The New Madeleine McCann Suspect
So, what about Christian Brückner? Is there any validity in him being linked to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann? Or is it just another fake suspect or a media splash? Well, let’s look at the various possibilities.
One, another media story because they need another media story about Madeleine McCann. Or the McCanns are pushing for more publicity. Or Operation Grange needs justification for more money. We have seen all of this before, so it would not surprise me to see it done yet again.
Two, the guy is really a pedophile or robber who snatched Maddie of his own volition. I sincerely doubt this. Why? Because robbers do not snatch children. Also, there was no evidence of an abduction that would be necessary if he were a child sex predator. And, if he were just some random creep and it was a true abduction, the McCanns sure have acted strangely all these years.
Three, Christian Brückner WAS involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann but his only role was in carting the child off.
Let’s look at his ex-girlfriend’s statement.
Okay, first of all, we don’t know that he really said this. Ex-girlfriends may make stuff up or disremember something or exaggerate something. What he said or didn’t actually say may have nothing to do with this case at all.
But, let’s suppose it did. What would it mean? Well, it certainly doesn’t sound like something a child predator says to his girlfriend. He wouldn’t tell her of a child he is planning to abduct. He also doesn’t think that abducting that child (which would end with her death a few hours later at most) will change his life because he would expect to do it and be done with it. Then, he would go back to his normal life.
Secondly, he wouldn’t call abduction a “job.” And it wouldn’t be a “horrible job.” It would be fun.
So, if he really WAS going to do a “horrible job,” what would this mean. “Job” means someone has hired you and “horrible” means it isn’t pleasant. And if it would change his life, it would mean he was going to make a lot of money for doing it. That he wouldn’t be seen for a while would mean he was going to lie low.
So, if he did take Maddie, the only explanation would be at the request of the McCanns. This would be a job, an unpleasant one of removing a body of a small child, and one that would pay well. If the man were hired to do such a thing, it would explain why there was no sign of an abduction because the door would have been left unlocked for him. It would explain why nothing was disturbed. It could explain why drugging two children might be necessary and why the parents would have to be out that evening and why Gerry would be lurking around at a certain time. It could explain Smithman with a little girl in his arms and it could explain why the McCanns did not want Smithman to be identified. It could explain why the dogs had no trouble identifying cadaver odor behind the sofa.
I know many of you might say this means that Maddie was dead for many days. I still would think that is an unlikely scenario. It is far more likely that something would have only happened the day before and there was less than 24 hours to figure out what to do. The evening was still a mess and reeks of panic. Why the dogs would hit on the McCann car might be explained by a later moving of the body to a final burial place. That the dogs hit behind the sofa could be that this was the spot they chose to hide the body that evening for the remover to find. Possible? Well, possible. However, fake children at the crèche and phony last photos and fake children being carried about is not likely. It is also possible that an accident occurred where Maddie fell behind the sofa on the previous evening and her body was placed in the closet.
So, where does that leave us? With two possible theories. Maddie died on May 3, 2007 and panic ensued and Gerry was Smithman. Or, Maddie died the day before, panic ensued, and Gerry hired Smithman.
IF the latter is true, there has to be some connection between Christian Brückner and Gerry McCann and that should be traceable. I find it odd that if there was a connection that this was not discovered earlier and only now Brückner Is being looked at. Very strange.
But, whether he is linked or not to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, I still find that the evidence leads back to the McCanns. If this is not proven and Christian Brückner goes down as a pedophile working alone, I will still think something crooked is happening with Scotland Yard. And if, finally, the McCanns become suspects, one wonders what would have taken Scotland Yard so incredibly long to come to this point in the investigation.
It will be interesting to see what comes of this. It may be nothing but hot air, but if there is really any evidence of Brückner’s involvement, then, maybe, we will finally learn the truth.
Update: There seems to be a bit of misunderstanding as to why I am creating this theory about this new suspect. I am not saying it is accurate. We have VERY little information as to make any link with this man to the crime. What I am attempting to do is put together the only scenario that WOULD make sense should there be proof the man has anything to do with the disappearance of Maddie. That he “abducted” Maddie is not supported in ANY way by the evidence. The ONLY way he could be linked to the crime would be if he were taking away a dead child on request.
1) Because there is no evidence of a break-in or an abduction
2) Because there is evidence of death in the flat
3) An abductor wouldn’t have killed Maddie and then left her long enough for cadaver traces to develop for the dogs to find
4) The McCanns have guilty behaviors that make no sense for an abduction
Which means he would have had to know the child was dead, he would only have taken a dead child for pay, the doors would have to have been left unlocked, and he would have had to had the assurance that the coast was clear. Also, the McCanns would have to be very lucky to know such a useful, disreputable person in their hour of need. Also, Gerry has the personality of a person who likes to control things and bringing in a questionable fellow that could rat him out would be not in keeping with his style of thinking.
That this happened, there is no proof. There is only evidence that there was a dead person in the flat and that there is no evidence of an abduction, the McCanns acted oddly, and the McCanns didn’t want Smithman to be identified. This could mean that Smithman was Gerry or that Smithman was this character. But, we do not have any evidence as of now that Smithman WAS this man.
Is this scenario at all likely? No, it would be very improbable. But, I want to clear up any scenario that this man would be a serial predator who abducted Maddie or a burglar whose crime went wrong.
PS. I stand by my original profile as the evidence supporting an accident on the evening of May 3, 2007 with a subsequent cover-up with Smithman being the key to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It still is the most likely scenario based on the evidence that we have to date.
Pat Brown
Investigative Criminal Profiler
June 10, 2020
82 comments:
I don't believe this man has any connection to the McCann case and he was eliminated by the Portuguese police in 2007. I think, and of course I could be completely wrong, that the Smith family saw Gerry with Madeleine's body and he then disposed of it, maybe in a bin as I don't believe they were searched properly that night and they are emptied every day at dawn. Her body could have ended up in landfill. The hire car could simply have got contaminated with cadaver odour from the apartment.
With all due respect Pat, I agree with you on a couple of points only but I take exception to you
1: Deciding there had been no abduction. You simply cannot say that
2: Assume Christian, if he was involved (& like you I don't believe he was) helped Kate & Gerry McCann. Could he not have taken her to order? Far more likely with all we know surrounding the case providing we don't jump into realms of fantasy?
Hello,
two things strike me in the McCanns-Accident-in-the-same-evening scenario:
1) the cold-blooded (pun) mindset to choose a plan in such a small timeframe; even with psychopaths, there are a lot of variables to deal with.
2) how could they reach, remove, move, bury/cremate a body several weeks after, with all the media swarming around them.
As for this german bloke, let it play out. Again.
Respectfully,.
Ruth, this is not a scenario I say is accurate. We have VERY little information as to any link with this man to the crime. What I am attempting to do is put together the only scenario that WOULD make sense should there be any proof the man has anything to do with the disappearance of Maddie. That he “abducted” Maddie is not supported by evidence. The ONLY way he could be linked to the crime would be if he were taking away a dead child on request
1) Because there is no evidence of a break-in or an abduction
2) Because there is evidence of death in the apartment
3) An abductor wouldn’t have killed her and then left her long enough for cadaver traces to develop for the dogs
4) The McCanns guilty behaviors
Which means he would have had to know the child was dead, he would only have taken a dead child for pay, the doors would have had to be left unlocked, and he would have had to had the assurance that the coast was clear.
