Monday, October 28, 2013


GERRY MCCANN'S DIARY BLOG, day 102, said "The campaign, as planned, will enter a quieter phase again. We have always envisaged that media attention focussed on Madeleine and us would quieten down and just occasionally we would try to remind people that Madeleine is still missing and that we are still looking."
 THE campaign not OUR campaign?
Why the distancing from the campaign to find their missing daughter?
Why not take ownership of the campaign either as a strong my or our to indicate unity, sharing and co-operation.

Why the campaign as planned?
 How far ahead is this campaign planned given their daughter was allegedly abducted and could theoretically be found at any moment?
Why will it enter a quiet phase?
Why should it should they even contemplate it entering a quiet phase?
This is 102 days after Maddie's alleged abduction, just over 3 months ( 3 we know is the liar's number -Mark McClish) is this the liar's number sneaking in by the back door?
If anything the campaign should be at full throttle, especially as it is the peak summer vacation season with people travelling the world over and with plenty of Brits travelling around Europe.
This isn't the time to quiet things down, this should be being pushed.

He says a quieter phase AGAIN.

What is meant by again?
When was the campaign quieter, apart from the first few days until the fund was up and running and donations pouring in.
This is a missing 3 yr old little girl, at no point should the campaign be quietening down.
This, then, makes me think, why did they feel the need for things to quieten down?
What was happening around this time that they wanted less media attention, especially given all their pressers, interviews and pleas for donations?

We have always envisaged that media attention focussed on Madeleine and us would quieten down.

It happens, especially over a long period of time, not after 102 days.

Given she was a adorable little 3 yr old allegedly abducted from her bed by a paedophile
Sorry, but the taken to be loved by a childless family story isn't even remotely believable.
In such cases it is a woman, often childless who takes a child to raise as her own.
It is always a newborn sometimes sadly, sometimes, even a preborn, as they have often pretended to be pregnant and claim the newborn as their own which is far more believable than turning up with a nearly 4 yr old and saying "Hi honey i just had a baby, it's a bit bigger than expected".
Even the dimmest of men and family members would notice.
Such women have often suffered miscarriages or problems conceiving and mental issues and desperation cause them to commit an act of abduction.

Since they envisage media attention would die down over time why be so accepting, so passive?

Innocent parents would be shouting from the roof tops, fully co-operating with the police, answering all questions, doing reconstructions, practically camping out at the station for any news or to tell LE if they remember anything no matter how trivial that could find their child.
We have them instead hiring lawyers and spin doctors as a priority.
Why would they need lawyers if they were innocent, unless of course they knew they could face charges, neglect resulting in harm at a minimum and homicide, concealing a corpse and filing a false police report as a maximum, along with the fraud from the fund ( obtaining money by deception)
Innocent parents would refuse to let it quieten down,
Guilty parents do, as it means the public and police eyes are not so focussed upon them.

and just occasionally we would try to remind people that Madeleine is still missing and that we are still looking.

This is quite a telling statement and indicates guilty language and knowledge.
JUST is used to minimise and weaken the statement in this case it is a qualifier word.
A qualifier is a word which when removed doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.
Here we have it next to OCCASIONALLY, a word which means infrequent or seldom and is entirely unexpected given it is in relation to finding a missing toddler.
Would is future conditional
Note also he tells us they would TRY to remind people, not that they would remind people.
Try means to attempt, it doesn't mean to succeed or complete.
They would try to remind people Madeleine is missing and THAT we are still looking.
THIS is close, THAT is distancing, why does he distance themselves from still searching?
How can they still be looking when kate has admitted they never physically searched in the first place?
Look comes across as a passive action, something done in passing ( the jogging and walks on the beach)
Search is an active word, it indicates a determination to find something that is lost.
You look for flowers, you search for a missing child.

Why would they only occassionally try to remind people Madeleine is missing?
Why not make a forceful and determined and prolonged effort to tell people Madeleine is still missing.
Why remind rather than tell?
He doesn't tell us we are looking for her or our daughter, he only tells us we are looking, he doesn't tell us what they are looking for.
 If they can't tell us what they are looking for, we can't assume or do it for them.

If you look back over what they have actually done, they have asked/demanded donations to their fund , supposedly to find Madeleine , but, which has in fact been used to pay the mortgage, lawyers fees, expenses and to support the family.
It has been used to pay for dodgy to none existent private eyes, a hugely expensive website, good quality wristbands, t shirts and other memorabilia with little spent on actual physical searching, 13% in the first year out of all their expenditure
They have never searched, they have jumped on sundry charity bandwagons and missing child cases, sued anyone who disagrees with their version of eventsand generally end their financial worries.

Instead of searching they played tennis and went jogging, travelled the world. (would she be hiding under the Pope's cassock?) and generally left it up to us the public and the police to actually get down and dirty searching.

The brain knows the truth and wants to speak it.
Words spoken or written are thought of a microsecond after being thought.
The words used tell me what is at the front of their minds, what they are thinking, what is important to them.

I suspect he wanted the money to keep rolling in whilst avoiding direct media and public attention on what they are actually doing to find their daughter.
There is a lot of distancing between him and kate towards their daughter.
Why would this be the case?

Is This The Start Of The End Game for the McCanns?

         Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The Sunday Times Insight team Published: 27 October 2013
Comment (0) Print

Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 (Adrian Sheratt)

THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities (Adrian Sheratt) Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed time line of the abduction back by 45 minutes.

The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 (Adrian Sheratt) The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised time line should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new time line and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert

 Well, well, well kate and gerry, what a palaver.

 First the libel trial which you tried to end by offering to do a deal with Dr.Amaral.
Why would you do that, given you claimed he libelled you and hindered the search to find your Daughter Madeleine Beth McCann.

This is unheard of, plaintiffs offering to do a deal with the defendant to end their case.

Why would you do that i asked myself?

Firstly you waited a year before you issued a libel suit, why wait so long especially given he was not only libelling you but also hindering the search?
Does libel get worse over time or was it perhaps you had your eyes on the possible money you could get if you waited a while to see how the book went?

