Evidence was manipulated

Source: Correio da Manhã, 04.08.2008, paper edition, translation by Astro

Investigation – PJ believes that the McCann couple altered the crime scene in order to simulate the abduction

Maddie’s parents accused of changing the disposition of the furniture and of washing the sofa

The Polícia Judiciária has no doubts that Maddie’s parents changed the disposition of furniture and objects in the apartment where Maddie disappeared from on the evening of May 3, 2007, in the Algarve, thus manipulating the crime scene in order to better justify the abduction theory that they always defended.

According to the Polícia Judiciária’s investigation, which from today onwards is public, the coincidence between the marking of cadaver odour and blood which was given by the sniffer dogs behind the sofa “indubitably” proves that the sofa was pushed against the wall after the little girl’s death. On the other hand, given the few indicia that was collected from this piece of furniture, which was located on the same spot where the dogs gave a signal, the Judiciária admits the possibility that it was “subject to washing” in order to eliminate eventual traces.

Soft toy placed on the bed

“There are strong indicia that they altered the crime scene, moving some of the furniture. The changes are indicators of simulation”, one of the PJ’s reports reads, also revealing that Maddie’s soft toy, which was found at the top of the bed where Maddie slept, was placed there at a posterior moment, given the fact that contrary to the soft toy, the bed failed to reveal cadaver odour.

“There was an intentional modification, in an attempt to take advantage for the simulation of the picture of abduction”, one can read in the process, where the investigators recall that the procedures from the family were in such manner as to conduct the investigation into the direction of the abduction thesis. The Polícia Judiciária believes that the false abduction was “worked by the group”, which made the investigators “waste time”.

McCanns mentioned death to the PJ

The possibility that Madeleine is dead was raised to the PJ by the McCanns themselves, who suggested contacting a person to indicate the spot where the cadaver could be found. “This fact became unexplainable for the elements of the investigation”, the PJ writes, remembering that in front of the journalists, the parents continued to manifest the hope that they would find their daughter alive.

The dogs never failed in 200 searches

In over two hundred searches, ‘Eddie’ and ‘Keela’, the sniffer dogs of the springel spaniel breed that were used in the investigation into the disappearance of Maddie, did not give a single “false positive result”.

The guarantee is given by English expert Martin Grime, who in the report about the search guarantees that the behaviour of the dog that is trained to detect cadaver odour “changed immediately after opening the front door of the apartment” where Madeleine McCann disappeared from.

“He went into the apartment with above average interest”, the document reads, explaining that the dog signaled inside the couple’s bedroom, in the living room, behind the sofa and next to the side window. The same signs were given by the dog that is trained to detect blood residues. The dogs signaled the same spots and objects that are related to the McCanns – house, car and clothes – which was decisive for being made arguidos.

Notes

No credibility

The deposition by Jane Tanner, who said she saw someone crossing the street carrying a child, was not considered credible by the PJ, which does not understand how the McCanns’ friend, upon seeing someone walking away from Madeleine’s apartment “did not act or speak out immediately”.

Everyone lies

The PJ says that the information that was collected from the McCanns and their friends was “worked upon” in order to strengthen the abduction theory. But it rapidly perceived that “everyone lies” in the issue of checking the children, further explaining that the family information, which in these cases is “fundamental”, was always “distorted”.

Files Process is public – From today onwards, the files of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine can be consulted at the Court of Portimão by lawyers, witnesses and journalists.

Brown Political pressures – Kate’s notebooks reveal that Maddie’s parents called the English prime minister, Gordon Brown, requesting for political pressure to be placed on Portugal.

Book Amaral recounts death – The former coordinator of the Maddie case recounts in his book ‘Truth of the Lie’, his thesis about the case and defends that the little girl was killed in the apartment and her body frozen.

150 Responses to “Evidence was manipulated”

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

  1. 1
    Lyndsey Says:

    Another thing I wonder about is that Kate McCann, in her profession as a GP, would highly likely have been involved either directly or indirectly with Social Services and I think there is a strong probability that she might have been responsible for other people’s children being placed on Child Protection Registers or placed into care. There is every chance that other people for whom she acted as their GP have neglected left their children and this may have included leaving them unattended and, of course, GP’s are asked for patient’s medical notes whenever Social Services have concerns about a child or family as they want to look into the background of the child/family. Therefore, for this reason she knew the risk she was taking herself of leaving her children unattended and this would be damaging and she would be anxious to limit the appearance of this damage (and her husband’s) by way of covering up. Her credibility as a GP would be blown apart and she may even have been struck off. Therefore suitable damage limitation is making us believe there was an abductor and it was someone else’s fault notwithstanding she and her husband left their children unattended, as we now know, for very long periods and crying for 75 minutes. As far as her advice to Social Services goes, the saying, ‘Do as I say, not as I do’ comes to mind.

  2. 2
    Jane Prosser Says:

    Leaving their children alone was a ruse to ‘enable’ the abduction scenario. As cadaverine is only released 2 hours after death, Madeleine must have died early on that day; therefore, why would she have been drugged?