That this happened, there is no proof. There is only evidence that was a dead person in the flat and that there was no evidence of an abduction, the McCanns acted oddly, and they didn’t want Smithman to be identified. This could mean Smithman was Gerry or that Smithman was this character. But, we do not have any evidence as of now that Smithman WAS this man.
Anon,
I CAN say there was there was no evidence of an abduction because there was no evidence of an abduction.
And, no I don’t believe she would have been taken to order because 1) it is rather silly and 2) there is no evidence of that
Anon,
Yes, it could have happened in one evening. Many a parent has done exactly the same under dire circumstances. For example, Baby Lisa and JonBenet, two cases in which the evidence supports someone connected to the child likely did something to the child and then staged an abduction or a stranger homicide. All done immediately. Why? Because when someone does something horrible to their child, they may panic and quite quickly decide they must save themselves. Add in a rather cold-blooded parent someone who has a rather psychopathic temperament to begin with and it is all the easier to manage.
There is nothing perfect about the disappearance of Maddie. The window issue, the dogs, Smithman, Tannerman, the confused stories, etc., it wasn’t perfect. But, as is true with many crimes or coverups, it may just be good enough and have luck added in and, perhaps, politics.
Mabey they were expecting the Body to be taken that night, that's why Kate used the words
"they have taken her" they may not have known exactly who was been sent to remove the body to a secret location until the fuss died down and they could have a proper funeral...things didn't go to plan though,most people with an ounce of intelligence knew that the Child wasn't abducted. I should say most people who read the Police files,the Criminal Analist files etc..
What utter nonsense. Poor and out of date reporting of facts, flawed analysis and highly dubious reasoning.
The German State Prosecutor, Hans Christian Wolters, has said Brückner had online communication with another pedophile shortly before Madeleine’s abduction (see excerpt:
He told how he wanted to “catch something little and use it for days” and, regarding the risk of being caight, added: “Meh, if the evidence is destroyed...”
He also wrote: “Then I’ll record maaaany videos/clips. I’ll document in detail how she’s being tortured.”)
He is documented as having a criminal history of abducting, then filming torture and rape of his victims, including that of a 72yr old American woman in Praia da Luz in 2005, about 18 months before Madeleine disappeared. He strongly believes she was abducted by Brückner and his working hypothesis is that he murdered her shortly thereafter.
Of course, Madeleine’s parents were negligent in leaving their children unattended and alone in an unlocked apartment. They will doubtless live with this for the rest of their lives. However, this in no way can justify the actions of the sick, evil criminal that abducted her. In this regard, I have nothing but sympathy for these parents. They have been through hell, not least at the hands of the incompetent Portuguese police. Anyone with any humanity and empathy would feel the same and stop spotting nonsense. SHAME ON YOU!
@ Pat Brown
You have categorically stated there was no abduction. I respectfully say to you that you cannot say that with any conviction because it is very possible and I think probable that there was an abduction, a very easy abduction, sadly.
@ Ruth Bashford
There is no evidence that Martin Smith or his family members witnessed Gerry McCann taking Madeleine. Gerry was in the Tapas at the time of Kate raising the alarm. Even Goncalo Amaral, for all his faults, acknowledges that.
It may well be that the Smiths saw a man carrying a child and that man might be Christian B but we have no proof of that either.
My concern is that Christian might have had his VW campervan parked down on the dirt track running along from the beach. Many use that stretch (Burgau side) to park up. You can see that if you go onto google earth.
@Pat Brown
Could you explain how you come to the conclusion there was a death in apartment 5a? Forget the dogs. Your good friend Goncalo Amaral concedes they failed in Luz and cites the heat! That is ridiculous as it wasn't any hotter than a hot summer in UK where the 2 dogs were trained.
If you go to the Final Report from the PJ, which is an file which reads as it was written instead of some bits added in and guesswork, then you might find the Attorney General also mentions that nothing the dogs alerted to proved to give any evidence, the swabs, , when tested proved innocuous.
Without the dogs there is nothing that would direct the level headed person in the direction of death. The PJ forensic officers didn't find anything themselves. ALL in the files Pat.
@ Babs 9:30am
We know Kate didn't use those words "They've taken her". Kate's words were "Madeleine's gone, someone's taken her".
It takes a certain mindset, with due respect, to conjure up a storyline like the one you have produced here.
Am I reading too much into the fact that the police have never told the parents what evidence they have that their daughter is dead?
Why would they tell them via a press conference?
The McCanns lawyer was on ITV News demanding the Germans tell them what evidence they have that Madeleine is dead. Shouldn't the police have done that prior to going public in any other missing person investigation?
And if the police don't have any evidence why are they pretending they do? Are they trying to presurre this guy into confessing to something we can be pretty certain he didn't do?
Spot on Pat Brown. Very few people are prepared to stand up and say the truth, I appreciate you for doing this. As a British taxpayer, all I can say is that I'm tired of paying for the farce I call Operation Grange. £12,000,000 down the drain already. The evidence definitely points to the McCanns but unfortunately, they appear untouchable.
On the night of Madeleine's disappearance, we are told that Matt Oldfield checked on the McCann children. He only saw the twins, he said. In his wife, Rachael Oldfield's statement, she said that Matt 'wondered where Madeleine Slept' and had looked for her in her parents' bedroom. He returned to the bar and Gerry went straight back to the flat. Why would Gerry go to the flat immediately after Matt? Because, I believe that Matt told him he couldn't see Madeleine. 3 witness statements say that (a) someone was heard in the street calling out a name - possibly Madeleine. (b) A shopkeeper was told that a child was missing and (c) the chef at the Tapas Bar arrived to start his shift and saw the McCanns table was empty - all before 10 pm. They'd all gone to search for Madeleine, I believe. Where was she? Behind the sofa, having climbed up and fallen onto the tiles below. This is what I believe from reading the witness statements.
FAO Pat Brown
This maybe all you need to focus on.
From the Archiving Summary of the Attorney General of Portugal regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Suppositions are merely that and while many can suppose this or that might have happened, in actual fact, nothing backed up the death of Madeleine McCann in her apartment. Without the dogs alerts there is not a thing to point in the direction of a death/homicide:
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Pat,Mr Smith already said that this is NOT the guy they saw that night.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/madeleine-mccann-case-key-irish-witness-in-investigation-doesnt-recognise-new-suspect-39268140.html
Pat Brown,
I really feel that even by hypothesising as to whether Christian B could have been "Smithman", you are not only flogging a dead horse, you're trying to resuscitate one!
One of the main reasons that some find the Smithman hypothesis seductive is because of the claim by Mr.Smith that his memory was somehow jogged after seeing footage of Gerry McCann carrying one of the twins, in a strikingly similar manor to the man he saw on the night of May 3rd 2007.
Also, and please correct me if I'm wrong Pat, but you yourself suggested that the reason the McCanns have never acknowledged the Smith sighting is because the man carrying the child that evening could have been Gerry!
