Why I Believe Smithman is Real and Likely to be Gerry

There is a lot of talk going on right now that the Smith family made up Smithman (all nine of them), that he never existed at all. I won't go into the all the theories on this out there, but I will tell you why I totally buy the Smith sighting: the McCanns themselves.

Yes, my Number One reason for believing the Smiths saw a man that looked like Gerry carrying a child toward the beach is the McCanns themselves. Because the McCanns refused to give the sighting credence when the police detectives and private detectives did. And this is strange behavior, indeed, for the parents of a missing child.

Across the board, parents of missing children will believe in the possibility of almost any sighting being their child. They ask you to run down the most ridiculous and unlikely "suspects' simply because the "what if" factor is there  - even if it is also "one chance in a million" - because they simply don't want to take a chance on that anomaly being true and ignoring a possibility to find their child. They will force their private investigators to follow every ridiculous lead "just in case," and PIs making $100/hr are more than happy to check out any and every so-called lead because they make a pretty good living doing so. (And getting your PI to privately take photos of a bunch of Gerry-look-alikes in Praia da Luz to prove Smithman isn't Gerry is not the same thing as acknowledging the sighting and truly going out to the public for help in finding the man).

But, here we have the McCanns, with two HUGE leads! Two very excellent leads: one that their trusted friend saw - a man coming right from their apartment carrying a little girl. Hey, if their friend isn't a liar (and the McCanns are innocent and didn't put her up to making this man up), HUGE lead. Yes, I get why they would want to follow this one, absolutely. But, then we have Smithman. Another HUGE lead. Same scenario as Tannerman, only instead of a trusted friend seeing a man carrying off a little girl, we have nine people saying they saw this. Again, HUGE lead! What parent of a missing child would have any good reason to believe one of these leads was absolutely true and the other one absolutely false? Both sightings were entirely possible with the supposed timeline, so why would the parents of a missing child have no interest in pursuing the second possible abductor, a lead as strong as the first, ignore one of only two leads they have?

The answer is this: there is NO parent of an kidnapped child who would ignore this lead. Not one. And since this is a fact, the McCanns ignoring this leads me to theorize that, they are not parents of a kidnapped child.

Kate McCann finally gives the Smith sighting credibility in her book but only if the Smith sighting is the same man as Tannerman. In other words, she admits its existence but still axes fifty percent of her chances of finding her daughter by ignoring this sighting as a true separate lead. Either she didn't want that badly to find Madeleine or she knew no sighting was going to bring her child back from the dead.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

June 6, 2014    
             


 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

How Madeleine Died During a Burglary

Right up the Rocha Negra from the Beach

I have worked on rare occasion for defense attorneys and more than once, when I have told them that their client was guilty, they then said, "Well, okay, but what other scenario could you come up with?" I would shake my head and tell them I wasn't going to make up something for them to defend their client with, but, you know, if you work hard enough at it, you can often come up with a plausible enough story that will make them happy (and earn you a few more dollars).

Right now, there is great hope that Scotland Yard is actually following the evidence in the files or perhaps a confession from the McCann group and they are searching for some intermediate grave that Gerry might have been miraculously able to dig in that rock hard ground with a Tapas spoon (as opposed to hiding Maddie's body in the easier spot on the Rocha Negra, in a crevices that already has gravel and loose rocks that could easily cover a body). Then he would have to unearth her again and carry her off another location (which I believe should be a place like Monte do Jose Mestre to the west of the town). Recovering Maddie's body from under some stones on the Rocha Negra is quite a bit easier than having to dig her up again from that wasteland.

Or, it could be that Scotland Yard is following the burglar theory. If I were concocting a plausible scenario for them, here is how it would go.

Burglar One enters the McCann flat through an unlocked door (wearing a skull cap to keep hair in place) and gloves so as not to leave fingerprints. As he is about to look around the living room, he hears Gerry turning the front door knob. Panicked, he flees into an adjacent room and hides behind the door. Gerry enters the children's room and the burglar presses himself up against the wall behind the door, daring not to breathe. Gerry looks about at the children and then leaves the room and the flat.