Ah yes, the book, the one you claimed libelled you and hindered the search and people would stop looking if they thought Madeleine was dead.
Except it didn't stop people searching, as sightings were still dribbling in, even the ones your fund or pi's paid for.

People were still looking despite the book, a book which was written in Portuguese and not available in the UK despite what your witnesses claimed.

Happily for you and sadly for us and Dr. Amaral, though you won the first round and had his book confiscated and all sorts of restrictions imposed to stop the facts coming out.

Happily for us and Dr. Amaral and sadly for you, you lost the subsequent appeals.

The judges said, quite rightly, he had freedom of speech and an entitlement to write his opinion be it on the case or the best way to have a bacon butty.

You were stuck, since the book you tried to ban was based on and used the facts from the actual police files  plus his years of experience as a cop.

This was a man who knew his job, knew all the tricks and mostly knew when someone was pulling a fast one and blocking the case and him.

He knew he could accomplish nothing more whilst he stayed a cop, politics and dark dealings hindered and blocked him, he thus made a  hard decision for himself, his family and for Madeleine.

He resigned.

Perhaps at this point you thought you were home free, the meddlesome cop was gone, you had contacts and money and a fearsome law firm, good old Carter-Ruck.
Threats to sue shut most people and media up.
Suing shut the rest up.
Some came to an out of court settlement which you spun as if you had won in court (nice touch standing on the steps of the Old Bailey there tapas 7, well 6 in reality)

He was down but not out, he bided his time and wrote a book, and, when the case was shelved as he and we knew it would be, he released it and the documentary.

You had shut down the media you couldn't shut down the net.

The book was translated by Portuguese friends for us, the public to read and at no cost to us except their time, whilst you spent allegedly £100,000 on translations
( BTW I and many others would like to see transparent accounts please which you promised us)
Heck if our translations are so far off as your supporters claim, we would love to see your translated files to see where we messed up, except that isn't going to happen is it?If our translated files were wrong you would have been shouting it from the roof tops and gloating.

You knew the facts in the files painted you in a bad light.
Whilst you were arguidos, much as you complained, you knew you were safe due to judicial secrecy.

You couldn't talk to the public but your family and friends could and did including dear clarrie.

With the facts in the files now translated and made public you were stuck you had to counterattack so you came up with the mockumentary and the bewk.
It was a delightful mockumentary despite the fact the actress who played you, kate, was cut as her story was unbelievable, you can thank gerry for that tidbit.
The supposed reconstruction was anything but, and hey, you even managed to briefly mention the Smith sighting even though he was morphed into bundleman.
What we saw was not a reconstruction it was a happy family  peep show.

Look how well we are doing without Madeleine.

The public saw this and laughed, the bewk did slightly better but kate, dear kate, you really are leakier than a colander.

Describing your daughter's torn perfect genitals was for what reason?

Shock value? remember the bewk was written for your remaining children to read.
I am sure they will be as shocked as we were when they reach page 129.
Was it a leaked marble?
Something you remember seeing?
It would after all fit in with your vision of a grey mottled body lying on a cold slab, a true reflection of a several days old corpse decomposing.
What would the twins make of all this, after all you can't stop them from reading books or surfing the net or listening to friends or watching TV, especially once they hit 18 and become adults.
You can only control what they hear for so long, and even now they come home asking awkward questions.

The marbles were leaking out.
We have you wanting to press a button, you talking about a murder in Portugal instead of an abduction.
Gerry talking about no evidence she is dead or that you played a part in her death!
Not disappearance then?

You set strict requirements on your pi's  and gagged them knowing they couldn't drop you in it
You demanded people phone your hot line with info and send in photos, claiming someone had the missing piece of the puzzle when you kate had 48 puzzle pieces and  refused to do a reconstruction via your faithful chums.
By the way how are they doing?
Do you still trust them to stay quiet, especially now?

You courted and feted the media and then cried foul when the media bit back, even to perjuring yourself in the Leveson enquiry.
Perjury carries a life sentence did you know that?

When the case was shelved you could have spoken up and demanded it be kept open yet you didn't?
Why was that?
A shelved case meant no active searching, no active investigation apart from your pi's, and we know how good they were.

You demanded a review not a reopening.
It sounded good to the public and media, the desperate parents trying to find their daughter, forever searching.
Except you never actually searched in the first place unless of course you count the beach walks, the jogging ( 19 Min's to the top of the hill, wow you must have worked hard that day) the world tours to countries where she hadn't been seen, meeting the Pope( did you get absolved? you can only be absolved if you confess)

Then something happens, SY do a review.
You felt safe a review would do nothing plus it saved you making a call or posting a letter offering to answer those 48 questions or do a reconstruction with your chums. all talk and no action.

What happened?

The yard say they were going to reopen the case, the public thought great.
I bet you and gerry were not happy.
What had they found that could cause then to start investigating?
It had to be something they had found, it turned out to be bundleman, or rather not bundleman and the Smith sighting.

Perhaps you didn't think your PI's would hand over all their files after all you sat on info for 5 yrs and had gagging clauses, however if the court orders it, it must be handed over.

For years you had talked about a crime watch type show, televised and following your information, knowing the PJ would say no thus you could blame them.
I wonder what was said when you found out there would be a crime watch special?

You couldn't refuse point blank as even clarrie would have trouble spinning that and even your most ardent supporters would go huh?
You set out restrictions to make it hard as possible.
No filming in Portugal as it would upset the PJ, except the PJ wanted you there doing one so you had to think of another excuse.
It would be too painful, add a few tears and bingo.

No worries said the police we'll film it in Spain and use actors, although why would it be too painful 6 yrs after the fact but not too painful for your mockumentary all those years back.

They said we will do the reconstruction and you can have a pre-recorded interview and then we'll do a bit of chit chat.
No worries, you have done all this before it'll be a doddle.

The police though like any good force weren't telling you everything.
We all know how they love to stage pressers with persons of interest to see what they say and how they act (the philpotts, tracie andrews etc)

They caught you by surprise.
Bundleman is gone and along with it gerry's alibi and to top it all those pesky e-fits you sat on for 5 yrs were up front and centre and everyone and their dog said oh look it's gerry.
This is why you looked so dreadful kate, you were terrified, you knew what us bloggers and commentators were saying.
Could we be right?