    Gerry needed to give himself an alibi and therefore ‘engaged’ Jeremy Wilkins in conversation. Jane Tanner had to say she saw an abductor while Gerry was talking to Wilkins; this was to dismiss any other sightings that fitted the description of Gerry McCann. This group of people seriously underestimated the tenaciousness of the Portuguese police and didn’t think it through properly. What a shock it must have been for them all (and continues to be)! Gerry and Gordon Brown’s insistence that Tanner’s ‘description’ of an abductor be released was purely to keep the abduction myth going and also to deflect attention away from anyone who may have spotted Gerry carrying Madeleine’s body (as Martin Smith probably did). Jane Tanner is the only one of the group who has spoken about the ‘abduction’. She has to – to keep the abduction scenario going. She must have volunteered to be the one to ‘spot’ the abductor. As the volunteer, she can’t be a part of the ‘pact of silence’. It all becomes quite transparent.

    When people refer to the McCanns being neglectful, the fact that they had to be to cover up their daughter’s death seems to be forgotten. Look at it from a different angle. When we write about them going out and leaving their children, we are falling into their trap of making us believe this is the reason why Madeleine ‘went missing’. She didn’t go missing. She died.

  3. 3
    AMANDA SOUTH AFRICAservice Says:

    SOME WHERE I READ THAT ON THE DAY MADDIE WAS “SNATCHED “, KATE SPOKE TO SOME OF THE TAPAZ GROUP ABOUT THE FEAR OF ABDUCTION IN THAT AREA. ISN`T IT STRANGE THAT SHE SPOKE OF IT THE 3rd OF MAY AND THAT ON THAT DAY AT NIGHT MADDIE WAS GONE. THIS IS NOT JUST COINCEDENCE FOR ME.

  4. 4
    liz perth Says:

    I am certain that Madeline is dead and agree thatthe McCanns covered up her death or murder. I am quite intutive and I see Maddie in my minds eye pointing to a pile of stones, like a cairn of some sort where her body lies.

    Site admin: One would think that a big pile of stones would be the first to be unturned by the McCanns. The big shame is that they have never been seen looking for Madeleine.

  5. 5
    chris longden Says:

    im sure some sort of prosecution is in order for the neglect shown towards their kids.
    if you or i went out for the evening leaving the children in alone and returned to find one of the children had a broked leg or somthing the trip to the hospital would result in me been charged with neglect.
    so why not these two ????

  6. 6
    Lyndsey Says:

    Does anyone know what the McCann’s and Tapas’s timeline was for 2nd May? We know that on the night of 1st May Madeleine was overheard crying for 75 mins. After that the McCann’s spoke of ‘upping their checks’. Did that therefore mean they checked every 30 mins on the 2nd May? I have only read that they checked every 30 mins on the 3rd. I wonder if there are any witness statements from staff at the complex who know what their movements were on the 2nd May?

    Site Admin: Interesting question. The police interviews typically asked about all days at the resort although without exception the interviews mainly concentrated on the activities of May 3 right across the board with all witnesses. It’s as though the interview technique was flawed from the outset because the police didn’t consider that Madeleine was maybe gone before May 3. There are forensic clues about the 2nd though. Creche records, tennis booking sheets, etc.

  7. 7
    Tony Says:

    I have tried to search for Madeleine in May 2007 and also visited the Portugal I contacted the police on airport and gave them my information about missing Madeleine. I have asked police in airport to inform special crime investigation regarding Madeleine disappearance but there was not any willingness to receive attention. I have evidence of abduction by two men and one women. I know there was non investigation regarding abduction, why the police with Goncalo Amaral didn’t investigate possible abduction theory? Was he unable to do it?

  8. 8
    Liz Y Says:

    Tony, Don’t really know what you’re on about, I’m sure if you’re information was crucial (like all the sightings – Yeah right, the McCanns would have been all over you like a rash. The fact is that Goncalo Amaral was blocked at every turn, and the McCanns weren’t in the least bit interested in the sighting by the Smith family, which I find strange (‘leaving no stone unturned’). They under-estimated the tenacity of the Portuguese police generally, and Goncalo Amaral in particular. They thought they were superior both intellectually and (by way of being British) self-importantly, they were wrong on both counts, and I hope he continues to haunt them forever.
    I am absolutely certain that he will win the day and all power to him, the sooner the better. By whichever means or date or whatever, they did it, THEY REALLY DID IT!!!
    Can anyone tell me, a technophobe, how to download his book.
    Respect to you Goncalo and former .colleagues

  9. 9
    Curious Says:

    I heard, and this is really just rumour, one of those friend of a friend things, but;

    A friend of mine has a friend who was in Praiza de Luz when Maddie vanished. She dmay or may not have loosely known the McCann’s or the Tapas 9 but was there, as can happen(popular holiday destination etc plus we’re from Liverpool where Kate is from so there may have been a connection)
    ANY WAY;

    The friend in Portugal told an interesting story which was ignored by the press and I’ve never heard a word on since; There was a 4th child in the room.
    Since Maddie and the twins where not the only kids, and to save having to travel too far to check on the kids, a 4th child, another little girl, was sharing the room with the McCann children.
    She might be the only person who knows or saw what happened but the Luz police didn’t want to talk to her or where not informed of her presence in the room.
    The friend knows through her loose, passing connection to the group and her vague knowledge of their habits with regards to the kids.
    Obviously, now, any information the kid had is long lost to the dusts of a toddler’s memory, or has been distorted, or she may even have been coached into silence.

    Either way, I’d be interested to hear more on that, if there is any information on it.

    Now, as we know, if this was the case it changes the game significantly; if another kid was in the room it means the Tapas 9 either knew Maddie was already dead, or she died earlier in the dinner and was moved some time before Kate raised the alarm, or she really was abducted and this kid saw it happen. Or slept through it happening…. either way, did anyone else ever hear anything like this?

