Here is how this works:
During the first half they present Goncalo Amaral’s case. They have him speak. They actually admit there is no evidence of abduction. They even show the dogs doing their great work. They quite effectively help the audience to see that it is possible to suspect the parents for good reasons.
I admit, it is quite shocking and amazing as we,who believe this evidence does indeed support the parents’ involvement in Maddie going missing, have not seen this level of what appears to be honesty; this appears to be a program willing to present the facts. We see it as a Great Leap Forward with the media. I am not complaining about this aspect because, hey, it IS something that is quite satisfying.
But, I knew there had to be a second half of the show that would effectively trash this evidence, Amaral’s theory, and the Portuguese police. And, I was not wrong. The second half did just that. It pretty much stated that Amaral’s theory was debunked by the DNA evidence, the physical evidence he was so hoping would prove him right. And, then, in comes Scotland Yard to do the case properly, find long ignored witnesses and suspects and, now, we start seeing that the parents, in spite of certain anomalies, could not possibly have hurt their daughter and covered up the crime. Why, it’s nonsense! Even Smithman couldn’t possibly be Gerry because, we all know “for a fact” that he was in the Tapas with everyone at the time the Smiths saw the man with the child.And the carefully selected host of the show, the journalists, the always pro- McCann Summers and Swan are used like product placement....right time, right part of the documentary....in order to promote the agenda which is still “the McCanns are innocent.”
Notice what the documentary did NOT do.
They present the facts that there was no evidence of abduction, but later claimed she was abducted yet ignored the earlier demonstration that there was no such proof. Oddly, when they did the burglar bit, they had the fellows in the re-enactment running around in the flat which is hard to buy as they would have left evidence of breaking in and mucking about.
They claimed the DNA proved Madeleine did not die in the flat nor was her corpse carried in the vehicle but they did not explain why the dogs went nuts both in the flat and at the car.
They didn’t explain that Scotland Yard’s claim of Tannerman being a guest carrying his child made little sense. Why they didn’t even show Jane on the street with Gerry and Jez! They showed a completely inaccurate depiction of Jane walking right by Tannerman where there were some stairs. What?
The documentary never allowed Goncalo to rebut any of their claims.
They had me on for a news clip but they made sure I also wasn’t on the show to likewise rebut the nonsensical claims they made.
In other words, they controlled the narrative. Essentially, the prosecution presentated their case and then the defense. But, they never gave the prosecution a chance to respond to the defense which means the defense is the last bit the audience gets.
One might think there was still enough in the documentary to sway people who have never seen the evidence before and now might think the McCanns are less than innocent. Surely, some will be won over. But, media goes with numbers and the numbers are in their corner if they keep controlling the agenda and presenting a very biased show.
I will say the most surprising thing on the show for me was, at the end of the show, Colin Sutton saying that the Scotland Yard investigation lacked legitimacy because they didn’t start at the table and abduction was ruled out before they even analyzed all the evidence. I would like to believe there was someone at Discovery who did that on purpose to throw a wrench in the McCanns-must-be-innocent theory and while it is possible, I tend to think it may have been an oversight in the editing process.
So, I am glad some of you see progress in this documentary and are happy that some of the truth came out even if most of the audience won’t go away realizing that this really was the truth. But, while I am happier with this show than many, I am still not surprised and still very frustrated that the media is not interested in truly being objective. If Discovery ID really wanted to examine the case, they would have let Goncalo, Colin, me and any other experts discuss all the issues of the case and leave it for the viewers to truly decide what theory the evidence really supports.
But then, they would probably be Carter-Rucked.
Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
April 27, 2019
It IS dead in the water! I am commenting on the media more than that it is going to influence the legal case. The media is corrupt and not interested in presenting the truth which I find very frustrating. They want a good story and to make money - like Making a Murderer - and they have no ethics in doing so. I don’t have a problem with them wanting a good story and to make money, but journalism or reporting or documentaries ought to attempt to be objective and truthful.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your continued heads up on that case. I have zero training, though I would love a second career ;-), but even to my untrained mind, nothing adds up. The only one thing that made the cover up successful is that at the onset they managed to create "enough doubt" in the "average person" about the possibility of a kidnapping that it stuck. And once it sticks, the operation has worked; as changing people's mind is the hardest thing once they have embraced an emotive stance (akin to trauma bonding) with a narrative; Job done!