We were indeed.

What now kate and gerry?

The cat is out the bag so to speak.
You know you will be asked those 48 questions and do a proper reconstruction.
The PJ reopened the case due to new and compelling evidence.
You will be made arguidos either because as soon as the case was reopened it was automatically reapplied, or because you request it or because the police impose it so you can refuse to answer and co-operate without going to jail.
In the UK you can say no comment till the cows come home without fear of penalty.

All this whilst the libel trial is ongoing.

You know you will lose.
It is a given since it is now clear you actively hindered the search for your own daughter, whilst Goncalo did all he could to find her and get justice for her.

How will you pay your legal fees and compensation since you can't use the fund (all those people who donated will not be happy)
What about all the other fees?
What about your backers who donated believing your story only to find out you lied.
They could sue for return of their money and that's a lot of money.
Plus, you can face charges of obtaining money by deception, fraud wire fraud in America and they don't take that lightly (darn that dollar  paypal button) plus, we then have charges in the UK of perverting the course of justice, obstruction of justice, perjury,etc and that's before we even look at charges in relation to Madeleine.
You know the homicide, filing a false police report and concealing a corpse, heck the UK police could charge you since she was a British citizen.
Then you will lose your kids, your medical licences, your house to pay your bills since no one is going to back you financially.

Your family may or may not eventually forgive you, the same with your children.
You will be a social pariah.
No more high flying contacts, no big parties.

You will be hated not only for what you did to Madeleine, even if it was an accident, but what you did to your remaining children, the children of your friends, your family, the public.
Everything you worked so hard for, everything you wanted will become ashes.
It will all be over.

Right now the only way you can make amends to Madeleine, Sean and Amelie, yourself, your family and friends is to come clean and speak the truth.

IVF is hard on a woman both physically and emotionally, 3 children in such a short period of time is a lot, we know you found it hard to cope, anyone would.

Emotions run high with all those hormones up to  harvesting and conception and then during pregnancy only to suddenly stop,.

Accidents happen, people do things on the spur of them moment when they snap.

The courts and the public understand this.
Many have gone through the same thing, we see it in the news, it happens.

In such cases the  the courts and the public are forgiving, even family and friends forgive when they know the truth.
Just like you tell your kids to tell the truth and that you still love them, now is the time to tell the truth.
You will feel so much better for it once it is out, just like you did as a child yourself.
You knew that your family still loved you even when you told a lie or did something naughty.
Punishment then forgiveness and finally moving on with life.

You are scared right now, scared of the unknown, what will happen.

If you tell the truth it will never be as bad as you think.

Let's make this the start of a new day.
Make your children proud of you that you did what you tell them to do and tell the truth,.
If you can't do it alone take a trusted friend or family member.
Once you say those first few words, this is what happened, this is what we did, then you can grieve for your little girl and start the process of healing.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Portuguse Police officially reopen the case

Police in Portugal have reopened the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann - five years after the original probe was closed.

The team of detectives is said to have had no involvement in that investigation which ended in 2008 and was heavily criticised in the British media.

The new inquiry - which will run separately, but alongside the probe by British police - follows an internal review of the case since March 2011.

Portugal's public prosecutors approved the move after a request from officers in Porto who have identified new lines of inquiry, witnesses who were never questioned during the original probe and several issues they want to clarify.

Kate and Gerry McCann Kate and Gerry McCann believe their daughter is still alive

A spokesman for the Attorney General's office said: "The Public Ministry has determined the reopening of the inquiry relating to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann following a request from the Policia Judiciaria."

Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry said they were"very pleased" at the decision by Portuguese authorities and hoped that it would uncover "the answers we so desperately need".

"We hope that this will finally lead to her being found and to the discovery of whoever is responsible for this crime," the couple said.

"We once again urge any member of the public who may have information relating to Madeleine's abduction to contact the police in Portugal or the UK.

"Please be patient and respect the work of the police as they endeavour to find the answers we so desperately need."

The lawyer for the McCann's in Portugal, Rogerio Alves, said: "While it is not known what happened to Madeleine, the matter is not closed.

Madeleine McCann Madeleine was three years old when she vanished on May 3, 2007

"The reopening of the case is excellent news, it creates a new perspective on the case and gives hope to the parents. The result is that we all hope Madeleine is found."

Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, who is leading the Scotland Yard team, Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley and Mr and Mrs McCann met officers in Lisbon last week to be briefed on the Portuguese case.

Mr Rowley welcomed the move as "good news", adding: "Combined with the formal reopening of the Portuguese investigation today, and our ever closer working relationship, I believe that we have the best opportunity yet to finally understand what happened to Madeleine."

Sky's Martin Brunt said the development would "boost the manpower" now applied to the case.

"This of course is what Madeleine McCann's parents have always wanted," he said.

"They were very disappointed when it was shelved after 15 months - after their daughter disappeared - the investigation having got nowhere.

"They were distraught at that, have argued ever since that it should be reopened and now they have got that wish."

E-fits of suspect police want to question E-fits of a man police want to speak to about Madeleine's disappearance

He added: "There is an awful lot of work still to be done, there are lots of people to be tracked down and interviewed, and at least now the Portuguese detectives who will be re-engaged on this can join Scotland Yard in doing that."

Carrie-Marie Bratley, who works for the Portugal News in Lagoa, in the Algarve, told Sky News the Portuguese detectives "were chosen for their emotional and physical distance from this case in the hope that maybe they could go over it with a fine-tooth comb and come up with something, which it seems they may have done."

The team is separate to the group of six Portuguese officers based in Faro who have been assisting the Metropolitan Police.

The move to re-examine the case in the country where Madeleine went missing comes after a fresh appeal for information was aired in the UK, Holland and Germany.

Scotland Yard received more than 2,400 phone calls from across Europe following the broadcast of a reconstruction of events leading up to the three-year-old's disappearance in 2007.

They have released two e-fit images of a man they want to speak to in connection with the case based on the accounts of two witnesses.

Both described seeing him in Praia da Luz at around 10pm on May 3, as Madeleine's parents dined at a nearby tapas restaurant with friends.