  10. 10
    Tony Says:

    Very interesting questions about
    1)Crying for 70 minutes by Madeleine was not correct. There is no evidence.
    2)Four children in apartment 5A on 3rd May was also not correct. No evidence
    3)Smith family and also Jane Tanner saw men carrying little girl after 9pm on 3rd May.
    4)There are no real evidence only some indication about Mc Cann’s guilty of dead or disappearance of Madeleine.
    My question for you, will you be happy if most of readers of that article accused you of this crime without evidence if this concern you?
    Remember, All evil are created by ignorance, book of Bagavad-Gita about 3 thousand years ago.

  11. 11
    eddie Says:

    Tony, I think you’re a dis-info agent.
    Your diction is written as though the English language is not your first language, yet your spelling is close to perfect.

  12. 12
    Bill Says:

    Jane Prosser – I would like to thank you for a well written and concise summation of “The McCanns and their theories on abduction.” Your words should be written on the copy book of every journalist in the UK to remind them before they put pen to paper to look at this case from all sides and report responsibly.

  13. 13
    Liz Y Says:

    Bill, I think you can bet your sweet life, most serious journalists would love nothing more than to report the facts and truth, sadly, once again, powerful people are involved. What I really want to know is Why?? Even in their somewhat elevated positions of Consultant and GP, Why?? Who the hell are these people??

  14. 14
    gj Says:

    Having only recently taken up an interest in this case, I am amazed to read these posts. They are interesting but i would like to know where your evidence for accusing the McCanns of a cover up actually come from? I see the dogs scented death in the room but that is certainly not conclusive. Can someone else please give me any hard evidence of a cover up? Specifics please.
    Thanks

  15. 15
    sophie Says:

    If your child disappears into the darkness of the night and in a foreign country, you would naturally assume the worst. Yet Kate has always been adamant that Maddie is being cared for by a family. She still maintains that position until today. As Liz Y indicated, powerful people are involved and why would they be afterall K and G Mccann are merely Consultants/GP.
    I don’t believe that Maddie was abducted or killed in the apartment. I believe that the Mccanns are involved in something much more sinister and sordid. They gave their daughter away and not to a family which explains kate’s outburst on the night that Maddie went missing.
    Kate : “They have taken her” “We’ve let her down”
    Maddie was drugged and the apartment door was left unlocked thus making it an extremely simple process to move her. Additionally, there was mention of a private plane leaving Paria LaLuz that night and as it happens the owner of that plane is an acquaintance of Gerry.
    Now if the incident is true in which David Payne allegedly made remarks of a sexual nature concerning Maddie in the presence of Gerry and another of the Tapas member, then this whole affair becomes something far more sinister.

  16. 16
    Martin - South Africa Says:

    Hi guys& gals, this is Martin { another south african “madeleine finder” arrives in portugal. This is my first post to this site, my last was to “stevo” to his email, that was published on the web.

    I am not one to get involved in gosip or run people down. Not even those who are “faceless”. over the past year and some months, a couple of people on this site had a lot to say about me, my visits to Luz, my motives, and even questioned why I was not speaking for myself. Simply this, No time to listen to most of the nonsense comming up on the site. I have from time to time followed a couple of the comments and discussions, with opinion reserved.

    As most of you are aware, I have been working on a theory of what happend to Madelein, and where she might be. The results of my findings have been forwarded to Rebelo, the Mc Canns, and most of the papers in the UK.

  17. 17
    Martin - South Africa Says:

    I am very interested to hear the comments on my last post, and want to leave you with the following:

    Madeleine Mc Cann will be found, in Praia Da Luz, she is not more than a mile away from apartment A5.
    I am inviting anyone who wants to contact me, to do so on facebook. bye of now…

  18. 18
    Liz Y Says:

    gj, I don’t think you’re going to get a potted version of this. Most of us started by believing that the poor child had been abducted, then things didn’t add up, too many lies, discrepancies and really odd behaviour and body language made some people (better than myself), dig further and the more they dug the more discrepancies and lies and the more odd the set up was. These brave people instigated these sites, so that others could read te info and make an informed decision. I think you’re going to have to start reading and questioning. If you do you’ll never see the McCanns and their cronies in the same light ever. Let me ask you this, had it ben your child who had been kidnapped?? would you be out at church smiling and laughing, or having a gentle jog on the beach a few days later, no, I didn’t think so. If you think all this is crazy, tell your friends, all of them. Someone, somewhere has to be bothered, about this little person, as, sadly her parents and their sponsors, sit in comfort, all the while dreaming up more scams to get the dosh rolling in. Not so easy now though is it Gerry – you can fool some of the people……etc, etc.

  19. 19
    Liz Y Says:

    Martin from South Africa, I hate to burst your bubble mate, but, you’re not another South African Madeleine finder, you’re actually another Failed South African Madeleine finder. it’s quite telling that apart from a few throwaway words at the end of your first post, you didn’t mention Madeleine at all, when you did you spelt her name wrong. It’s all about you! I come to this site to read comments, some I agree with and some not. However, all of those posts are written by people who care (whether their mindset is similar to mine or not) I know they care. I take exception to someone suggesting that their views and mine are rubbish. I think Madeleine will be found in the Library by Miss Mustard. All hot air. You should take a few industrial strength Humility Capsules, and then seek urgent medical help, to remove your head from your arse. Have a nice day!