The burglar comes out of the room but hears Gerry outside talking to Jez. As he stands there frozen, trying to decide what to do, Maddie wakes up and comes out of the room. She sees the man and starts screaming. The burglar panics, grabs Maddie and covers her mouth with his hand. He doesn't realize as he is attempting to keep her quiet, that when one covers a small child's mouth, it is easy to also accidentally cover her nose as well, blocking both airways.

Gerry and Jez finish their conversation and they both move off. The burglar is relieved and takes his hand off Maddie's mouth. Then he looks down and is horrified. The child is not breathing. The burglar panics and doesn't know what to do with this dead child. He pulls the couch away from the wall and pushes Maddie's little body behind it. He rushes from the flat.

Once outside, he calls his other two burglar friends and asks them what they should do. They tell him h needs to remove the child's body because his DNA might be on her in some way or other. The burglars meet up with him and one watches the back of the flat and the other stands outside the window. Burglar One goes back in and opens the window of the children's room. He then goes into the living room and gets Maddie's body from behind the sofa and takes it to the window. He passes the child's body to Burglar 2 after they are sure no one is on the street to observe them. Then, he goes out the back and the burglars head away from the flat. Maddie's body remains in the flat long enough to account for the cadaver dog.

Burglar 2 is seen carrying the body of the child by the Smith family. He takes the child to one of the burglar's homes where they decide what to do next. Eventually, they decide to bury the child in a shallow grave in a scrubland nearby that one of the burglars knows well. One man digs while the other two stand guard. It is possible that they decided later that they should move the body to a place farther away or dump her in the ocean, so using the same three person system, they may have removed Maddie's body from Praia da Luz to a place from which it cannot be retrieved.    

I am sure many of you can argue that there are flaws in this scenario. But, if you think about it, there are difficulties with the McCann scenario as well. If you don't actually have to prove it in court, a scenario only has to be good enough to be accepted by the audience you are trying to influence.

This scenario isn't a bad one. The McCanns can't be blamed for being unaware that a burglary ring was operating in the area (that would be the resort's fault for failing to inform its guests) and Maddie would have died quickly in an unfortunate accident, something Kate could surely forgive the hapless burglar for.

The sex predator scenario also could be used with the same unfortunate accident occurring while trying to keep the child from screaming during an assault or attempted abduction. A little less savory but if there is a handy sex predator in the area (that guy in jail in England lived there), he could fit the bill just as well.

Once again, I hope I am wrong, but I would be a lot more confident that this investigation had taken a turn for the better if Scotland Yard were up searching on the Rocha Negra, a place which should have been the easiest location to get permission from Portugal to dig.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

June 3, 2014



 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

"We Just Want to Know What Happened to Maddie"

Really? That's all? Apparently, Isabel Duarte, the lawyer for the McCanns' libel suit is claiming this is what they want to know. Not only them, it seems, but Scotland Yard, too, is willing to settle for "just knowing."

A couple just heard their son was found hanging in an abandoned building days after he was last seen going out to retrieve his lost cell phone. They want to know what happened. A young man leaves a bar drunk and ends up in a river. The family wants to know what happened. A girl leaves home and she is found dead in a drug house. Her relatives want to know what happened. Why? Because they want to be sure there was no foul play and they want to know why their loved ones killed themselves, purposefully or accidentally.

When a small child "goes missing" and absolutely did not wander off and die of exposure, the family and police do not generally want to just "find out what happened." If there was an abduction, both the family and the police want the evildoer caught and imprisoned. If the police suspect the parents, they should want to bring justice to the child and remove fear from the community.

Most folks know that I strongly believe the Scotland Yard investigation is not basing their investigation on evidence, but working toward a story the public will accept. When I hear both the parents and the police just want to find closure and not necessarily justice, this only confirms, in my opinion, something just ain't right with what is going on in Praia da Luz.