Pat I think your analysis of the possible role of CB is spot on. It's exactly my reaction and especially what you have said about the possible interpretation of his GF's comments. The only difference is that you have put it far more succinctly than I could have. I think many people are impressed by the fact that a seemingly independent German prosecutor has concluded that Maddie is dead and this guy is involved. My take on this question is that CB was due for parole on his cannabis charges and had appealed the older lady rape conviction on what seems like a paperwork screw up by the Prosecutor in the extradition from Italy, I have read he was only able to get to Italy because a screw up by the Prosecutor allowed him out of jail before the charge could be filed. So the Prosecutor has a win-win scenario. If he confesses or someone comes up with compelling evidence, he will be seen as a hero, if not the majority will still think he has solved the case and most probably his parole and appeal will be denied.
In terms of the overall case, I remain open as to whether the accident (in my view most plausibly an anaphylactic shock reaction to a sedative given by Kate followed by a failed CPR by Gerry spraying blood at high pressure out of her mouth and nose), happened on Thursday or perhaps a day before. I note Diane Webster who gives the only honest reading testimony among the T7 was taken offside on Thursday by scheduling lunch by the beach. Also I find it difficult to see how they could hatch a plan that the others were sufficiently confident in to play their role without discussing it beforehand.
Pat, Id also value your comments on another aspect of the case which you touch upon that intrigues me. You point out quite correctly that kicking the Smithman sighting into the long grass is incredibly suspicious both on the part of the McCanns and Scotland Yard. They are obviously incredibly important witnesses. By the way Mr Smith is already reported to have told the Irish papers it wasn't CB who he saw that night and of course CB is nothing much like the description given by Mr Smith and his family at the time (whereas that description does fit Gerry very well.) If we accept the veracity of the testimony of Mr Smith and his family, and I can see no incentive for them to lie whatsoever. Then IF CB was hired by Gerry to dispose of the body as in your "other possibility" scenario, then either the Smiths saw a Gerry McCann look alike carrying a small blond girl or he saw Gerry McCann with a decoy such as Amalie or Ella O Brien. You have largely discounted the decoy theory meaning that it would be a Gerry McCann/Maddie lookalike happening to be wandering around at 10pm and for some reason never willing to come forward or be identified by someone who knows them - obviously extremely unlikely. What gives more credence to the decoy theory than I think you allow is the eagerness of the McCanns for IRISH tourists to come forward BEFORE they actually did. We know Smithman would have known the Smiths were Irish as Mrs Smith asked him whether she was sleeping plus I'm sure there would have been plenty of chit chat among the kids, any Brit let alone Gerry with his Irish ancestry could pick up the Irish accent within 2 words. So WHY would the McCanns go to the trouble of repeatedly calling for Irish tourists to come forward with anything they saw that night, even to the lengths of appearing on Irish version of crimestoppers? To me this only makes sense if the whole point of taking a kid out that evening was to run into some tourists and therefore substantiate the abduction claim. He would have assumed that the only detail a passerby would remember was that a average man was carrying a little blonde girl toward the beach. Who could imagine that a mini fashionista like Aoife Smith would recall a detail like the buttons on his beige trousers - trousers Gerry has been photographed wearing. Of course when the Smiths came forward with such a detailed sighting they had to throw the whole Irish tourists must have seen something thing into reverse PDQ. 13 years on we just remember how they have kicked the Smiths into touch but I think it might be just as important to recall how keen they were for Irish tourists to come forward and tell what they had seen that night.
From a criminal profiling point of view, Christian B is being linked (or rather, trying to be linked) with all sorts of people. Rape of an older lady which he was found guilty of... but then also very young girls, possibly young boy(s) and slighted older girls/teens... Is it common, as a sexual predator not to have a specific type... or would this be very typical? I dont see any theme in the potential other victims particularly, or have they just been thrown in the mix to heighten his appearance of being evil?
i don't believe this man or any other man did the "abduction" i am curious to know....if the people that were with the ....................McCanns in portugual...are still having great friendship?....anyway...there was no abduction...impossible one man or else...took 1 child when there was 3 of them...Maddie would have make some noise...so the twins would have been woken up...and the...parents...never showed some sadeness to this day...
Can you tell us Pat what evidence you feel someone would leave if their intention was to break in and lift a child?
Considering the amount of fluff & debris in 5a on the floor & bearing in mind it was a very much used rental property, I'd imagine there'd be so much dna that to find any from an intruder would be hard?
How do we know that CB wasn't an acquaintance of Murat? He seemed to know everyone, so I am sure he knew CB. Murat maybe requested his services.
This is a very interesting read. I’m just curious about the “accident” theory. If there was an accident, why would the parents need to cover it up & not seek help for her. Is this theory suggesting something more sinister from parents? Wondering what others believe the “accident” to be? I agree that it’s strange for this man to announce to his girlfriend that he has a “horrible job” to do if he really was going to commit something evil like this, but aren’t some individuals so twisted that they enjoy seeing how much they can say & still get away with? Just food for thought, but you brought up some very good points.
There are far too many questions here for me to answer, most of which I have already answered in my books or blogs and in this blog in particular.
I will only reiterate a few points here.
All theory about a case are based on the available evidence. Evidence may be missing or insufficient to take a case to court. Likewise, when I wrote this post about Chistian Bruckner any analysis was based on the slimmest of information and zero evidence! All I really know about Bruckner is that he is in prison for some crime and that some police are saying he might have taken Maddie or that some media is claiming that the police said that. We don’t know if a bit of this has any validity. I only wanted to write the blog to give a scenario that would show the only way Bruckner could be involved would not eliminate the McCanns from involvement.
A profile of a crime is based on the totality of the evidence. When I say I believe the evidence does not support abduction it is because ALL together the abduction theory makes no sense.
As to Smithman, I will say the same thing as I have said again and again. It matter not so much if the Smith family saw him or whom they say they saw or if they were told to make up a story; the problem is that the McCanns did not want that sighting investigated nor were they even interested in it. Any parent of a missing child goes insane at any sighting that they think might be their child, no matter how ridiculous because this is their only hope of saving their child or finding their child or finding out what happened to that child. The McCanns went nuts on that Tanner sighting in the correct fashion but completely ignored the Smith sighting. This means to me they did not want to have that sighting investigated; they did not want anyone to find out who it was. WHY NOT? THIS is the KEY to the case. (Along with the mass of other evidence, it adds up to the McCanns likely involvement in what happened to Maddie.)
Hi Pat, you've previously written that while you are in broad agreement with Gancalo Amaral's thesis about the events leading to the disappearance of Madelaine on the night of 3rd May 2007 you have some differences of opinion. Could you set out the most substantive of these please and explain your reasoning? Thanks
Pat, the comments came in thick & fast since last night so I can see your reluctance to address them each as individuals.
I would like to point out observations I have on some of this, if I may.
Firstly, I don't believe the German Prosecutor has enough to charge Christian Bruckner with being Madeleine McCann's abductor &, in their view, murderer. Flimsy evidence of some sort he purportedly made to an acquaintance later that he knew all about that (being the abduction) as well he might. The whole world knows about Madeleine. CB lived in Praia da Luz so he witnessed the media surrounding the area & heard talk first hand presumably. It doesn't make a confession in my eyes.