  20. 20
    Tweets that mention Evidence was manipulated | Truth For Madeleine -- Topsy.com Says:

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by nobby-Lobby. nobby-Lobby said: RT @Muttfan: #McCann evidence was manipulated http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/08/evidence-was-manipulated/#comment-16723 […]

  21. 21
    Helen Says:

    2 right you are Liz. And that “Tony” guy seems like an Italian dude i knew once upon a time with his Mickey Mouse English, verbal diarreah and endlessly making ref to Bagvad-Gita.
    Anyway, i really go along with what Sophie says in general though, there is just an AIR around this whole thing, and it’s something that seemingly none of us are able to put our finger upon entirely, and we all keep on trying. One thing remains clear to myself however, lies, distortions and disinformation in an endless array of layers upon layers surrounds Madeleines disappearence, and just that fact alone speaks volumes. Most of us are just simply too nice people to really courageously voice out what i think most of us are actually thinking and i think what we are thinking is what Sophie indicates. and that then indicates there is a really “grand design” it all, that is the most sinister one of them all. I mean, it is easy enough to find piles of stories from the past 10-30 yrs of high level politicians and upper class, socialite snobs being involved in the most organised form of the -p-word. Admittedly, most stories have no conclusion, no s.t.s substantial proof, and are mind boggling stories of the worst sort. We should therefore remind ourselves that -truth is stranger then fiction- and that is a fact we all know to be true whatever we observe in history. Just the fact that so far Madeleines disappearence seems to sink more into the quicksand the more we all ask ourselves what happened to her and speculate over her fate, and then compare that fact with all the other mind boggling stories, it most certainly seems that they are created by the same sinister web of people in -high places-. And yes, the question remains, -WHO are the McCanns in relation to those people?

  22. 22
    Aquarius Says:

    What’s with Liz’s attitude? My goodness, aren’t we just a ray of blooming sunshine? Perhaps you should get your head out of the sand and start living girl! You’re a bitter sounding individual who ten to one hasn’t accomplished much in life and sits back criticising others who are trying to make a difference. Buy yourself a dog, take a nice long walk on the beach then go home and pour yourself a nice tall glass of shut the hell up … seeing as you have nothing ‘nice’ or ‘sensible’ to bitch about.

  23. 23
    Aquarius Says:

    Helen, I left a note on the other site in case you haven’t viewed it. This case is like something out of an Agatha Christie novel. Seriously. Having been involved from day one, I have seen the attitudes of (not wanting to mention names) ‘people who know what happened’ change from one extreme to the next. The vindictiveness and blatant cheek of the authorities, the press who twist words. When you one day get to sit and read through all the documentation from this side you’ll wonder to yourself just who actually has Maddie’s best interests at heart and who was ever there at the end of the day to protect her. It’s too sad for words and something that I’m looking VERY forward to putting behind me. Just to go over some of the recent events (over the last 6 months or so) make me cry and angry at the same time. No child should ever be remembered in this way …

  24. 24
    Liz Yallop Says:

    Aquarius. My my, whose feathers are ruffled, I made a mistake, I thought we believed in freedom of speech, the very thing that Goncalo Amaral is campaigning for. People will change their opinions, as new information comes out, there are people who have only reached this site today, and their take on this will change with additional info. Let’s be honest, as someone who was at the beginning, didn’t your views change as time went on? Of course they did, we all thought it was a genuine case of abduction, YOUR views changed I’ll bet, mine too. If someone comes on here and criticises the people who care enough to write their views, it’s bad manners and vindictive to label them and their views as nonsense, there was no need to say that. Anyway, who made you judge and jury?
    By the way, I have 2 beautiful grandaughters, I have 3 dogs, am a staff nurse in children’s cancer ward and the beach is miles away, I lead a fulfilling, active life and I hope against hope that Madeleine will be found safe and well, but, at the same time, I know she won’t. Just remember that everyone who comes here, doesn’t need criticism of their views, length of service doesn’t entitle anyone to be rude, everyone wants Madeleine back.

  25. 25
    Liz Y Says:

    Aquarius, Have been looking at other forums, you certainly don’t mince your words to others. I didn’t realise you were Martin’s sister,that explains a lot. Freedom of speech, hmmm… isn’t that what Goncalo has been campaining for? What makes you the judge and juror? Had your brother not been critical of other people on here, I wouldn’t have replied. I find it strange that you criticise me for what you yourself have done in your reply to me. My reply wasn’t anywhere near as vitriolic as your little outburst. It’s a great shame you seemingly can’t allow your brother to speak for himself.
    I am neither bitter nor unfulfilled, I have 3 dogs, I have a tall glass but prefer to fill it with vodka & tonic, and having one’s head in sand is much better than the alternative. If you want to find sad and bitter, re-read you reply. Now, I would like go back to discussing Madeleine, if your brother knows so much, he’s certainly keeping it to himself all this time.

  26. 26
    Helen Says:

    Aquarius.. Hi , thank you for the reply..sorry i’ve been away for a while. I’m sorry i don’t know which site you indicate, i am following most of them.

  27. 27
    Helen Says:

    I realize everyone have their opinions and feelings in this matter, i am however not getting in to non-constructive arguments with other people about anything related to this matter. I find it extremely sad that people argue, as it will not help in finding out what happened to Madeleine. I understand and respect that feelings might heat up, as it is totally human that that happens, when that happens to myself i just stay out of the discussion for a while in order to calm down.
    I know at the end of the day that most of us here are good people with a genuine concern for finding out Madeleines fate, whatever angle or country we come from. Wishing you all all the best.