I may find out I am wrong in a day or two and my mouth will drop open, but if what I am hearing or seeing is indicating that I am unfortunately correct with my analysis of the investigative methodology, then I think we are going to eventually hear that someone who lived or worked in PDL is a Gerry McCann look-a-like and there was information gleaned from the PJ files and from interviews with possible sex offenders or burglars that indicated Maddie was either buried nearby the suspect's home or place of employment or disposed of at sea. If they don't find her body, then the latter must be true.

By the way, one reason I find it hard to believe anyone specifically told them Maddie was buried in Praia da Luz is that Scotland Yard has asked to search more than one site. If an abductor had confessed, he would know where he put Maddie's body and if any of the Tapas 9 had confessed, then the police wouldn't be searching in Praia da Luz at all for Maddie's body (and they are ONLY searching - or pretending to be searching - for a body as the methods they are using indicate they are looking for a grave).

For you who think the tide is turning, try turning off your computers and just go watch the news; the majority of it is in favor of the McCanns and trust in Scotland Yard. Just think, if you who  have studied this case nonstop for years, have recognized the political backing the McCanns have had is extremely unusual, and yet you STILL think or at least hope that Scotland Yard is on the up and up, how much more so will the trusting population accept the outcome if Scotland Yard's investigation ends with a dead or imprisoned abductor and every media outlet carries the final conclusion with complete and unwavering acceptance?

Let's see what the next few days bring....hopefully, a better conclusion than I suspect. Keeping my fingers crossed for a miracle.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
June 2, 2014



 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

Why is Scotland Yard Digging There?

I just don't get it. Really, I don't. I could pick a number of places in and around Praia da Luz for Scotland Yard to dig for Maddie's body or any remaining items that sniffer dogs might hit on, but that piece of wasteland is the one place I wouldn't waste my time with (no pun intended).

I could see the searching on the Rocha Negra, the large rock that soars above Pria da Luz and which is accessible from the beach. Kate said she had a dream that the abductor had put Maddie's little body up on this rock. It is also the location I believe Gerry may first have hidden Maddie on the night of May 3, in the sandy crevices between the rocks.

I could see Scotland Yard searching beach areas where on the night of May 3 there were overturned boats to temporarily hid a body under and a number of abandoned buildings and weedy areas one could hide a body for a time. All of these areas would be past the point where the Smiths saw a man carrying a child toward the beach.

But where Scotland Yard is looking is back toward the vacation apartment of the McCanns. This would mean the man the Smiths saw would have at some point, if he were indeed the "abductor" or Gerry himself, turn around and go back with the body of the child. Go back somewhere as in his own home or vacation flat because the man carrying the child wasn't also carrying a shovel.

(Update: I wrote this post prior to today's new. The search site is now  be at a location at the left bottom of the map of Abril 25), a location where Smithman would pass the Smiths. If this is so, still a bad location to try to dig a grave (open to public eye and difficult terrain) but more likely because an abductor could have taken Maddie, passed the Smiths, and gone to his home (there are some homes down that way). Then, later he could have dug a grave and buried her in that wasteland spot nearer to the beach. Still unlikely he would have bothered with a grave at that location rather than just using it as a body dump site, but if he were worried about being connected by DNA, I would think he would have taken the body out of Praia da Luz to some barren area where no one could see him digging the grave). (Also, this invalidates any theory that the sniffer dogs were right about the McCann vehicle because the car would be unnecessary and unwise to use to bring her body to that spot for burial. It could be a temporary hiding place for Maddie and then she would have been moved to someplace like the Rocha Negra and then out of Pria da Luz, but I don't know what the police would find of use there now).

Then, after the police started crawling the area, the man would have had to go back out and start digging a hole in an area completely open to the view of anyone passing! Who in their right mind would choose a spot to spend time burying a body where everyone can see them do it? The standard rule for even body dumps is to go to a place you know you won't be seen. When it comes to burying a body, you really need isolation; either you bury in your own backyard (the Murat theory) or you find a desolate place like Monte do Jose Mestre (my theory of where Gerry may have buried Maddie) but you sure as hell don't pick a place that is open on all four sides to the street where anyone walking by will see you. I have walked by that spot and there is no way I would ever chance burying a body there.