However, I think it was Greg above (forgive me if I'm wrong) who in one of his posts, mentions the Smith family passing by a man at 10pm as they wended their weary way home up the hill. It was stated above by the contributor that Mary Smith asked if the child was sleeping but no reply was forthcoming. Possibly a foreigner who had no idea he was being asked that but there are also people who never reply in this kind of situation, so that in itself isn't something to concern us. You can read the Smith family statements in the PJ files and not one of them would have been able to describe the man's facial features as he kept his head low. All descriptions were of his perceived height, his perceived hair colour in the dark & that he didn't strike them as a tourist. If it was a local carrying his child home, what a pity he was reluctant to get involved. Aoife's description of the pants the man was wearing did not state he definitely had buttons on them, just maybe they did & she certainly didn't state they were half way down the leg, so what if she saw back pocket buttons? Far too vague for any person to say they were Gerry McCann's trousers, which I hasten to add, were of the type in the early 2000s that many men favoured as holiday wear as they converted from long to shorter legs by rolling up and securing with the button.
On you saying that Kate & Gerry refused to acknowledge this man, I have to pick you up on this Pat because they most certainly did & if you look in Kate's book Madeleine, there at the back is a list of suspects & this man's is very much there & Kate acknowledged him in the body of her text too & he is still a concern to them. However, Jane Tanner's man is equally as relevant & if you watch the Netflix documentary released last year, then you will see that Jane wasn't lying & she suffers the anguish of knowing she might have prevented Madeleine being taken had she realised at the time, especially as Gerry was in the street at the time chatting with Jez. It has been a story the world has focussed on from Brazil to Australia, Scandinavia to South Africa, simply every corner of the earth, Madeleine has become the symbol of all missing children & hopefully has made parents open their eyes to not leaving the children under any circumstances or with anybody at all.
I'm very certain Madeleine was abducted & probably to order. Too easy under the circumstances & yes, a small window of opportunity perhaps, but undertaken & almost foiled but sadly they got away with her. I live in hope she is alive & that she may yet return to her family. Amen to that.
Please promise us you will apologise to Kate & Gerry if you find out you've been wrong.
"On you saying that Kate & Gerry refused to acknowledge this man, I have to pick you up on this Pat because they most certainly did & if you look in Kate's book Madeleine, there at the back is a list of suspects & this man's is very much there & Kate acknowledged him in the body of her text too & he is still a concern to them."
But why did they release the Smiths efit as late as 2013? It just doesn't make sense at all.
Read the police files
Madeleine died in apartment 5a
The dogs don't lie
There is no evidence to convict him or link CB to the case GA had tested the van years ago and ruled him out They only checked him out as he is a known pedophile
Unfortunately the evidence links the mccann and to her sadly dying in apartment 5a
BS she did use those words Google it
Big News Story
To get all the marches of the front PAGES????? #BLM
I fail to see how anyone who doesn't believe the abduction narrative should ever be asked to apologise to the McCanns for anything in the EXTREMELY unlikely event anyone, nevermind this guy was ever found guilty of Madeleine's abduction.
It was the McCanns and their friends themselves who intentionaly sabotaged the orginal investigation. That is aiding and abetting an offendor in any criminal investigation as far as I am concerned and it was the, ahem, abductor who abducted Madeleine they would have been abetting.
I for one will never have anything to apologise for.
Further to last nights posts I have checked out Kate McCann's book Madeleine and at the back of the book there is a section under KEY SIGHTINGS and the first 2 witnesses were Key Witness One Jane Tanner's sighting followed by Key Witness Two Martin Smith's sighting and in that section (paperback version page 466 - 468, there is a very detailed comparison between the 2 men seen from the height to the fact they both were described as not being tourists from the way they dressed to the way they held the child and them both being females in pyjamas and both saying barefooted (only Martin couldn't say but his family observed the bare feet). Also both sightings said no blanket or any covering.
Kate appealed for people to come forward if they identified with either man and stated they were both still of great interest to their investigation.
@ Andy Dacre 12:59
Mr Smith having given a statement stating that he could not recognise the man who passed them by his facial features (the man kept his head low), later, having seen footage of the McCanns return from Praia da Luz at East Midlands Airport, opined that the man he saw that night could have been Gerry McCann! I find it incredible as his judgement for this was on the way Gerry carried his son down the aircraft steps. No matter how many times I watch this very sad footage or ask people their opinions on the way Gerry carried Sean, the consensus is there was nothing wrong with it and was quite normal for any person to carry a child in that manner, so Martin really needs to explain himself on this matter but to say he was now 60 - 80% certain it was Gerry he had seen was utterly ludicrous.
Mr Smith had seen plenty of photos in the press and on our televisions of Gerry McCann so if he felt it was him why didn't he say that in the first instance? He couldn't because he really did not see the facial features and this hinges on the way Gerry alighted the aircraft!
Jane @ 12:12
I think it is how you read Rachael's comment about Matt Oldfield wondering where Madeleine slept. I took it she meant when he entered the apt he wondered and looked in that bedroom before the front bedroom.
Please note also that plenty of witnesses agree with the McCanns account of the way the evening panned out and that it was just after 10pm Kate returned to the Tapas to raise the alarm and that includes statements from waiting staff.
You have to realise people were trying to recall what happened and as much as there are obviously discrepancies in the Tapas groups statements there will also be discrepancies in others too and that is natural enough.
@ Pat Brown
My husband has just been reading some of the comments on thread and said the fact Madeleine was not in her bed WAS evidence of an abduction. Yes of course she may have got out but highly unlikely, so abduction it is. He also asked me to say to you, is Madeleine still hiding in the wardrobe then?
Hello from Germany:),
to be honest, I don't believe that man is in any way linked to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, so imo this is nothing but hot air and Christian Brückner is going to be the patsy they were looking for, perhaps they had to wait until he is in prison. I am just ashamed of the fact that our authorities here in Germany are executing this farce.
Kind regards
Angela
This “no body no case” is a familysecret of the McCann’s. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
From Operation Grange to Operation Slaughterhouse to solve the impossible.
The innocent one: “ Hang’m high‘ the German trumpeter weeps.
Just a comment on this issue of the McCanns and Smithman. No, the McCanns were not interested in Smithman for a very long time. They ignored him as much as possible which is not normal for parents of a missing child.
Secondly, WHEN they decided to acknowledge him they made up a ridiculous story that IF Smithman did have Madeleine, it was because he was the same man as Tannerman, that he ducked into an alley for a long time and then reappeared carrying the child off toward the beach.
The McCanns appear to have been desperate to have Tannerman BE the abductor because 1) they appear not to want Smithman identified and 2) Tannerman is Gerry’s alibi.
@ Pat 1:34pm
With all due respect to you, I have never read that the McCanns ignored Smithman. Where can I find this information and please do not say in Goncalo Amaral's book!
Smithman could still pan out to be Tannerman, nothing is yet confirmed. The likeness in the way he dressed is one indicator although Jane had Tannerman with longer hair at the nape of his neck and the Smiths didn't report on that, rather he had short brown hair. The McCanns have acknowledged him though. It is possible that Tannerman did circumnavigate up through the cut through at the side of the apartment blocks you were staying in (but the ones further towards Murats end of road) & then back in front of the apt you stayed in, across the road
and down onto Rua da Escola Primaria where he was seen by the Smith family. It is possible.
@ Bob 7:01am
It is your opinion the McCanns sabotaged the investigation. I would say myself it was the PJ who were responsible for that, not immediately sending out alerts to the airports to be on the look out for a child in the company of a man who might not belong to the man. Mari Olli said the sighting she had of the little blonde girl in the filling station in Marrakesh didn't sit right with her. The man did not appear to be the child's father nor relative.