  28. 28
    Helen Says:

    Looks like there are 2 Helen’s posting on here, for future i will post as Helen1 to avoid confusion, as i didnt write the above! But have posted as Helen on other threads.

  29. 29
    Taurus Says:

    It is all in a name. What name is on my mind is the Bull and so I am adding me as I went to dine at the Bull Inn.

    Point 1. Martin has emailed all those on this who can inspect what he says.
    Point 2. Martin can be challenged. Leicester Police have his emails as he knows. They have had them for one year now as I sent them. Team McCann have them. Martin Grime has them.

    Martin insists she is where he says and the problem is he is not saying that she is alive.
    If he were he would be on the front page of every newspaper and get funds from old age pensioners who donate to the PR campaign of where not to find Madeleine.

    He instead says of a place and Portimao Police and Amaral are aware of what he says, and yes his emails and FB have been hacked. All this is true if Admin published it he will reply to affirm this. I have seen the emails from Amaral. But like all emails I do not send them to those with a coflict of interest. It is unethical to give information that could be used subversively to gain from and not act on. You have not heard the last of Martin by a long chalk.

  30. 30
    Beverly Says:

    It seems the right day to post something here – 3 May 2011. I too thought this was an abduction, but then I started reading, including Amaral’s book. This week the Daily Express, UK, wrote a heart-rending article thoroughly endorsing the abduction theory; the Daily Mail this week featured KM’s new book, which is expected ‘to sell millions of copies worldwide’. The media seem to have curled up with their collective legs in the air – and of course, they can’t afford to lose money these days; there does not seem to be ONE single journalist or broadcaster willing to look at the facts – one or two have even made it plain that any view other than abduction is “sick”. Patently, they have not read the material that we have read on this site. Why not? So – all of that is a preamble, four years on, to ask if anyone knows what is happening? Why are these people being so protected? Why has the evidence not been reviewed? What is the role of the UK police? When are we going to see some true justice for this child?

  31. 31
    Liz Y Says:

    Beverly, It seems perfectly obvious that the press have been silenced, (more people in high places), websites have already disappeared. This whole thing isn’t the result of hysterical outporings of grieving parents, trying anything, to find Madeleine and get her home. I think there is something really insidious and highly illicit happening here. Two men who are overheard making offensive, disgusting comments about their own children, and, neither man has bothered to refute these allegations, whilst being compo-happy about anything and everything else, pertaining to this case.
    The FBI recently (within 6-12 months ago) sent correspondence containing the names of paedophiles loose in this Country, there are thousands more off the radar, (that the FBI can do this and not our own police and security services is disturbing). The said lists carried the names of many, many Doctors, Lawyers, Priests, Judges, Teachers, Clerical workers, Manual workers, Bus drivers, Politicians (not that politicians are normal), and any amount of other normal people going about their daily lives, usually near a school or some such place where children are in large numbers.
    I have sometimes been aghast at the soft sentence being given to child molesters, predators and their kind. Maybe, MAYBE, the Judge empathises with this scum, because he’s doing it himself, the teacher maybe ogling in the kids changing rooms, priests (well, it’s part of the job in some parishes). Doctors (maybe paediatricians), in contact with sick kids. For the most part, there’s a majority of wonderful caring professionals and, I take my hat off to them. But the others are as plausible as the best of them. Maybe paedophile politicians, and other high-ranking people are calling in favours, leaning on others, bribery and corruption which are just part of a normal day.

  32. 32
    Beverly Says:

    Liz, well said and for including mention of the two men in the overheard conversation(s). I have to wonder how the case would have proceeded – and its treatment in the press – if an unmarried couple on benefits, say, had told the same story.

  33. 33
    Liz Y Says:

    I been thinking, the whole charade about Karen Matthews and daughter Shannon was caused by the treatment the McCanns had, and continue to have. Can you really blame them? They saw what happened and thought they could have a piece of the action. Imagine, you’re not overly bright, lots of kids, not much money, not much of a life really (Not that I’m trying to excuse them), switch on the TV or open The Sun. What they see is a couple whose daughter is ‘abducted’ being feted as celebrities, rubbing shoulders with the rich and famous, people throwing money at them, not any word of parental responsibility whatsoever and no legal repercussions. They see a light at the end of their tunnel, a £50 grand reward, WOW!! A way out!! Not for Karen Matthews who got 7 or 8 years (Shannon is still alive and thriving in a new home which is good news). Beverly and a lot of other people here say ‘I wonder what would happen if it were someone on benefits on a council estate or such like?’ WELL NOW YOU KNOW!!

  34. 34
    Laura Says:

    If I were the McCanns I would have insisted on the one option that would go a long way to proving themselves innocent – lie detector tests. I would also administer the tests to the Tapas 7.

    If they pass, the world can focus on Madeleine an an abductee. If they fail……

    Either way, if I KNEW my daughter had been abducted, I would have demanded a lie detector test once it became clear that I were under suspicion.

    There is only 1 truth and therefore no need for stories to change or become more embellished as time goes on.

    The testimony of Jane Tanner has changed so many times it no longer holds any value or crdibility. The lack of emotion and the conflicting statements given by the McCanns themselves enabled the suspicions to grow.