Four other e-fits based on witness accounts of men seen in the area, some of whom may have been working as "charity collectors" who may or may not be genuine, were also released.

An appeal is also due to air on Irish television later this month.

Home Secretary Theresa May said the collaboration between British and Portuguese police officers was "starting to bear fruit" and hoped it would lead to a "resolution"

It is interesting to note the  media isn't telling the whole truth as in they refused to have the case kept open when offered the chance

Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry said they were"very pleased" at the decision by Portuguese authorities and hoped that it would uncover "the answers we so desperately need".
This sounds like a strong statement except it isn't, qualifiers (words which when removed don't change the meaning of the sentence) in this case the word VERY weakens their statement.

Kate and gerry BELIEVE their daughter is alive allows for others to believe otherwise especially when the reaction of blood and cadaver dogs is taken into account and their demeaning of them and kate relaxing when the dogs reacted calling it junk science.
Innocent parents would be freaking at this point demanding if this meant their child had been hurt or worse.

Guilty parents woukld be oh shit, let's minimise their reactions and oh lets  link them to a 30 yr old murder case were dogs reacted but no body was found, only to later find the dogs were in fact correct when the hubby admitted murdering his wife and the dogs reacted to where he laid her body.

"We hope that this will finally lead to her being found and to the discovery of whoever is responsible for this crime," the couple said.

This is close, that is distancing, they place themselves close to the crime.
Notice they say THIS CRIME without specifying what the crime is.
I would expect them to say  responsible for abducting her except since she wasn't abducted they can't say it.
Lying is stressful and people don't like stress, they will thus lie by omission or minimising as we see here.

The lawyer for the McCann's in Portugal, Rogerio Alves, said: "While it is not known what happened to Madeleine, the matter is not closed.
 This is actually quite a telling statement and unexpected given what has been claimed.
What is claimed is Madeleine was abducted from her bed, this is what the mccanns and the 7 dwarfs and the pink princess and sundry family members have been thrusting down the throats of the police, the media and the public, heck even the twins.
Their investigation has been based on abduction, the fund has been based on an abduction.

Now we are being told by their own attorney that it is not known what happened to Madeleine.
 If it wasn't abduction as claimed then the parents et al lied.
If it wasn't abduction and she didn't wander what else is there?
As concluded in the final report prior to shelving the case we have homicide, filing a false police report and concealing a cadaver.

A classic case of open mouth insert feet.

"The reopening of the case is excellent news, it creates a new perspective on the case and gives hope to the parents. The result is that we all hope Madeleine is found."
A new perspective for whom?
It's bad news for the parents since the case is now reopened as per their alleged requests ( review not reopening initially)
The case has been reopened because of new and compelling evidence as the PJ always said it would be.
What changed?


 It obliterated the bundleman sighting which in effect gave gerry an alibi.

It brought to the fore the Smith family sighting, a sighting which the mccanns and the pink princess ignored until the public clamor forced them to mention it in their mockumentary and even then it morphed into bundleman and nothing like gerry as the Smiths claimed ( 60-80% sure) based not only on clothing and general looks  but mainly on how he was carrying Sean as he deplaned.
They had promoted every vague sighting except the one from independant witnesses.
On crimewatch it became central, they told us everything we knew about events that night was false and the timelines were well off.

His alibi was erased, also erased was the visit by david payne,  bather of other peoples children.

The new and compelling evidence is that tanner lied outright which begs the question why and who was she covering for, the checks and timelines weren't as claimed and, it seems given who was not mentioned in the programme, is it that someone has spoken to LE and told the truth?

They are screwed in that they originally refused to do a reconstruction because it was too long after the fact, wouldn't be televised, and unhelpful.
They wanted a crimewatch type programme.

They got what they wanted which was now a problem.
They knew if they took part it would fall at the first hurdle all those checks that never happened as claimed, the non sighting  etc.
They then said we don't want it filmed in Portugal because it might upset the PJ.
The PJ would have been delighted had it been filmed there, it was what they wanted all along.
The mccanns realised this and then went for the it would be too painful for us claim.
Possible you may think, except, it wasn't too painful for them to film on location for their mockumentary, so why wasn't it too painful then and too painful now?
Gerry was in charge at the time and what he said went, even though it was supposed to show events that night it turned into a brief  here is bundleman , here  are the checks , this is where i was standing, 5 mins of what happened and the rest was a mccann love in.
The problem was The actress who played kate had her role cut, because, in gerry's own words her story was unbelievable!, the self same story they had been telling the public.

The didn't even show all the checks only animations of who went where and when.

Since the case is now being investigated both in the UK and Portugal and you can bet the 2 forces are liasing with each other, they can't claim inept or corrupt coppering.

They are now faced with a conundrum, they have now got what they allegedly wanted ( according to the pink princess)  they now have to answer all the questions and if required do a police reconstruction in PDL.
This is what innocent parents would do and should have been doing.
If they refuse it reveals the lie that they want to co-operate etc.

They and probably the 7 dwarves will be made arguidos, either at their own request or at the request of the PJ.

It is a given.

As a witness they have to answer fully all questions etc on pain of a prison visit if they don't, they have to tell the truth and again will face prison if they lie.
Being an arguido offers them legal protection, it allows them the right to refuse to answer questions or co-operate in any way, it also allows them to lie.

How will they spin it i wonder if they refuse to help or answer questions?

Notice also it says Madeleine will be found, NOT that she will be found alive, something the parents insist she is (despite all the statistics etc)

"This of course is what Madeleine McCann's parents have always wanted," he said.

"They were very disappointed when it was shelved after 15 months - after their daughter disappeared - the investigation having got nowhere.

 No it wasn't otherwise they would have demanded the case be kept open when they were told it was being shelved and at any time since they could have requested it be reopened by either answering the 48 questions kate or all doing a reconstruction.

The investigation got quite far, the reason it was shelves was because the parents and chums legged it back to the UK after refusing to answer questions and take part in a reconstruction

One has to wonder what has changed in the relationships between the mccanns and their chums who weren't even close friends, what has changed between the tapas 7, what has changed between the tapas 7 and their families and between the mccanns and their families.