The ports were not informed of the missing Madeleine and road checks were not put into place for 3 days or so. The Golden Hours and days were lost entirely in a bungled investigation. The PJ were out of their depth to the detriment of Madeleine and probably other missing children.
I once recall the late great Blacksmith suggest that the end will be in sight when the criminal lawyers begin to appear.
The McCanns criminal lawyer Rogerio Alves is telling Sky News: "For the family it was a shock, although they realise that Madeleine, you know, anything can happen in 13 years.
"But the fact that the prosecutor is saying so strongly that she is dead, I think that he shouldn't say it without proving and demonstrating why he's saying what he's saying.
The McCann's lawyer is now defending the suspect and confirming they haven't been told what evidence the German police have that their daughter is dead.
That's the criminal lawyers appearing now anyway so we will soon see if Blacksmith was right or wrong in due course.
It is interesting that Gerry McCann allegedly bumped into Jez Wilkins, TV documentary maker whose partner worked for TV programme Crimewatch, shortly before Jane Tanner allegedly spotted Tannerman. Almost as if 'something' was supposed to happen at around the time that Gerry bumped into Jez Wilkins - shortly after 9pm - right outside apartment 5A as Gerry left the apartment having admired Madeleine sleeping and thinking how lucky he was.
It's almost as though Tannerman is some kind of 'retro-fit'. He was only hatched in the early hours of Friday morning, I do believe. Around the time that Matt Oldfield, in the company of Ocean Club resort manager, banged on Jez' and his partner's apartment door and told the pair that Madeleine had been abducted. To which Jez replied: 'You're joking', apparently. Jez did not bother to look for Madeleine, despite only a few hours having passed since her alleged abduction. He told police that he and his partner: 'Went back to sleep'. This seems unlikely, given that the pair worked in the media and one of the biggest news stories of the decade was breaking around them. And also, their daughter allegedly played with Madeleine McCann in the kids' club that week. You would think they would be concerned for Madeleine's safety but apparently their sleep was more important.
The timings of all the above appear to be more than coincidences in my opinion. It is also on record that Jez's first statement to police pointed a finger of suspicion at a blond 'rasta-man' who Jez allegedly saw acting suspiciously on Thursday evening at the Tapas restaurant at 7,30pm - 8pm. Jez later gave very different accounts of what he was doing that evening in subsequent statements and who he saw. Which does not inspire confidence in him as a reliable, unbiased witness.
However, it is on record that Detective Amaral urgently faxed Jez a list of questions to be answered a few days after Madeleine's reported disappearance, after Jez had returned to the UK. Jez replied to these but in a news-story published later in the year written by Jez' partner Bridget, who worked on Crimewatch, she stated that Portuguese never 'bothered to contact them'. This was clearly a lie. Why lie?
Would Pat Brown tell us if she has watched the Netflix Documentary which captivated so many last year? It is the one called Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and has 8 episodes.
Maybe your perception of the entire case would be changed if you took the time to do so?
It was an eye opener and frightening as it revealed from so many people in the know, the kind of activities going on alone the Iberian Peninsula, the people trafficking and the drug trafficking which Goncalo Amaral knows all about.
Madeleine, it was said, being from a professional and middle class family, would fetch a very high price and therefore there is a great chance she is alive because children taken for sexual exploitation and gratification are taken from the streets.
The McCanns certainly did behave oddly if they believed this to be an abduction - in failing to answer questions, or to do a reconstruction that would help the investigation- who takes meetings with lawyers and foot drags, believing their child was abducted?
If they knew she was dead and could come to no further harm, maybe. But to dodge and waffle just to protect themselves from a charge of child neglect while their child could be in a pedophile’s dungeon, is very odd indeed. It’s obvious they’re guilty of neglect - at least- by their own account they left the kids and clearly, one came to harm as a result.
That behavior along with the evidence of death in the apt / vehicle indicates that the parents were involved.
However, if CB is found to have abducted MM and killed her, the fund raising ends, the pretense that perhaps she’s alive and unharmed ends. They’re then facing (potentially) charges for neglect leading to harm. They continue to insist they hope for her to be found alive and well - of course, we could all hope that. But if they did not find her dead or kill her themselves, then they know she was abducted due to their continued neglect having been warned that it was unsafe to leave the children in that type of resort set up (never mind with no monitor, or with doors unlocked). Not a good outcome for them.
Until her body is found or we get a believable confession they remain victims, safe to fund raise, and safe to maintain their tight hold over the UK government’s investigation via the very powerful media story. I don’t think McCanns require any big powerful contacts; apart from their ability to sue and ability to leverage the media’s greed - they used it to force Cameron to give the police budget to investigate maddie’s disappearance as a kidnapping ONLY.
Having said that/ the German police aren’t held by the short hairs. They aren’t being paid to search for Maddie and find clues that point away from McCanns as the private PIs were, they aren’t directed by their PM to ignore clues pointing to parents, and only investigate it as a kidnapping, as the Metropolitan Police are.
What would be the motive for the german police to drag CB into this? He was there; he’s a sexual predator, he spoke of it online (as anyone can whether or not they had anything to do with it) and he was on the phone for half an hour outside their apt an hour before she disappeared-?. Those are good clues but not enough for the German police to declare they know he killed MM.
There must be more the German detectives are not divulging. They don’t have a motive to, or a history of playing games. And the MCCanns will not come out if it looking good if it IS discovered that they neglected their child to her horrible death. They don’t want this outcome- CB waltzed in an unlocked door and took their sedated child to murder her while they hit the booze a football field away. I doubt they’re promoting this.
I think the door is open for CB to have planned this - with parents seen to be routinely absent for hours, the apt unlocked, it would not be an impossible task to nip in and take one, particularly if that child had been sedated to keep her from waking up crying for hours.
Remember, that had happened the previous night. Their reaction to it was not to hire a sitter or stay home. But they’d do something. It’s not difficult to imagine a dose of Benedryl as a solution to that, with MM unable to even wake up or cry out ☹️
No evidence of a break in doesn’t mean no evidence of an abduction. She’d have been pathetically easy to take. The Germans seem to have some evidence of CB having an inside (Mark Warner) accomplice who could tell him which Apts guests were staying in. Seeing the loud group of British doctors always gone three hours plus at night most likely with very little “checking” would provide opening for a bad actor.
Also as to Smith man- he’s not CB. Whether an opportunistic “I came for the laptop but decided to take a child” or a planned kidnapping, he would not make walking for blocks in public his getaway strategy. Even if just planning to take computers, camera, etc I think a vehicle nearby would be involved. Certainly for a planned abduction it would be ridiculous to walk down the street openly for a long way as your exit.
Tannerman turned out to be a tourist who didn’t come forward - why not smith man?
Also, McCanns would prefer tannerman not only because he alibis gerry but because he did so during a check. Right under their nose in fact. Gerry wasn’t dining 100 yards away, he was just outside the apt. I can see why he would be the preferred abductor Of the two because you would be unlikely to get a neglect charge there.
I hope this german PD is not trying to get in on the act throwing CB against the wall to see if he sticks, for their own aggrandizement- but has some credible evidence.
I assumed this would be solved in this fashion, not by British detectives but by the perp being snitched on or busted for another crime and uncovered, if in fact it was an abduction. To stop the madness - further crimes from whoever killed her, the gouging of the British tax payer and disrespect for the Met in the way they’ve mangled the investigation, and to put Madeleine to rest if the worst happened. She shouldn’t have to be a media feast or the basis for a fund raiser.