    Their lack of desire or will to take lie detector tests tells me everything I need to know about them. Innocent people do not fear the truth.

  35. 35
    Laura Says:

    One further point people. The dogs in question have never been wrong therefore the probability that they are wrong in this case is negligible.

    Unlike people, the McCanns cannot take the dogs to court to silence them.

    If I had to choose between believing the dogs or believing the McCanns and the Tapas 7, it would be the dogs every time.

  36. 36
    Kate McCann releasing a book - General Chatter Forum (Page 112) Says:

    […] http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/08…#comment-20358 […]

  37. 37
    Beverly Says:

    Well said again Liz. Yes! Interesting too that those with enquiring minds have been hammered in the press this week as ‘internet ghouls’. Analysis is not a poison; it is a quality to respect and cherish when it is rightly used, surely. Doesn’t a child’s disappearance merit every kind of decent analysis? When was that poison!! I wrote to the S. Express following their articles this week, where they omitted vast swathes of research material which has been debated long and hard on the net (by ‘the ghouls’, no doubt ..). I listed twenty questions and asked if they had researched each of these elements when preparing the articles. I copied Nick Ferrari, a journalist with the S. Express and key presenter on LBC Radio (London). Needless to say, I received no acknowledgement from either. What was interesting tho was that, on Nick Ferrari’s early-morning programme on Monday, the following day, he featured the Madeleine case, and chose – from any element he might have presented – to follow up on the recent suspect and to interview someone I think in the police who knew vaguely something about it. Or not much. This ‘suspect’ has not even been interviewed, as I understand it, for this case, and it was/is not proven whether he was even in the resort at the time. So much for analysis!

  38. 38
    Liz Y Says:

    Yes Bev, and so much for truth and justice. Having admitted that their form of ‘investigating’ is not working, and joe public will be footing the bill for Scotland Yard, will they now give up their ‘search’, close the fund, and donate any remaining monies to help search for real missing children? ….WHAT, hand over OUR money to someone else? NEVER!!
    Search for Pat Brown a criminal profiler, then onto the Madeleine Case, it isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that Madeleine’s remains are in this Country. One thing is certain, they’ve hidden her well to have this confidence and audacity. It’s certainly worth looking at.

  39. 39
    Beverly Says:

    Thankyou Liz, I will do that. My hope is that the Yard will do an honest review, starting with a reconstruction. I found Goncalo Amaral’s comments most interesting on the Joana Morais blog yesterday. All best wishes.

  40. 40
    Dawn Erison Says:

    Hi, I have just been reading about peoples views of what happened to Madeleine. I have huge concerns myself…it just does not add up. One of the puzzling things (to me) is, if she died that night (or earlier in the evening) how could they have kept her body to then (someone) move it in the hire car some weeks later on? Where could she have been kept? Someone must know something? It would have decomposed to some degree somewhere! What would the climate have been there then? Probably warm as they had gone for a holiday to a beach and seaside. Sorry if I seem quite naive on this stuff…but this puzzles me most….as there is NO DOUBT in my mind that there are some SECRETS here. Something is just not right with this group, ALL OF THIS GROUP….and they are all guilty of keeping secrets to some degree.

    Site Admin: Our opinion is that Madeleine’s body was stored in a freezer. This part of the suspected hoax was probably the easiest part of all. In this scenario there is little doubt that the body was frozen prior to being moved to another place in the hire car. Decomposition would not be very rapid as bodies are stored in morgues like this all the time and the climate in May 2007 was not as warm as people think. Check the historic weather data or even read Kate’s own description of the cold weather in her latest work of “fiction” “madeleine“.

  41. 41
    Dawn Says:

    Hi Site Admin, I do get that she could have been stored in something like a freezer but I can’t get how ‘someone’ could have stored her in a freezer….with all the interest in her….surely someone would have twigged that she could be there…wherever ‘there’ was. (Like if someone wanted to use my freezer whilst they were on holiday and a child went missing I would want the police to check my freezer out for peace of mind – and kids get into fridges and freezers all the time which is why parents have to be so vigilant.)

    It is all too odd…unless it was almost preplanned by ‘one of the Tapas 9’ during their holiday…but with no-one outside their group putting two and two together is the strangest of all…. It does seem logical what you said though.

    Also how could ‘whomever’ be sure of getting the same hire car…or was that their bit of bad luck? Because once she was scented in the hire car by dogs weeks after her disappearance there would be a connection. If the body-mover had had ‘another’ car it may not have come up. And no-one recognised them when they hired a car to move her. All the Tapas 9 photos were published were they not? Sorry….so many unanswered questions and Madeleine deserves the perpertrators to be brought to justice. And her little twin brother and sister protected. That is the least we (all of us enraged public) can do for her.

    Thanks

    I really hope they get to the bottom of this…the whole group of 9 seem pretty odd….cold and uncaring…like they are ALL concealing too much

    Site Admin:You make some good points but remember that there were many diversions and smoke and mirrors. Read Faked Abduction and in particular the chapter dealing with the weekend of June 9-10, 2007. Like a magician, the audience is looking one way while the “trick” is being played out somewhere else. The McCanns had at least one friend in Praia da Luz and there is nothing to say they didn’t rent another apartment through a proxy – an apartment with a freezer. And don’t forget that the McCanns had the weight of the British government behind them.