Friendships come and go over time, some fade to nothing or turn to dislike or hatred, others grow closer and still others toddle along at their own slow pace.

Who is to say what carrying such a secret has done to friendships and relationships, who is to say what the guilt of carrying such a secret is having on them, it is only a secret if one person knows, 2 people if one of them is dead.
Here we have 9 people who know , are involved in  or suspect  what happened.
Why have they remained, at least publicly silent, what hold does gerry have over them?

What could be so bad that admitting to child neglect resulting in harm resulting in a 10 stretch is more acceptable than telling the truth?
Heck if they admitted neglect even to sedation they could possibly keep their licences although it be suspended for a period of time or meaning they have to have more training and be supervised.
What is worse would be involvement in a more serious crime such as paedophilia or homicide.

We can expect now a period of quiet due to the Portuguese secrecy laws although that never stopped the gruesomes before using  their spokespoodle and family members to leak info.

Will the tapas 7 break ranks and cover their own asses, cop a deal and reveal the truth?

SY will also be looking at fraud in relation to the fund, given the gruesomes are claiming she is still alive etc and wanting donations to find her and yet in the process of free editing they have told us Maddie is dead, will they face charges of obtaining money and services by deception, wire fraud , perhaps even theft since the fund was to search not fund a 5 star lifestyle( though they may find that hard to prosecute as the support the family clause in there)

Will they still demand donations even though they have had no one searching since march last year?

So far the rumors are that they are suspects in the case, yet, the PJ said that right up until they were declared arguidos.

I bet  a few sphincters are a quivering right now, wondering if they are being bugged, followed etc and wondering if their chums will stay silent.

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Perfect or Imperfect, which one is Madeleine?

 It strikes me as interesting  the mccanns obsession of perfection, everything being just so.

We have them describing Maddie as almost perfect, almost perfectly formed implying their was some obvious defect that was visible at birth yet at the same time in kate's bewk we have her describing Maddie's perfect genitals torn apart.

Does this mean that Maddie was faulty, defective, apart from her genitals?

Often in cases where a parent, family member abuses or kills their child, we see subtle demeaning of the victim, thus whatever happened was deserved by the child, they brought it on themselves by being imperfect in some way.

We have Maddie describes as a screamer, having a temper, being clingy, being demanding, requiring comforting for however number of hours, given we know all this and kate expressed concern Maddie was going to turn out like kate ( why would a mom worry her daughter will turn out like her? usually that's a compliment unless there was something physically or mentally wrong with the mother which she saw in her daughter, and why Maddie and not Amelie?)

We know kate had to have a lot of help with her children to the extent it seems she was never really left alone with them, this leads me to ask was this because the family knew there were problems and were trying to deal with it within family and possibly close friends?

I have seen subtle and even blatant demeaning of Maddie but none of the twins, why is this i wonder?

Given they were all IVF the obvious questions is parentage.

The twins will share the same parentage for obvious reasons, what is worth asking is, if the twins share the same parentage as Maddie?
Do they share both gerry and Kate as parents?
Gerry and a donor egg?
Kate and donor sperm?
Donor egg and sperm?

Remember when choosing IVF parents will invariably choose donors who bear similarities to themselves such as skin, hair and eye color, height, nationality even perhaps even intelligence, they want their child to be similar enough to them in looks so that the child won't stand out like a sore thumb when presented to family and friends, although not a certainty as genes are complicated things and throwbacks can and do occur which is why you may get a blonde baby in a family that usually has dark hair or vice versa and when they look back through family pics and history they find a blone/dark haired relative.

They aren't going to choose a white donor if their family is non white or a non white donor for a white family, The child would stand out like a sore thumb and questions would arise , especially if the family didn't know the child was IVF or it was against their religion.

IVF children also have a higher risk of genetic defects resulting in  either physical or mental issues.

We know Maddie had a coloboma and that there are various other health issues linked with it from mild to profound.
First they said it was pronounced and a good way to identify her as well as being a good marketing ploy, later on they minimised it to a mere fleck.
Why then the change in description?

Is this why medical records for Maddie were not handed over? 
Was it because it would reveal some truths they wanted kept quiet?

The clinics where kate had IVF would have records as to donors even of the parents, number of cycles, number of eggs harvested and so on, her GP would also have access to Maddie's records such as health issues, vaccinations, checks from the midwife etc.

Should it be that gerry wasn't the father, it is no big deal half the time it is the dad that has the problem, it might mean that the donor is no longer allowed to dontate (especially if other offspring have health issues) Could it be that gerry doesn't want to be seen as less than the perfect man, a blow to his ego that he fires blanks or his swimmers need assistance ( depending on the type of IVF used in each case) 
Could he blame it all on kate which would fit in with his arrogance and ego.

What was so different about Maddie that she never fitted in with their idea of the prefect family i wonder?

They have the perfect family blonde blue eyed twins a boy and a girl, a big house, professional jobs that are respected ( doctors)  cars, upper middle class ( up from working class roots) social climbers with good connections, the right social circles and connections in high places. Did Maddie not fit in with their future plans i wonder ( hence kate refusing to answer the question about handing Maddie over to another family member or even possible adoption)

Given all the work involved and money needed for IVF why then decide you don't want to keep the result?

It's not like you can take the baby back and ask for a refund or replacement because it is faulty.

Giving her to a family member is more acceptable but still questionable as in why get rid of her and keep the twins, why not hand them all over as a group or why not one of the twins?

Sunday, October 13, 2013

Madeleine McCann Timeline Of Events 'Wrong'

British detectives working on the Madeleine McCann investigation have revealed that key details in the timeline of her disappearance were wrong.
The revised details will be documented in a new Crimewatch appeal on the case to be broadcast on Monday.
Speaking ahead of the BBC programme, senior investigating officer Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, of the Metropolitan Police, said: "The timeline we have now established has given new significance to sightings and movements of people in and around Praia da Luz at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.
"Our work to date has significantly changed the timeline and the accepted version of events that has been in the public domain to date.
"It has allowed us to work with Crimewatch to build the most detailed reconstruction as yet, and highlight very specific appeal points.
"I hope that when the public see our investigative strands drawn together within the overall context of that appeal, it will bring in new information that moves our investigation forward."