DeleteWonderful put up.
ReplyDeleteMister C,
ReplyDeleteTen years ago I said the case was dead in the water when Scotland Yard stepped in and I stated I was not going to spend everyday discussing every issue of the case. I come back every once in a while when there is something to say, but, since I cannot influence the outcome, there is little need to waste too much of my time on this.
Well. Sir Jimmy Savile was a hero and idol in Britain too...until the sad truth about that piece of won't say what came out .That poor girl was dead from day and the parents make fools out of everyone. Unfortunately without body you cannot prove anything and as Gerry says we can only ask the dogs. Regards
DeleteEven if it was proved that Madeleine was never in the hire car it wouldn't exonerate the McCanns. The hire car could have got contaminated with cadaver odour from the apartment. Madeleine's body could have been disposed of on the night of the 3rd. Maybe Gerry simply put her in a bin after being seen by the Smith family.
ReplyDeleteI admit I haven't watched this programme yet. The Netflix nonsense was enough for me to steer clear of these programmes.
ReplyDeleteBut what has DNA got to do with whether Madeleine died in the apartment or not? Cadaver dogs don't detect DNA. They respond to the unique olfactory signature produced by the process of decomposition, and they do it well, and with exceptional accuracy.
You can put a body in a room for a time. Then take it away again. A cadaver dog can signal to the odour of decomposition because the volatile molecules produced by the body can adhere to materials and surfaces in the room, as well as remaining in the atmosphere.
There are no cells, no tissues, no liquids, no DNA remaining. Just volatile scent molecules.
I think there are two types of public. Those who can smell a rat and those who cannot! It fascinates me how so many people do not see what is staring them in the face. All you need to do is look at the evidence. There is nothing to indicate that Madeleine was abducted other than a staged break in (come on!) and the fact that she is no longer here. Even if there was no other evidence to the contrary (scent dogs, inconsistencies in statements, sightings, missing tennis bag, cuddle cat being laundered, staged break in etc) this would be a clear cut case of something sinister having happened to this little girl by someone who had to have access to the apartment. I love your work Pat and cannot understand why people cannot see the truth behind this lie / cover up.
ReplyDeletequote - Colin Sutton saying that the Scotland Yard investigation lacked legitimacy because they didn’t start at the table and abduction was ruled out before they even analyzed all the evidence.
ReplyDeleteShould the was, be replaced with a wasn't Pat ?
An accurate review which sums up my thoughts exactly. So much time given to attempt to prove the abduction theory and hardly any time allowed to explore other theories. I am shocked at the number of people who jump on the abduction bandwagon, despite there being absolutely no evidence to support this. None of us knows what happened to this poor child but, in my opinion, professional documentaries should be unbiased and adhere to the evidence.
ReplyDeleteIf Discovery ID really wanted to examine the case, they would have let Goncalo, Colin, me and any other experts discuss all the issues of the case and leave it for the viewers to truly decide what theory the evidence really supports.
ReplyDeleteIf only Pat, if only..........:-(
One aspect of the investigation that is rarely mentioned is regarding the replacement of the refrigerator in the McCann's apartment. Both the timing and place of the disposal of the original appliance and where and how the replacement was obtained seems never to be discussed. Vehicle (or vehicles) would appear to have been used and maybe monies exchanged to acquire a replacement. Of course, if the replacement was not brand new, it could have been swapped which infers a conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteI do quite agree with Ruth Bashford, I can't see how the presence of DNA in the car boot and in the flat would prove anything. Human remains VOCs are evidence beyond doubt, but whose remains ?
ReplyDeleteNow if the inconclusive results of the FSS can be accurately analyzed found conclusive, good for them !