  42. 42
    sophie Says:

    From the very beginning of Maddie’s disappearance, Kate McCann has always insisted that she believed Maddie is being looked after by a family and she never thought that Maddie was in any danger. However she has since changed her tune with the publishing of her book. In it she claims that she is haunted by the thought that maddie’s abductor/s could be a paedophile. Yet none of her earlier statements and interviews suggests she ever entertained those thoughts.
    Like many you, i am leaning towards the possibility that she did indeed died in that apartment and the outburst by kate “they’ve taken her” suggest the movement of the body to another location.
    If it was an abduction, then would it not have been easier to take the younger kids as it would have been easier to move them out of the apartment especially if they were sedated?
    The body language of the McCanns seems to indicate that they know a lot lot more than they are letting on and their version of events as told in their book will work against them.Justice for Madeleine.

  43. 43
    I Don't Believe It Says:

    Sophie,

    I am no more convinced by the McCann narrative than you. However, we do have to be a bit careful with the facts. The McCann machine is adept at throwing out all sorts of confusing suggestions and some things have become legend in the anti-McCann camp.

    I would query where you get the idea that KMC claimed Maddie is definitely being looked after by a family. Do you have a source for that? I think they have encouraged that idea at times, and have often said there is no evidence that she came to any harm, itself an odd way of talking about your infatn daughter have been abducted from her family. But if you challenged KMC on this, she would probably be able to point to previous statements that contradict what you say.

    I would also like to know the source for “they’ve taken her”. I am not sure I have ever seen a credible source for that and even if she did say it, it doesn’t mean the phrase is indicative of a conspiracy. People in the UK might well say “they’ve taken the TV” if they were robbed of their TV by burglars. Abduction is an unusual situation to say the least and “they’ve taken her” is not necessarily so unusual a phrase as to suggest anything other than abduction.

    I couldn’t agree more about the body language. They’ve become more adept at controlling the tell tale signs, but even now the body language is instructive.

  44. 44
    sophie Says:

    May 14th : “”until there is concrete evidence to the contrary, we believe Madeleine is safe and is being looked after ”

    Thursday, October 25, 2007
    In the recent interview with the parents of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann states she believes Madeleine is alive, essentially unharmed, and being cared for in someone’s home.”
    There were at least two more interviews with kate where she mentions that she believed that maddie is alive and is being looked after by a family.

    “They’ve taken her, they’ve taken her, Maddie is gone maddie is gone, they’ve taken our little girl.””,: According to the staff ( 2 nannnies, a waiter and a receptionist) at the resort, kate mccann shouted these words from the balcony and as she ran back to the restaurant. These staff members when interviewed separately all claimed that these were the words uttered by kate. Days later, the Mccanns issued a statement claiming that the words uttered by kate was : Maddie’s gone maddies’ gone.

    In a burglary it is normal to say “they’ve taken the tv or in my case they’ve taken the car” because someone would have had to enter the premises to remove the particular item. The phrase “they’ve taken…” is applicable. It is NOT applicable in the case of a missing person be it a child or adult, unless you know for sure that there are others involved. A normal reaction would be to say Maddie is missing or I cannot find maddie she is not in her bed or the apartment”. I have always found Kate’s choice of words be it “they’ve taken her or Maddie is gone” to be strange.

    Additionally, kate has always refused to have the kids tested to know if they were drugged. In her book, she now claims that the kids were sound asleep despite the commotion in the room that night and she suspected that drugs may have been administered to the kids. Yet she refused to have the tests carried out. Don’t you find all this extremely worrying and strange that these two are not being charged with neglect?

    (Please forgive my english as it is not my first language…it’s getting better i hope)

    Kate enters the apartment to check on the kids. Maddie is not in her bed. She looks around the apartment and maddie is not there,. She then frantically begins to scream Maddie is gone maddie is gone they’ve taken out little girl”.

  45. 45
    sophie Says:

    The choice of words Kate used on the night ” Maddie’s gone” from my point of view seems final somehow. She’s gone, she’s no longer with us are phrases used to indicate the death of someone.

  46. 46
    I Don't Believe It Says:

    Hi Sophie,

    Well thanks for the reminder of the quote. It sounds familiar, but you haven’t given a citation for it. Are you sure it wasn’t something Clarence said about what she was thinking?

    In fairness I had forgotten that. But of course it does not say she thinks she is being cared for by a family which is what you say she said. Clarence would easily spin that statement as the forlorn hope of a couple yet to come fully to terms with the tragic events.

    They equally (in the Panorama programme – around the same time I think) promoted the idea of a sinister man – a “predator” was the word they used – watching the apartment from across the way. I think they have been sending out a variety of messages at different times. They are v. clever at doing that and the strategy works very well. In the same way the “abductor” has had long hair and short hair, been swarthy and blonde, been alone and had an accomplice…

    I don’t really understand why people place so much evidence on “they’ve taken her”. You admit English is not your first language and in idiomatic English “they” does NOT signal a specific plural number of people. People in the UK use the word in a much more abstract sense. “They ought to do something about that”. “If they can put a man on the moon…”

    There are only four possibilities.

    – KMC has no knowledge of how her daughter disappeared from the apartment and neither do any of the Tapas 7.

    – KMC has no knowledge of how her daughter disappeared from the apartment but one or more of the Tapas 7 do.

    – KMC had no exact knowledge of how her daughter disappeared from the apartment but had a strong suspicion about what had happened.

    – KMC does have knowledge of how her daughter disappeared from the apartment.