Poster of missing Madeleine
The timeline of Madeleine's disappearance has 'significantly changed'
The full reconstruction of the events six years ago when Madeleine went missing starts with a scene of Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry playing tennis.
Madeleine, dressed in pink shorts, T-shirt and hat, then runs across the court, holding a batch of tennis balls.
In another clip, the McCanns are asked how often they think of their daughter, who went missing when she was three years old on May 3, 2007 from a holiday apartment as her parents dined at a nearby tapas restaurant with friends.
Mr McCann says: "When it's a special occasion, when you should be your happiest and Madeleine's not there, that's when it really hits home. Obviously, Madeleine's birthday goes without saying."
Mrs McCann adds: "It's when you have big family occasions really. That's it isn't it? 'Family occasion' and you haven't got your complete family."
During the programme, DCI Redwood discusses how the police have approached the inquiry.

Gerry and Kate McCann interviewed in BBC Crimewatch.
Gerry and Kate McCann tell Crimewatch their anguish is undiminished
He says: "Primarily what we sought to do from the beginning is try and draw everything back to zero if you like. Try and take everything back to the beginning and re-analyse and reassess everything, accepting nothing.
"The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key.
"Primarily, we're focused on the area between 8.30pm and 10pm. We know at 8.30pm that was the time Mr and Mrs McCann went down to the tapas area for their dinner and we know that around at 10pm that was when Mrs McCann found that Madeleine was missing."
A number of e-fits are also to be shown in the appeal in a bid to "identify the men and eliminate innocent sightings".
Scotland Yard detectives, who have interviewed 442 people as part of their review-turned-investigation, hope to track down as many people present in the Portuguese town at the time.
Since launching its own investigation, 41 people of interest have been identified by the Met Police, including 15 UK nationals.

Madeleine McCann
Madeleine seen on the day before she went missing in May 2007
Detectives have issued 31 international letters of request to mostly European countries in relation to some of the persons of interest as well as accessing phone records.
A large but "manageable" list of phone numbers identified as being in Praia da Luz - though not necessarily used to make phone calls - has been drawn up by detectives with a "significant" number unattributed to any named person.
British detectives launched a fresh investigation in July this year - two years into a review of the case.
The Met Police now has a team of six Portuguese detectives based in Faro who are carrying out inquiries on its behalf.
The Portuguese investigation is officially closed but authorities there are backing the Scotland Yard inquiry and officers from both countries are working together in pursuing new leads.

Od dear this is bad news for the mccanns , after wasting using valuable searching time to write down not one but two versions of their timelines, testifying in their rogs that their timing were correct and even kate seeing to paper permanently, her version of the timelines regarding checks  and the rest of the world saying hang on a minute apart from the toing and froing of sundry adults checking on the children (allegedly) and comparing it to a sketch from the Benny Hill show, apart from the times as stated leaving approximatly 80 seconds to break in, sedate the children, abduct maadeleine and making their escaoe with said child and only being seen briefly by jane tanner who managed to remain invisible in a silent, small street with poor lighting whilst walking round gerry and Jez Wilkins.
Even kate admitted the interviewer in the Panorama interiew )19-11-07) was right and that is was only a small windlow of opportunity to allow Madeleine to be whoosh clucked.

It now seems that everything the mccanns, the tapas 7, clarence mitchell, family and supporters said concerning the time lines, is wrong.

Not just wrong by a little bite bit, a minute here a minute there, rather they have


Where does this leave the mccanns and the tapas 7 if the police are now saying their time lines have significantly changed?

Basically it tells us someone was telling porkies.

This then makes me wonder why would innocent people tell porkies about what they were doing when, when a child goes missing, allegedly abducted?

When people are deceptive, they have a reason to be deceptive.

It could be to do with guilty knowledge of the crime, it could be guilty knowledge about something else, something sensitive such as an illicit affair or sexual liaison, it could be to do with drink or drugs, it could be financial.

If it was guilty knowledge or sensitivity about something not to do with  missing Madeleine, why would they continue to lie to police  thus hindering the search?
Surely, whatever they did, if not related to Missing Madeleine, would be ignored or minimised (affair, drinking, drugs etc). it meant the police could then exclude them as a possible suspect with involvement and  continue to focus on the remaining members/family or others.

What was going on that was so bad, so incriminating that they would lie about timelines, they would risk neglect charges, with a maximum of up to10 yrs prison for neglect resulting in harm?

Is it a case that after 7 years of telling us they were doing regular checks, a better service than offered by Mark Warner (the holiday company)  refusing to make use of the evening creche or the babysitting service (because they didn't want to leave their children with strangers, even though they did this at the creche everyday and the creche workers were the resort babysitters)
How will they spin this?

They can't claim we misunderstood,  as they thrust these checks and timelines down our throats, railing and threatening anyone who said they were anything other than responsible parents.

They can't claim they misremembered since we have not one but two written timelines, written on a the cover torn from Madeleine's book, we have the signed rogatory statements which were also recorded and can be used in court and of course we have their mockumentary and kate's book, AN account of the truth, HER account of the truth, not, THE account of THE truth (since that would stick them in jail real fast)

Claiming they remember more over the passing of time isn't going to work, unless of course you are jane tanner, in which case, the longer the time period, the more exact the recall.

Generally (with the exception of tanner) the more time passes, the fuzzier the memory.

So, how can the mccanns spin this in a positive manner as, judging from the headlines of the papers, they are calling the mccanns liars and everything we know about the events is untrue.

Is it a coincidence this is breaking just as they are in court in Portugal suing Goncalo Amaral for libel claiming his book hindered the search and prevented people from still looking ( if so why were we still getting sightings after the release of a book written in Portugal and not available in the UK)

Is it a coincidence that they are doing badly in court, so badly that event their own witnesses are doing more to support Goncalo that the mccanns?

So coincidental that both kate and gerry have asked to be allowed to testify as to harm caused, with gerry showing up twice and being turned away, kate turning up on her own to challenge Goncalo and not looking him in the eye, that when the case was abruptly adjourned  for they day isabel Duarte asked for the remaining witnesses to testify by letter rather than returning ( thus avoiding cross examination) it was declined.