To anonymous @11:26
I hear you but what I would say is that as the only police suspicious of Christian Brucker are the German police themselves, how do you come to the concept this is all in order to frame him as a patsy? Neither Portugal's PJ nor the OG team are considering him a likely suspect.
This is my question as well. If the doors were left unlocked what evidence would we expect to see? Wearing gloves would remove the chance if fingerprints on the door knobs. Unless he tarried there touching things he would walk in, remove the child and go. She was three, not likely to put up a fight that would knock things over. If the children were very tired or had a dose to help them sleep they might well sleep through it.
If an abductor watched the place, or had a pal inside MW to tell him they sat for hours away from the apt at night he would know he had a window of time when they were at the tapas bar to get in and out. He would not linger - what would be the point of that?
I don’t say it happened just that it would be an easy thing to do given the position of that one apt, it’s unlocked state, and the known regular absence of adults.
The German police must have more evidence than what you’ve cited that CB took MM and killed her. Simply being in the Algarve and a sex offender who knew all about the case is not enough. I read that he was outside the apt for half an hour speaking on the phone to someone at eight pm - they provide the two phone numbers one of which they must have linked not just to the crime but to him.
Agree that the Smiths did not see the face of the abductor and at ten pm after a long dinner with alcohol a good description isn’t likely beyond approx height and build and head down carrying a child.
Tannerman was a tourist whom much more was made of and he did not come forward either unwilling to be involved or not realizing the importance of doing so. Why could Smithman not be a tourist or local as well? Simply unfeasible to believe an abductor would have this public promenade as an exit strategy.
MM as a poster child for parental neglect that will help parents realize what most of us know instinctively is a small, terribly sad victory. McCanns were warned by staff and smart enough to see this spread out resort with Apts was not the kind of place where listening services are safe but insisted on having it their own way even after Maddie herself told them she’d been crying alone the previous night. If it turns out Maddie was taken it is McCanns who owe the apology especially to her, for letting her down and then refusing to help reconstruct in case it made them look neglectful. They took lawyers advice - refusing to answer, while their child was with a pedophile?
Well I will still maintain my belief that the McCanns were responsible for her death and that her body is still around, somewhere close to the scene of the crime/accident. But I have to admit that this belief didn't sprout from any substantial evidence but from my wish that we can still find Madeleine's remains and put her to rest in peace after all these years. If they moved her body to a second location, this could be anywhere and she may never be found, if we focus on Praia da Luz, maybe someone interested in the case with the travel resources or a local could still manage to find her and put an end to this.
I agree Pat, the Smithman is the key to solve this, if only you could find out who are the Smiths, perhaps then you could interview the Smith's father and maybe make a massive breakthrough on this case.
Seemingly the case against Christian Bruckner has collapsed in respect of his involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
What a difference a day makes, 24 little hours! Did the German Prosecutor need to have declared Bruckner the guilty one & to upset Madeleine's parents? The height of cruelty!
Quote: “PS. I stand by my original profile as the evidence supporting an accident on the evening of May 3, 2007 with a subsequent cover-up with Smithman being the key to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It still is the most likely scenario based on the evidence that we have to date. “
In my scenario I call it an fatal aftermath of a near drowning, called ‘secondary drowning”. The tiredness of Madeleine that Thursday afternoon, her very pale face and changes in character during hight tea because she loved swimming but didn’t want to the beach with the other Tapas friends and kids ( Kate wrote about it). She asked her mom to carry her to the apartment. It was all caused by lack of oxygen.
Secondary drowning occurs 1 to 24 ( or more) hours after the sailing incident at sea that morning. She got water in her lungs. Lack of oxygen caused a heartfailure. Both being doctors they didn’t call an emergency number to bring their daughter as soon as possible to the hospital because she needed oxygen. Instead the starting CPR. A big medical mistake. She died. As Kate stated many times “ I know what really happened, we know what really happened and God knows what really happened” that is the truth . They failed to save her life.
To avoid an autopsy they made up an abduction story. Parental neglicence and their guilt feelings are covering up the medical negligence.
The question is of the Mark Warner company was informed about the sailing incident. Catriona Baker, the nanny of the Toddler group 2 was transferred to a Greece resort in the week after the disappearance. Two waterfront employees , present during the incident, were never questioned by the PJ. It was Neil Berry’s daughter Jessica who told her dad about Madeleine launching herself into the sea to save the straw hat of Jessica, blown off by the wind. The Netflix documentary revealed it last year. The McCanns refused to take part in it and never said anything about this sailing incident. This unsolved case is a family secret. Kate and Gerry vowed to unturn every stone to find Madeleine. The millstone around their necks is the only one who can’t be turned. They both know she is dead because they were present when she died.
There is no doubt about their involvement in the never ending story. No peace of mind will occur. Her body will never be found because she is buried at sea on the remote beach near Aljezur.
Her body will never been found.
So if your husband goes missing one day you just say to the police: "he was not in his bed this morning so he must be abducted" and they will buy it?
There are too many holes in your theory.
1. If Maddie died 24 hours before is highly unlikely that Gerry - a foreign tourist in a country that he doesn't speak the language - would have been to find CB and negotiate a plan for him to come down the next night and take the body. It's just too far fetched.
2. If Maddie had died the night before, then CB couldn't have been contacted and had the opportunity to tell his girlfriend that same night. It's too complicated for events would have moved so fast.
3. Any calls abd payments made to from GM to CB would have been easily traced by the Portuguese police during their investigation.
4. There were too many confirmed sightings of Maddie on May 3rd by friends and the hotel staff, which more or less rules out an earlier death.
5. This leads me to believe that CB was not involved whatsoever in the death of MM and is being set up by the McCanns PR machine.
There doesn't need to be a break in though Pat does there. The patio door was open as we all know.
Was the 11 year old girl who saw him twice lurking round the apartement lying when she was shown this man's picture and confirmed it was him she saw?
It's pretty obvious they lied about the window being the point of entry because at the time they didn't want to admit they had left the patio door open.
They only changed their statement when they realised Jeremy Wilkins had been interviewed and said he saw Gerry coming down the stairs from the patio door.
Its not rocket science when you don't have a one sided belief.
The dogs tracker dogs tracked Madeleine's scent across the road before loosing her scent, and given the fact we know how much you love the dogs reliability why ignore that?
It's far more likely she wondered out of the apartment and all they were covering up was that.
The trolls are disgusting. Not one of you has considered the damage this has done to her siblings who can see all of this and despite the blindingly obvious all choose to ignore it.
Agreed 100% the Mccanns did it crew won't ever expect they might be wrong
The couple who lived above,the Moyes had gone into their apartement the night before to comfort Madeleine who had woke up crying. That's who she thought they were. And that's why she made that comment.
Initially that is what they thought. They lied about the window to cover up the fact they had left the patio door unlocked and contest Madeleine hadn't wondered off.
Its clear to see what they lied about and why, when you peice it together.
That is all very different from covering up your child's death or expecting people to believe 2 doctors could accidently give their child to much medication and not be aware of the risks..
Negligent, yes. Reckless, yes. Killers no! Covered up and accident and moved her body that was so well hidden, and to do so in full view of the world's glaring media camped out from day one.
Impossible.
This family who had to work for a living were so highly connected the whole of the govefment and their friends covered up for them. Ridiculous!