    To my mind, as an English speaker and one who works very closely with English sentence construction every day, I am confident in saying “they’ve taken her”/”Maddie’s gone” are compatible with all four.

  47. 47
    sophie Says:

    I’ve got to leave for work in a few minutes but i promise you i will find the clippings of kate’s interview with a british journalist in which she repeatedly said that Madeleine is being looked after by a family. At the time i thought this was quite strange.

    As a parent, if i came home and found one of my kids missing my first reaction would be to say “… is missing or … is not here” to say “they’ve taken her” does not sound right to me. But that’s just my opinion

    “There’s absolutely no suggestion that Madeleine or the (twins) were drugged and it’s outrageous,” Mr McCann said “These questions the public knows are nonsense and we shouldn’t be giving them the time of day,” he added. ( interview in 2007 with kate and gerry) Today Mrs Mccann is now singing a different tune.

    Have a pleasant day everyone.

  48. 48
    Taurus Says:

    Many people change their stories every time it does not fit to suit an issue, or agenda.
    The issue is why shout ‘they have taken her’ when Jane has seen only one person with a child and not two? But of course she did know a fellow guest taking coffee had left with his daughter at that time. She had to, she was there.

    Kate says of the night before of an ‘abductor’. One who now is said to have ‘drugged’ the twins and Madeleine.

    One who caused the ‘stain’ as pale brown on the Marks and Spencer top of a pyjama.The illustration of this is that the man got in and alarmed Madeleine and Sean, but not Amelie?

    That the act of this sinister man was why they were afraid before, and she had not questioned it further. Except this.

    The tea stain is a pale colour, so what happened then to make that colour stain?
    To me it is saying an act of a sexual nature or why put it into that context?

    Paedophile and not thief is suggested?

    It is saying tea was given by someone when they were out as a possible that the man brewed up and gave them sweet, or not sweet tea when in bed to sedate them, yes? This to waken them to drink it or whilst they were awake?

    Or is it an suspicion that they were not awake and some action took place that made the stain on an unworn top on a bed nearby ready to be worn. Was she wearing the same top twice after it was washed, or was it ready to be worn the next day? I am confused at the reference to this stain and to what is implied by it?

  49. 49
    I Don't Believe It Says:

    Sophie –

    I am just trying to look at this in the way that a defence barrister or a PR spinner would…playing “devil’s advocate” if you like.

    I guess I would say that “they’ve taken her” is not the most natural thing to say…but on the other hand it’s not outside the range of possibilities. Of course it is something someone might say if they were deliberately planting the idea of abduction.

    I think the “drugged” denial relates to the suggestion that they were sedating the children (which would of course explain why they were so confident the children would not wake up, had that been the case). It is compatible with the abductor drugging the children. But what is not compatible, is the McCanns’ reluctance to have MMc’s siblings tested in hospital.

    Taurus –

    The “stain” story is one of those strange McCann stories that seem to be invested with great significance by them, but we cannot quite fathom why. It’s similar to that story about her “carefully” removing the braid tie (?I think it was a braid thing). Of course that may relate to the status of the “last photo”.

  50. 50
    Taurus Says:

    As you learn new terms you use them and forget the slang or terms prior.
    To me reading the book I got a third through and could not go on.
    Her mind has not only thought, or delivered images, they are still there all these years later.

    I could not in my nightmares think of the terms she uses or the experiences she puts in words that Madeleine a days from four year old had perhaps suffered as a visual to the world in a book children, paedophiles and decent educated and none educated would read.

    My thoughts cannot ever go to dark places or ‘they’ as the agents of mental illness would see this as psychotic and that would mean certain procedures to that individual. It is only words in a book, but they are truly disturbing to read. The book will never be read and is now in a brown cover and stored far away. It will not stop the words she wrote giving me nightmares on certain pages. As A locum she would know that would affect decent minded persons to read such horrors, and I will not repeat what that strand was.

    I am here because I care. Not for any reward, but for simple human suffering.

    If anyone understands any of this please enlighten me.

    ‘They have taken her’ was heard and Jane did not enter into discussion to object when ‘they’ as Rachel I think, and Kate both came to the stairwell of David Payne as 5D to 5H to search for her.

    Why did Jane not say ‘who are they, Kate’. Why did anyone not say this?

    As to the tea stain, again ‘she likes tea’. Well how would Mr Kidnapper know she and Sean liked sweet milky tea, or not? Where would he get the brew from if it was to lace sedatives to the child and not kill her or he in doing so?

    How would he get such sedatives?

    How would he know much to lace tea with the night before, IF that is the suggestion of the stain on the Eeyore pink top of the missing pyjamas on the fateful night.

    Find that out and you have a more sinister reason for an abduction as she is now fearing put in print.

    It is simply where the mind does not go.

    It hopes, it thinks rational and even is an abuse survivor does not ever descend into an abyss.

    Such images from the words come at you like an ice road truck out of control.

    Dare I think phenobarbitone, or other drugs that were used due to the tiredness and the apathy?

    No I may have it in my mind and write it here as a fear, but reject it.

    Like I reject all of it, except a simple explanation.

    She walked out the open patio door when Gerry went and flushed the chain, or someone flushed the chain.

    She had a fall and concussion due to her looking out the window and fell. Her concussion then led her to be taken by someone, or she went and is still where she could not summon help.

    Is that beyond the realms of possibility?

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

Leave a Reply

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.

*

Log in | Designed by Gabfire themes