The best and only accurate, detailed, impartial mainstream media programme is the Australian podcasts by Mark Saunokokoko. They're excellent and have found that with new methods the dna in the car and apartment can now be reanalysed and identified. The leading expert has offered to do this free of charge for Scotland Yard. He has privately contacted them with this offer. Their silence is deafening.
ReplyDeleteChris Smit..Spot on I have just listened to the new one.Finally a mainstream channel presenting the FACTS of this case. perhaps Australia is beyond Carter Tucks reach
Deleteonce upon a time documentaries dealt with documentary evidence.
ReplyDeletecan you profile what kind of police department would cover up a crime against a tiny little girl? does that make them no better than the perpetrator of the crime and will they all get jail time when it finally comes out? what would be a possible reason for them to do this and who in GB has that kind of power to instruct the police to not solve a case?
ReplyDeleteThe prime minister for one. The reason is that the Maddie story was worth millions to the British tabloids. Who threatened him if he put a stop to their cash cow story. The papers had already been sued for libel. The papers printed McCann's letter to David Cameron demanding funding for an investigation of a missing child - he complied and since then over $20million has been wasted on an investigation that found nothing. No politician is going to risk being the one to end the investigation and the huge dollars to the red tops which would then go after him viciously.
DeleteSY was instructed to search for an abductor through a PM's request based partly on compassion party on media pressure. After 12 years of not finding abductor, the supposed to be best police of the planet should reasonably come back to step O and examine what happened to MMC. Why don't they ? Authorities don't admit easily they took reckless measures.
ReplyDelete@AnneGuedes @ 7.59am
ReplyDeleteOperation Grange was set up at first as a review of the case files. I believe the large team of just short of 40 officers had their work cut out as they not only received the volumes of paperwork & files from the PJ but they also received boxloads of information from the teams of PIs who worked outside of Portugal. Within all of those files would be information none of us could possibly know about.
Whatever was found and set aside as of real importance, it was decided that the review should progress on to a full investigation, which is what we have running today but with a smaller team who still have their work cut out, of course, but with the more manageable amount of really important information gleaned from the original. They MUST have found things within the files that they felt needed further investigation.
We have no way of knowing what stage they are at or who they are focussing on, but suffice to say it must be somebody. On the matter of whether it is the McCann couple themselves, I would say there's not a chance of that being the case. The PJ Directorate have issued a statement 3 times over the past 7 years or so, declaring the McCanns as "Not suspects in the inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance". Pedro do Carmo could be no clearer than he was in interview repeating this.
I would also point out again that it would take some very strange couple to leave Portugal & for them to pursue our government for help if they had harmed their own child. It was pretty obvious Portugal would have put the files away & never bothered with them again if it hadn't have been for the actions of the McCann couple in getting that help so desperately needed & in turn the PJ feeling they had better re-open those dusty files & do some more work on the case, probably because they know the worldwide interest this little girl's case has caused & eyes firmly fixed on Portugal. They certainly don't need this feeling by people that they just didn't care.
Surely they aren't focusing on mccanns. That was not the remit. The job was to ignore the parents' potential involvement and search for an abductor which they have done for ten years. The only thing they came up with was ruling out Dr Totman, (Tannerman)-who remains to this day the prime suspect featured on McCann's website regardless.
DeleteMccanns have no respect for the SY investigation they demanded any more than they had for the PJ one. Or indeed the German one. They simply want to continue the confusion and drag this out with one suspect after another.
yes costing 18m from UK tax payers
ReplyDelete@Anonymous 7;59 am
ReplyDeleteNot being examined as a suspect doesn't mean you are innocent. The STJ was very clear : the MCs' innocence hasn't been proved (their guilt hasn't as well).
Anyhow it is very unusual to make a review without starting from scratch. Actually it seems it never happened..
You may believe they "found leads" if you don't mind wishful thinking.
The only important point is to let the public know that, in spite of SY investigating only an abduction, there's no evidence at all that the child was abducted, hence speaking of "her abduction" is a misuse of language, "disappearance" being the right word. In times where fake news are denounced or should be denounced, it is crucial to name things and events appropriately.
ReplyDelete