So, unless this is simply a public charade of looking for a body near where some local abductor lives (maybe one of those burglary gang guys), I have no clue what could have led Scotland Yard to the one spot in Praia da Luz no one would even consider as a possible grave site to dispose of a missing child.

Also, for those who think that Scotland Yard is looking at the McCanns, if Scotland Yard were following the sniffer dog evidence (that hit on the McCann's hire car), they would be looking outside of Praia da Luz for a body, not right in it.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 29, 2014



 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

The McCanns and the Magician Trick of Misdirection

We have a new documentary, The McCanns and the Conman (read: another criminal gets paid by the media to lie to the public) airing June 4 on Channel 5 in the UK.  It appears to be about Kevin Halligen's "abuse" of the McCanns and their fund, how he lived the highlife on money designated to find their daughter. The twist in this show is this; although the conman was ripping off the McCanns, he inadvertently did some good work, identifying the man the Smith's saw as the abductor (yeah, like the PJ hadn't already done that) and getting the Smiths to give a description that ended up as the now publicized e-fits, and somehow getting the Smiths supposedly to retract the statement that the guy was Gerry McCann (oh, wait, no, that won't be explained that way). Scotland Yard is said be basing their investigative strategy on Halligen's leads on this man (who, of course, is not Gerry).

I am sure we are going to hear in this program about how the emotionally fragile McCanns were taken advantage of by this snake oil salesman....blah, blah, blah....something that seems to happen a lot to the McCanns  (considering they also hired the Metodo 3). But, one question I am sure they are not really going to address in this documentary is why the McCanns chose this crook; why they needed a man who claimed to be a superspy and not someone with proven skills in investigating missing children's cases, perhaps a profiler or PI or an agency with solid recommendations from missing children's organizations who would charge only 1/10 of the price Halligen got, something they should clearly have kept in mind since they were supposedly using the donations of well-meaning people; they had a responsibility to use the money wisely and honorably. Also, regardless of their own theories of what happened to Madeleine, parents of missing children usually put their trust in seasoned professionals, experts who really know how the abduction of children works, who took look for, and where. But, no, the McCanns chose whack jobs, flamboyant showman who seemed to have no prior experience for the job at all. How badly did the McCanns really want to find their missing daughter?

So, yeah, why Halligen? And Metodo 3? Why them? Why not a sound, reputable fellow that would properly conduct his investigation?

I would say it is because the McCanns did not want any investigator who would focus on Praia da Luz and the evidence. Like Scotland Yard, I believe the Number One requirement for the person they hired would be 1) accepting the "fact" Maddie had been abducted, and 2) accepting the "fact" that Maddie was not abducted by a local Praia da Luz sex predator.

I believe the most important part of what appears to be a faux investigation by the McCanns is that the private detectives make the hunt a worldwide one, not one local to Praia da Luz, that all searches for Maddie be directed far away from the town and environs. Through this worldwide search into international sex rings and children stolen for adoption, the concept of what might have happened to Madeleine would become something all people fear might happen to their own children and that what happened to the McCanns had nothing to really do with the neglect of their children, their possible use of medication, the apparent death of a child in their apartment, and anything else that occurred in Praia da Luz on May 3rd, 2007. In other words, LQOK AWAY! LQOK AWAY!

Misdirection is a common magician's trick. Fool people into not paying attention to what is really happening. In this case, make people look everywhere in the world for Maddie, everywhere but where she really is and where things really occurred, look for a live child in every country money can be sent in to the fund from instead of looking for a child buried quickly on Portuguese ground. I think this is the misdirection the McCanns have been involved with for seven years.

