this down, it will go away. It is only in the minds of the McCann obsessed that they think this case is of such vast concern to the rest of the population. Few really give a damn and if I am right that the case is shut down with an abduction explanation, you will see how life goes on without much protest.

Anonymous said...

I am still confused about "the checking"
Jane "saw" someone, but she did not take her turn to check the Mccan or the other kids..
Anyway..Some abducter took her while she was asleep.
No way she could get out of her bed, and search her parents..
No she was asleep..
How can you be sure, she did stay asleep,and never wake up one or all the children?
Why take such high risk?

Children on the way to school, beach malls or playground get abducted.
And no demanding for money for the abductor

I think the alarm was rased after the had a good place to hide her.
The search was for a alive child,
And soon all over the world too.

Even if there are reamains found..
I dont think so..
It will probaly not prove anything.
Only she is not alive.

Anonymous said...

Jane did not check up the Mccann kids.
Matt did, Gerry did.
This checking on the kids.
Did they check the children of their friends to?
Or did Matt just that night a check for his friends just once?

Leslie Lim said...

Thank you for posting some kind of information. It was really helpful since I am doing some research now.

Blossom Blogs said...

Thank you for this explanation, which has answered my questions about WHY the McCanns have not been "caught" for killing Madeleine. The evidence is all there, but the proof is lacking. Yes, they are indeed a very unlikeable couple, cold, aloof, arrogant. I wonder why the fact that the Gaspar's comments in relation to David Payne, and the Social Worker who recognised his face from an investigation she was involved in and passed this information to the police, wasn't looked at in more detail? I believe it was probably DP who assisted the McCanns in disposing of Madeleine's body. It's galling that there cannot be a prosecution of the McCanns for the reasons you have explained.

Anonymous said...

As anyone read Kate McCann's Book on Madeleine, now that's a piece of fiction that is misleading? it's full of inaccuracies from her original accounts made to the PJ investigation

Pat Brown said...

Anon 7:34

It IS a very interesting book. Actually, I refused to write a complete profile of the case until I read that book because I wanted to hear a full rendition from the horse's mouth as to what transpired. I found the book fascinating (in a profiling way) and then I wrote my book because I felt I had enough information (and not through stuff that might have been improperly presented on the Internet) to be confident in my analysis.

Anonymous said...

Hello Pat, i have great respect for you and your work - are you familiar with Peter Hyatt, he is a highly respected expert in crime statement analysis and there is a Youtube channel called - McCanns Embedded Confessions.

A very interest analysis on how the McCanns actions look very guilty, he does a great job going through each constructed sentences quoted by the McCanns and they both show deception, and are likely hiding the truth about what happened to Madeleine?

Pat Brown said...

Anon 12:21

Yes, Peter and I are friends and he does excellent work with statement analysis. It is always fascinating to see how people express things and, in doing so, there are often many interesting insights one can get from what they say. One of my favorite line one of my suspects said in an interview was, "I don't mind that my Mom is dead, I just don't like the way it went down." Huh? ::laughs::yeah, okay.

The McCanns have made many statements that lead me to believe that they know Maddie is dead, they know what happened to her, and they know where her body is.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Pat, it's alway great to hear your views on the McCanns, here is the full analysis statements from Peter's blog of the McCanns interviews since the beginning of the Madeleine case and it's very revealing.

pilchard said...

Hi Pat I'd just like to say I've really enjoyed reading all your posts on this. The circumstantial evidence is compelling: the witness statements of the smith family on the PJ site, the clip of eddie and keela on YouTube, the statement of David payne given to Leicester police read word for word in one of the Richard Hall's documentaries and the interview between Richard Hall and Peter hyatt the statement analyst expert.... Although none of this is evidence - if they were charged and the whole group of friends in the tapas bar were interviewed under caution surely there would be a good chance that if they have been lying one of them would slip up... But as you say elsewhere maybe we need to all just move on - whatever the Scotland Yard review decides. Great line from the film transiberian "with lies you may go ahead in this world but you may never go back"

Anonymous said...

I believe the Maddie 'died' well before the alleged time, hours or maybe a day or more.

All the evidence can be erased by that time and possibly disposed of.

Maddie in my opinion did indeed die in the apt but when !

Pat Brown said...

Anon 2:29

All the evidence points to Maddie dying in the apartment on the evening of the alarm. Nothing supports death days earlier with a huge conspiracy to fake Madeleine being alive (which makes little sense) and then staging a terrible bad abduction. The terrible abduction staging if that was what it was, was a mess. A mess usually means an accidental death or unplanned homicide that is quickly covered up so there is little time to figure out how to do it better.

Anonymous said...

It work for Harold Shipman for a long time; Police ignored witnesses' complaints dismissing them out of hand for social status reasons.

Anonymous said...

I work with Police and believe they would.

Pat Brown said...

Anon 3:56

I am not sure what you mean by "I believe they would." If you mean through your work with police that you are well aware that parents kill their children, I am with you there. I think if you work long enough in this business you learn that lots of things the general public believes are not true like, yes, women do file false rape charges, yes, sometimes killers don't tell anyone anything about their crimes, yes, sometimes cases are unsolvable or unprosecutable.