Not to mention Amaral said the excat same thing about another little girl Joanne Cipriano. She too was hidden in a fridge. Please..
The police did not preserve the crime scene and lied about the DNA findings.
Someone could make a full confession and the McCann's did it camp would still say it was them.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/400796/Mystery-couple-seen-going-into-McCanns-flat-on-night-before-sobbing-Madeleine-disappeared
Funny that as the Smith's never compiled the efits. The McCann's private investigators did that from his statement. That is why there are two very different views of that man and why they didn't release it before.
Your'e relying on the media to suggest Martin Smith said that? 😂 The same media who said it was her DNA 100% please.
The media wouldn't know the truth if they fell over it. They just want a story no matter who it harms.
Show me evidence he said that. And also if he cant even say it was gerry he saw that night after seeing him again on tv and say's it's from the way he held the child, how on earth can he say it wasn't this man?
Alot of men hold children the same way just as lots of mothers do.
Martins statement can't even be sure if the guy had blonde hair or dark hair and he said he never saw his face. Ffs that's what you're relying on?
What's your take on recent developments Pat in respect of Christian Brueckner?
Pat, I respect your views as a criminal profiler, when a child is 'missing', 'abducted' or 'murdered', you have tosto at at ground zero, the closest people to the missing person and work outwards, which you have done.
The PJ carried this out, obtaining statements from the family and friends of Madeleine, albeit at the time, the actual crime scene became very contaminated in doing so.
The dogs Eddie and Keela did thier job, the video evidence shows they were doing what they're trained for. Cadaver odour and blood were found in apartment 5A, despite the rigourous cleaning and washing of fabrics and a soft toy belonging to Madeleine,so the crime scene became contaminated, people walking in and out didn't help.
I do struggle why the later hired car the parents hired some weeks later, responded to both cadaver and blood and on the parents clothing, unless it was used to transport a body carried by the mother?
Why did Gerry squirm in an interview when asked about knowing Gordon Brown, when asked if they gave Calpol to the children, when asked why their story had added statements, which were retracted - the only reason is guilt, it's simple... And that's what this case needs to go back to in order to be solved - SIMPLICITY
There are so many facets to this case, Madeleine needs her justice, I hope it happens soon
"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when FIRST we practice to deceive" True saying
I have answered most of these questions in my blogs and book and will not answer them again here.
I will say:
This blog was only written as a response to those thinking anyone acted independently of the McCanns. It was not intended to prove that Bruckner was involved.
Barring a body or a confession from the McCanns, this case will NEVER go to court. NEVER. Why? 1) There is not enough evidence 2) A defense lawyer would destroy the case 3) Scotland Yard would look really bad, and 4) offering him a plea deal in exchange for a confession is easier and safer or just claiming he did it and letting the media run with it might be sufficient.
@ Pat Brown
You set up a blog & allow comments to be submitted & refuse to respond then to the claims made. That tells me you're fed up with the case and really cannot be bothered.
Reading the entirety of the thread I can profile these commenters and say that many are living in realms of fantasy. Where do they get their thoughts from. Sadly they wouldn't even make a readable fictional novel.
Apologies as I don't mean to appear rude but profilers they do not make because even the basic knowledge of the case has evaded them somehow. It appears they have done their training by reading & engaging in the internet forums who daily cause the more sensible to roll their eyes to the heavens.
So what do we know to be closer to the truth? That Portugal closed the case in 2008 with a closing appraisal from their Attorney General that laid out bit by bit what the PJ had done, even though the first 5 months were really dreadful, missing the most important & very valuable Golden Hour, but we know they fell down. I digress, the AG pointed out all aspects most people cling to as reasons to disbelieve an abduction had taken place. True he could not say whether one had or had not happened or whether Madeleine lived or perished, there were no signs they could find directing them to either.
What we did learn from the AG is that while the McCanns did leave their children with checks made, this told them that there was no negligence that was deliberate.
We learned that the dogs made alerts, I hasten to add after months of the disappearance & after 5A had been further rented out, and that those swabs taken & tested by Portugal's own forensic laboratory & by Britain's esteemed FSS, proved innocuous. There are bound to be patches/areas in any building that would cause dogs to alert in this manner. People bleed even on holiday.
The fabrication we see from certain quarters saying the curtains were washed & the apartment forensically cleansed remain fabrications as no such evidence exists & I am certain if it had, the PJ would have jumped on it immediately & the McCanns would then, rightly, have been charged, even without a body. It was not mentioned by the Attorney General ergo it didn't happen. The Ocean Club Manager would have had a say if any of this had taken place but nothing was ever mentioned in respect of cleaning the apartment nor washing curtains. It was something dreamt up on internet forums & suddenly became a fact. It was & is FICTION!
Armchair Detectives we may all be to a greater or lesser extent, call it Criminal Profiling but please remember this is a family being ravaged by cruel words on the internet & as pointed out in one comment above, the twins have access to the internet now & although I feel certain their parents have discussed the crueller elements of society & their imaginings, it is still a fact Sean & Amelie are going to come across facebook forums who blithely call their parents murderers and paedophiles & child abusers when there is no proof of any of it, not one iota of it!
To say the parents sabotaged the investigation is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of documented fact. Putting the media circus the McCanns created to one side, they refused to tell the police the truth, knocked them back for the reconstruction despite them repeatedly stating in public that they would be WILLING to do anything that helped the investigation and it's a matter of public record that "to have it officially brought to an end didn’t feel like as big a loss as might have been expected". (Kate McCann)
If Christian Breukner abducts your daughter, to have the investigation into her abduction brought to an end should be the a very big lose. It's certainly a big lose to the child who the German police say is dead.
It is also a matter of public record that the McCanns could have had the investigation reopened at any time if they done the reconstruction. That's not an opinion either, it is a documented fact.
And as for the tosh that the police failed to put up road blocks, close borders and all the other trash the McCanns have aimed at the police - it's lies. Police had no description of any vehicle to block the roads for and the UK police certainly do not close their roads and borders ever time they receive a report of a missing child. Otherwise their borders would never be open.
Some of the criticism aimed at the Portuguese by the McCanns and their band of merry men is just - pathetic.
The sabotage of the investigation by the McCanns is a matter of public record, not an opinion.
FAO Pat Brown
The McCanns have issued a statement denying they have received any letter from the German Prosecutor and that media stories are false. That is true to form as we know that we cannot rely on any media articles any longer.
So hope remains that in light of there being no evidence to the contrary, Madeleine may still be alive. To that end we continue to support the McCann's and have faith in the law enforcement agencies and that they are working in Madeleine's best interests.
FAO Pat Brown:
Official Find Madeleine Campaign
38 mins ·
Kate & Gerry McCann Statement: June 16th 2020
Since the recent police appeals regarding Madeleine’s disappearance there have been many inaccurate stories reported in the media. The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead is FALSE. Like many unsubstantiated stories in the media, this has caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives.
As we have stated many times before, we will not give a running commentary on the investigation- that is the job of the law enforcement agencies and we will support them in any way requested. Furthermore, we do not have a family spokesperson nor are we actively paying any lawyers. Any recent comments attributed in the media have not come from us unless they have been posted on our website. If there are important developments that can be made public, they will be issued through official police channels.
Kate and Gerry
I'll believe them above anybody else.