Hence, you can't hire an investigator who is going to focus on the evidence because doing so will only accomplish one of two things: that he will be focusing in on Praia da Luz and the Tapas 9 or he will at least be focusing in on Praia da Luz and a local sex predator Neither of those scenarios keep the money coming in for the "search" fund and both of them narrow the focus down to the night of May 3 and what happened right there in town.

For the McCann's objective, an ethically challenged PI was needed...to LQOK the other way. Finding such jokers is not difficult. There is a lot of money, endless money, to be made in looking the wrong direction because this is one way to assure an investigation can go on for years and years. For that matter, looking in all the wrong places keeps the fund going for years and years as well.

The McCanns' refusal to acknowledge the Smith sighting as valid and their attempt to hide this information from the public can only mean one thing: they didn't want the man carrying a little girl toward the beach to be identified. Either it was Gerry or these parents had no interest in finding the "abductor" of their child. I would like to hear the McCanns explain that, wouldn't you?

I think the title of this new documentary should have simply been called "The Con Artists."



Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 27 2014


 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

Why I Love My Fellow Madeleine McCann Fighters For Justice

Montel and I discuss Possible McCann Involvement in the Crime 

       

I have seen a lot of angry comments on Facebook, Twitter, and Message Boards concerning my last three posts laying out my reasons for why I think the Scotland Yard review is a whitewash, why I think Scotland Yard would be unlikely to spend millions and years on a probably unwinnable case for anything other than political purposes, and why I think all of us have little power in comparison to the McCanns and whatever politics lies behind this bizarre missing person's case. Some people are so angry they have come at me with ad hominem attacks or statements that they will never read a thing I write ever again. I think these volatile responses (and I am not talking about well-reasoned arguments to my analyses which I think are a good thing as it gives all of us more to think about and I, myself, learn a lot from opposing opinions) are an angry backlash that comes from fear - fear that I am right. And I get it. If I am right, it sucks.

For seven years, people interested in justice have studied every aspect of this case and spent way more time in analysis than Scotland Yard will ever put in. Some people have built and maintained websites and Facebook pages full of information about the case, sites I am thankful for and have used myself. I won't name them all here, but I appreciate each and every one of them, even those that might have issues with my take on things; they still spread the word.

So, why then my last three posts and my adamant belief in a whitewash? Why my strong belief that this case will never be prosecuted? Why my assertion that in spite of everyone's efforts, we have so little power to affect a good outcome? Why don't I just STFU?

All I can say is experience. I have seen the inside of police cases, the inside of politics in police cases, and the inside of media. I know what I know and I have always called things as I see them. People expect that of me and it would not be right for me to suddenly go silent and hide what I think is true because the truth (at least what I believe is the truth) is not that palatable. I share my experience and analyses of the situation because many people have no idea how police investigations work and how media really works; they make assumptions from outside of these worlds. I have been in them and this is why I bring you my take. I have seen a lot of stuff and while I may be wrong about my belief as to how this case will turn out, what I say I base on inside knowledge of how these things have worked in the past.

My other reason for not staying silent about what I think is going to be a stomach-turning outcome of the Scotland Yard review is to help folks keep a more rational head about what might be coming down the pike, to recognize that the McCanns being arrested is something that should be a happy surprise, not an expectation, a major triumph that would come from actually having enough evidence to proceed to prosecution and having a political turnabout that would allow this to happen. What I fear for all those who have put so much time and energy into following this case and championing justice is that they are going to be crushed if this case is closed with a patsy abductor or a Scotland Yard "expert" conclusion that the Maddie was abducted by an unknown predator and her body too well hidden or disposed of to ever be found. Personally, I would rather be on the cautious side and not get my hopes up too high when the odds are against a pleasing ending.