So coincidental that kate wants to testify, but ..., she wants to write her testimony thus avoiding the risk of cross examination,.something the British media is once again avoiding mentioning.

One has to ask why are the mccanns and chums so reluctant to appear on the stand in a court of law?

Why, after refusing to do a police reconstruction claiming it was too late and not helpful, then claiming they wanted a crime watch type reconstruction that would be shown on TV, when granted their wish they refused to have it filmed in Portugal, claiming it would anger the Police and then yet be too upsetting!

How would it anger the police when it is what they have been after since the get go?

As a result is was filmed in Spain, and used actors to play the mccanns etc.

How can this be classed as too upsetting when a couple years back they happily took part in their own reconstruction for their mockumentary!

They couldn't exactly refuse to co-operate given it was what they had demanded and was offered by the UK police and BBC and even pinky would be hard pressed to explain it away, so instead,  we now have a reconstruction of a crime that never happened, in a location it never took place in, in a country they weren't even in. this is a bigger mockumentary than their C4 version.

What will this achieve?

How can it prod memories if those in PDL and surrounds when  it bears no resemblance to the events that week?

Is this perhaps a plan by SY to show the discrepancies in the group's timelines and thus showing the abduction as claimed never occurred.
This then puts the focus right back on the mcanns and the tapas 7.

The other point to remember is the cadaver and blood dogs reacted in the apartment and hire car, dogs with a 100% track record.

kate perjured herself in the leveson enquiry when she said their were no body fluids, yet, earlier had come up with explanations as to why fluids had been found including coming in contact with dead bodies prior to the trip, rotting meat, dirty diapers, sweaty sandals, sea bass etc.

 Since there is no record of anyone dying in 5a and it is easy to check if kate came in contact with any dead bodies prior to her trip and a body was found in the hire car and a child is missing how did the fluids get there especially as in the UK a 15-19 marker match is enough for proof ( in Portugal it has to be 19-19)

Every time you tell a lie a hole in the story shows up elsewhere and the more you lie the bigger the holes.

The timeline and accepted version of events surrounding Madeleine McCann's disappearance have "significantly changed", British police say.

The Metropolitan Police said a BBC Crime watch appeal to be aired on Monday would feature "the most detailed reconstruction" of the case yet.

It will also broadcast e-fits of a number of men police want to find.

Madeleine, of Rothley, Leicestershire, was three when she went missing in Portugal in May 2007.

She disappeared from her family's holiday flat in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz, as her parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, dined out with friends at a nearby restaurant.

Portuguese authorities dropped their investigation into the case in 2008, but Scotland Yard started a review in May 2011.
'New significance'

The purpose of the Crimewatch appeal, which police are describing as the "most complex and detailed" so far in the case, is to try to identify a number of computer-generated images, or e-fits, of men who were sighted in and around Praia da Luz on or before Thursday 3 May 2007.

As part of that effort, a reconstruction - almost 25 minutes long - of events leading up to and surrounding Madeleine's disappearance will be shown.

A short clip released in advance by police shows an actress playing Madeleine running across a tennis court as two adults, apparently her parents, play a game.

During the search for their daughter, the McCann family released a photograph of Madeleine, believed to be one of the last taken of her during the holiday, holding several tennis balls.

Det Ch Insp Andy Redwood, who is heading the investigation, said: "The timeline we have now established has given new significance to sightings and movements of people in and around Praia da Luz at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

"Our work to date has significantly changed the timeline and the accepted version of events that has been in the public domain to date.

"It has allowed us to work with Crimewatch to build the most detailed reconstruction as yet, and highlight very specific appeal points.

"I hope that when the public see our investigative strands drawn together within the overall context of that appeal, it will bring in new information that moves our investigation forward."

DCI Redwood said that police had sought to "try and draw everything back to zero... take everything back to the beginning and then reanalyse and reassess everything, accepting nothing".
Phone records

He added: "The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key. Primarily, we are focused on the area between 8.30pm and 10pm.

"We know that at 8.30, that was the time that Mr and Mrs McCann went down to the tapas area for their dinner, and we know that at around 10pm, that was when Mrs McCann found that Madeleine was missing."

Madeleine's parents will make a live appeal in the studio during the programme and, ahead of the broadcast, they told the BBC how much they still miss her.

"When it's a special occasion, when you should be at your happiest, and Madeleine's not there, that's when it really hits home," Mr McCann said.

Mrs McCann added: "It's when you have the big family occasions... and you haven't got your complete family."

Earlier this month, police said phone records may be key to the case after it emerged officers were analysing data from phones belonging to people who were in Praia da Luz when Madeleine vanished.

The Crimewatch appeal, which will be shown in the UK on BBC One on Monday from 2100 BST, will also be broadcast in the Netherlands and Germany.

It is interesting to note they now seem to be claiming the tennis ball picture is the last one taken of Maddie as kate and gerry played tennis, interesting except that picture shows a much older Maddie with longer hair and bags under her eyes and not the much younger Maddie as has been used to promote the campaign.

Mrs McCann added: "It's when you have the big family occasions... and you haven't got your complete family."
Interesting to note that kate uses the distancing pronouns of you and your rather than the expected we and our.
She tells us how we would feel if we had a family get together and there was a person missing rather than telling is how she feels when they have family gatherings and Maddie isn't there.

It is noticeable that kate uses a lot of distancing language in regard to Maddie, there is no maternal bond between her and Maddie and it shows in her language.

She goes to extremes of either using Madeleine at every moment (why so insistent on only Madeleine and not Maddie as used by the twins and family and friends? is it because Maddie was the good child and alive and Madeleine was the bad child and dead. Maddie alive was tolerated, suffered with, Madeleine was the hated child, not tolerated and glad to be rid of?) or she uses the term child (most parents use kids, when child is introduced is can indicate a poor relationship between parent and child even to the extent of physical and sexual abuse, it is worth noting when the terms Madeleine, child, daughter and kid all appear and if the change in language is warranted and also when it is Sean, Amelie or the twins.