Things have moved on a pace now and we find that not only haven't the McCanns received any letter from the German Prosecutor but that their prosecutor knows nothing about this at all.
How can things get so warped in the media Pat? I feel this has been the sorry case throughout the case of the little girl Madeleine McCann and what a great pity and detriment to her.
Goncalo Amaral tried to get people to disbelieve the McCanns version of events and so did his chum Tavares de Almeida when he wrote his interim report. I don't think the PJ after this were so bad except for one or two like Carlos Anjou who seemed miffed at the McCanns for whatever reason he had in mind. There was an element of sour grapes in the PJ of that time but I don't think they were up to the task of conducting an investigation into this kind of crime or perhaps they knew more than they were letting on and turning a blind eye.
At the bottom of this mangled, deceitful investigation was a little girl who so desperately needed the help of these men and it didn't come!
Your argument that the parents lied about the window to promote the theory of abduction and then admitting later they’d left the door unlocked aligns with my own. I don’t see how that makes the McCanns look good.
They knew their child was abducted and quite possibly with a pedophile, yet lied, staged the scene, interfered with the investigation and prevented the police from engaging in their investigation which could have resulted in an answer much more quickly- or even in the rescue of their daughter. It is normal for detectives to rule out the most obvious suspects, those who last saw the victim- in the case of children this age , sadly, that is also the parent/s- before pursuing other lines of investigation.
McCanns so keen on protecting themselves from neglect charges even if it meant their child being in terrible danger for longer than absolutely necessary, did not and does not seem like the actions of parents whose child was abducted. No surprise that the lies and staging and refusals to cooperate made them objects of suspicion.
Very selfish, cynical people at best. They knew better than the resort how best to mind their children and better than detectives how best to drive the investigation? Look at the result.
There is no way in which their remaining children will not be horrified at the situation and their parents’ subsequent behavior including the one you suggest.
No winners here.
Blacksmith was brilliant
We now have McCanns sting they “aren’t paying” any lawyers but the man identifies himself as their Lawyer and has the opinion that they are not being kept in the loop - they are losing control of the narrative.
She’s abducted was always the claim but somehow not harmed.
If she is dead that’s not only terrible news in itself but for their argument that she’s unharmed. Now we have neglect leading to harm, if the state of limitations for that crime hasn’t passed.
You can’t have it both ways though they’ve appeared to thus far.
So much hinges on what the German detectives aren’t divulging - but given the relationship between McCanns and the pj and Metropolitan police I would say that playing their cards close to the vest is a smart move for the Germans.
McCanns want information to use for their own defense - keeping the possibilities open is the only thing that keeps them from facing a finale that ends badly for them in every way.
Why would it matter what background she came from unless the kidnappers wanted ransom? There is no difference between a three year old whose parents are poor vs rich, to a pedophile ring. They want children they can get easily and who will not be missed never mind be made a global story.
This argument makes no sense.
The McCanns say, "The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is EVIDENCE or PROOF that Madeleine is dead is FALSE".
They haven't said they didn't receive a letter at all. Just they haven't received a letter with EVIDENCE or PROOF that their daughter is dead.
That seems to indicate one of two possible things
a) The police have jack shit on this guy to send them
b) The police can't tell the parents what the evidence is because it involves them.
How else could telling the parents of a missing child what evidence they have their daughter is dead jeapardise their investigation?
They clearly don't trust the parents enough to tell them what evidence they have, if they have anything is the only logical conclusion one can draw from the German prosecutors behaviour so far.
That's what happens when you surround yourself with paid liars to spin the truth. People lose trust and rightfully so.
It’s very odd, isn’t it.
I don’t think this situation feeds the mccann’s media narrative. Why the German police would want this kind of publicity is a big question.
They may be trying to keep him in jail while they investigate him on other charges, since he’s trying to get out on the basis that he was returned to Germany on charges different to those for which he was ultimately tried.
I don’t think the German police have an obligation to tell mccanns or their attorneys what if any evidence they have. That being the case the sending of the letter is odd.
FAO Pat Brown:
Just seen this on the forums. Maybe you'd care to listen? No sensationalism just a good listen:
https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudGhlZ3VhcmRpYW4uY29tL25ld3Mvc2VyaWVzL3RvZGF5aW5mb2N1cy9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbA/episode/NWVlMTI4YWI4ZjA4NjBjYTIwZmE5ZGMy?fbclid=IwAR1hrr-yu4FfpzCw4kpOvB4Dkk_lS_eI7_txq_vozoplCLw2vQXcDNyl_aI
Now it seems the letter was sent via Scotland Yard who did not pass it on.
The struggle to control the investigation and the narrative (& the kudos, blame, and funding) continues.
Interesting that Clarence Mitchell would remark on the content of the letter that was never received.
Everyone has to add to the chaos and get their oar in-
No wonder these investigations go nowhere!
Há uns dois dias, Gonçalo Amaral afirmou - e provou-o com fotografias da carrinha no jornal da noite do canal de tv português TVI - que a viatura utilizada por Christian Bruckner que foi mandada pela Polícia Judiciária para a Alemanha tinha uma pintura diferente da pintura da viatura que apareceu em tudo aquilo que era jornal um pouco por toda a Europa e pelos E.U.A.
Lembro que é essa carrinha que o senhor Procurador alemão pede ao público que identifique. Se essa carrinha, à altura em que era propriedade de C.B., tinha uma pintura diferente, que carrinha quer o senhor Procurador alemão que seja identificada? E identificada por quem?
Quanto aos McCann, eu penso que eles deveriam ter vergonha de terem achincalhado o país que é Portugal e o povo que nele vive. E há uma coisa que eu sei: as pessoas reagem de formas diferentes à tragédia do desaparecimento de um filho, mas não é comportamento próprio de pais consumidos pela dor irem fazer "jogging" pouco depois de a sua filha desaparecer e darem-se ao pormenor de apontarem os minutos que demoraram a percorrer determinada distância. E isto não é uma opinião, pois quem escreveu que isso havia feito foi o senhor Gerry McCcannn no seu blog.
@ Pat Brown
3 wells searched at your Vila do Bispo and no remains found. Every search done and ticked off gives us added hope Madeleine McCann is still alive.
Portuguese commenters have rightly opined that any graves would be impossible to dig especially without leaving evidence in that sun baked and dried out soil. So what now for the theorists?
Thanks,how did your investigation go? Can I have all the details please, you must be s very smart person to know what mindset I have based on my recollection of what was said by Kate at the time, you pure genius..come on, lets hear your analysis mate 🤔
@ Babs 10:28
What investigation?
Nothing about the current hunt for Madeleine’s remains gives normal people any cause for hope of finding her alive. They’re looking for a body based on the BKA having solid proof she’s dead.
The McCanns can’t be arsed to get an age progression photo done so people chasing rainbows and unicorns can at least know what she’s meant to look like.
They know she is deceased. They have known it from may2007- Kate sensed it and dreamed of it. Heir behaviors certainly aren’t those of people who think their 17 year old is out waiting to be found
They have been sitting on over £300,000 during this new case without spending anything to help - and challenging the German police in their statements. Typical.
They don’t believe Scotland Yard either or trust their findings and just ignore them. Still talking about Smithman being the suspect and every story has a photo of a two year old babe when Madeleine would be an adult in a few months.
Next we will be renewing the “sightings” of which there have been close to 9,000 thus far on every continent.
Post a Comment