I know the experience of being blindsided by the illegitimate closing of cases I have worked on with police. It isn't just one time that I turned in my profile and thought the case would eventually move forward properly to prosecution or at least a proper investigation, all to have nothing good happen at all. I have had detectives tell me that my profile was awesome (with each determination supported by convincing evidence) and that they now believed in my conclusions on the case. I would leave, spirits soaring; I knew justice would now take its proper course. And then nothing would happen and the case shelved or the agency would go public with America's Most Wanted or the local press and continue down the same erroneous road they were on before I worked with them. Why? Because it was too late to get a solid prosecution (a legitimate reason why they can't do anything with the case and why I gave up working cold cases) or they are embarrassed they had been after the wrong person for so long (and aren't going to admit it) or the new focus is a problem politically. I have learned the hard way that justice is often not what all parties are working for. Politics, egos, and incompetence play a big part in what actually happens with in a portion of police cases. We don't realize this because a good portion of cases are easy to solve and prosecute because the suspect is obvious; the police just need to do a solid job protecting the scene, evidence, and rights. The difficult cases are fewer and most don't get that much media attention. The odd ones that make headlines are special cases and often are a nightmare for police departments and are "put to rest" in whatever way works best. Reality bites and it is actually far worse than many of you think it is. There are certainly ethical and highly skilled detectives out there; I have worked with some that I think are absolutely the best (I am working with some now to forward police training in criminal profiling) and these guys solve cases and sometimes very difficult ones. But then there are the other detectives and other cases; not all goes perfectly. Real life is not Hollywood.

Regardless of how the McCann case turns out and regardless of how some folks feel about me, I still appreciate the hard work and heart all of you have put into keeping the truth about this case in the public eye. Even if I feel that none of us really have the power to change the course of this "investigation," I do think we all have the power to show others and the future generations that people care and that there are human beings out there who believe in truth and justice and will put themselves on the line to stand up for it.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 26, 2014


 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.

How Much Power do YOU Have? How Much Power do the McCanns Have? Take the Test!

After my last few posts questioning the validity of the Scotland Yard "review" into the McCann case, a number of people have responded with two issues: one, that the McCanns don't have that much power, and, two, we the people, have a great deal of power which means it would be ridiculous, with all the outrage about Madeleine not receiving justice, that Scotland Yard would try to dupe the citizens of the UK and the people of the world with a whitewash of the case. I say the McCanns have tremendous power and we have little to none.

Let's start with the McCanns: I cannot think of ONE case of a missing child in the world where so many huge names and politicians have stepped up to the plate to protect them from a police investigation. Yes, I have seen small examples of probably guilty parents of missing children getting some media attention (Baby Lisa's parents got a nice kiss-their-butt program by Dr. Phil, but, then again, Dr. Phil is an ethically challenged TV host who is all about ratings) but that is about it. However, when the McCanns made phone calls, people came running from high places to give them assistance. And they have continued to make phone calls and get assistance in the most incredibly huge ways.

Now, here is a test for us to take to prove both the power of the McCanns and our own power. As you are sitting here, tweeting with #McCann and commenting on McCann Facebook groups. close your computer and pick up your phone. Who are you calling about this case? Hmm.....uh.....yeah....no one. While the McCanns have dozens of numbers to call, numbers to people with power, you've got no one. Even I don't have too many useful numbers to call (a few TV producers who are not going to put me on to talk about the case just because I called; it doesn't work that way in TV unless I really had some scoop) and I can call my agent (I already did that because  Gonçalo and I want write an english language book together on the McCann case: we couldn't get an American publisher to touch it as of yet due to lawsuit issues). Okay, so I have little influence; you probably have none. Every parent of a missing child I can think of to date - pretty much none. The McCanns - unprecedented and off-the-charts ability to get support for their cause. 

So, if you think the public - and our online blogging, tweeting, and Facebooking - is going to sway Scotland Yard into doing the right thing, you are sadly mistaken. Why even the media almost always blocks comments about the case and unlike early media, I am no longer allowed to speak on the case on television. Someone is controlling the message....and it isn't us. If the McCanns ever going to go down, it will be because the political winds have changed and someone more powerful than them and their allies has changed the rules of the game.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

May 25, 2014

 

Published: July 27, 2011

By Pat Brown
Rating: 
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

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.