Why would a parent, especially a mom distance herself from her kids?

Could this be why she had to have so much help, even to family and friends flying down to help for a couple of days or over the weekends?

Could it be they didn't trust her with the care of the kids? that the kids were in fact, at risk of harm from her?

Friday, October 11, 2013

Wendy Murphy Speaks the Unspeakable

Wendy Murphy Speaks the Unspeakable

Oh dear, Wendy certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons yesterday when she told America and pretty much the whole world, that the latest 'sighting', the latest e-fit from Scotland yard and the upcoming 'reconstruction' is all a PR stunt to draw attention from the libel trial which is ongoing in Portugal between themselves and
Gonçalo Amaral the now ex lead detective in the case of missing Madeleine McCann.

Their claim is that he libelled them in his book  A Verdada da Mentira, ‘The Truth About A Lie’, and also by default in his documentary.

This is despite his book being based on his own knowledge of the case as lead detective with access to all the files and also reaching the same conclusions as the Files

10 September 2007
(Processo: VOL ,X, p. 2587-2602)

"....we conclude that:

- The minor Madeleine McCann DIED in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007

 - It was performed a SIMULATION of kidnapping;

 - Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are INVOLVED in the occultation of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;..."
Gonçalo Amaral:

At the end of his book, he delivers the conclusions of his work and that of his team. That can be summarised as follows:

 - Maddie DIED inside the holiday apartment on the night of 3rd of May, 2007;

- There was a SIMULATED abduction;

- The parents are probably INVOLVED in the concealment of the body;

As per usual in such cases when a statement  or comment is made by anyone not actively supporting the mccanns, and, which in fact, clearly points out any discrepencies, contradictions, actual facts based on actual physical evidence, new sightings or spinning of a clarence mitchell type, they either show rage, outrage, shock, anger, fury or other suitable emotion or as has been seen today, according to the pink poodle clarence mitchell "couple will not dignify' ex-US prosecutor's comments with a response"

They won't dignify it with a response because it brings up the 48 questions which kate refused to answer despite her answering the 49th one admitting by not answering she was hindering the search.
It would also draw attention to their libel trial in portugal whic is doing a darn good impression of a car crash, which might expalin why they tried to do a deal with Gonçalo to stop the case coming to court (it is almost unheard of plaintiffs to offer to do a deal to end the case since they are the ones looking to get the money, whilst the defendant would often come to a deal so they minimise the financial hit)

America also has the first amendment  right to free speech, which, much as they would like to shut her up, they can't plus who would pay their legal bills should they try?

Their only option then is to say nothing and hope no one was watching and those that were will be mocked, threatened and derided as haters,  this will keep the trolls happy for a while.

Even better is the claim that both kate and gerry want to testify at the trial, obviously this goes against the advice SY gave saying it would create media frenzy and interfere in the case and their own attorney isabel duarte saying they didn't need to be there etc etc.

As we all know kate and gerry are allergic to courts and so far have managed to obtain a lot of money by threatening to carter-ruck the doubters, suing sundry media and coming to a deal outside of court and then doing statements along with their friends giving the impression they won in court.

Kate commited perjury in the Leveson Inquiry by saying there were no body fluids, despite coming up for excuses as to why DNA from body fluids could be found in the apartment, on items of clothing, cuddlecat and the hire car, so, which is it? There were body fluids which you had a good explanation for or no body fluids for which you also had a good expanation for?

Since everything their witnesses said in the trial so far counts only as hearsay and the nasty judge refused to let them write their testimony down to save them travelling back to Portugal, kate and gerry have been forced to step up to the stand so to speak.

Testifying though leaves them open to cross examination, a perfect opportunity to ask those 48 questions, to ask about their timelines, to ask about their refusal to do a reconstruction and so on.
As they will not be able to refuse to answer, and i would imagine this was pointed out real fast to them, it seems kate at least wants to write her testimony down and thus avoid the risk of being questioned.

So much for wanting to clear her name ( hasn't she been telling the world and it's dogs they were both cleared of any involvement)

So far all they have succeeded in doing is promoting Gonçalo's book and documentary as well as the PJ files which have been translated into english.

They demanded a crimewatch reconstruction and refused to do a Portuguese one saying it would not be helpful, was too late and that it wouldn't be televised.

All well and good they thought, let's not ask for the case to be kept open as is our right, lets leg it back to the UK and hire expensive extradition lawyers and lets have SY do a review.

Unfortunately SY said ok it's years down the line  but we think we have enough evidence to reopen  the case, to reinvestigate it,  yay went the mccanns.
Then they got their 2nd wish a police reconstruction on crimewatch.
Oh dear this couldn't be allowed to happen as all the discrepencies and such like would be revealed to the UK public.
A compromise was reached, the reconstruction would go ahead except it would be in Spain not Portugal ( cos it might anger the Portuguese cops who desperately want them to do the reconstruction in PDL)
they wouldn't take part themselves because it was too upsetting but clearly not upsetting enough to stop them doing their own reconstruction in their mockumentary even though the actress playing kate was cut from the whole thing because, in gerry's own words, " her story wasn't believable"

So now we have a non reconstruction, taking place in a nonexistent  location for a non existent crime, with actors so if it proves unbelievable they can blame the actors/crew/location.

The timing of all this has been forseen to mask the disaster taking palce in a court in Portugal.

Every time there is any news that paints the mccanns in a bad light, there is the predictable sighting or on story about a recovered memory of seeing Madeleine, a suspicious man/woman/egg lurking in PDL weeks or months before  Madeleine went missing.

Still they bang on about someone having one piece of the puzzle, one piece of info that could bring Madeleine home, forgetting to mention kate has 48 pieces of the puzzle.
When they lose this libel case can we expect to see gerry suing kate for hindering the search?

Statement analysis shows that Madeleine is dead, kate, gerry and even the pink poodle have told us this.

Wendy Murphy has stated the obvious, she has told us,the public, what the mccanns don't want us  the public to hear, what British MSM are too scared to broadcast.

She is a voice for Madeleine, the same as all of us demanding justice for a little girl, justice her parents are desperate to see denied