The 48 questions that remained unanswered

Source: Correio da Manhã, 03.08.2008, paper edition. Translation by Astro

Investigation – What the PJ inspectors wanted to know

When she became an arguida, Kate stopped talking to the inspectors

September 7, 2007. Kate McCann entered the Polícia Judiciária in Portimão in the morning and the questioning extended into the evening. She was heard as a witness, but the tension in the air was evident. For the first time, people were concentrated at the PJ building’s door and murmured words of mistrust regarding the couple.

On that day, CM had reported that the dogs had detected cadaver odour on Maddie’s mother’s clothes. A piece of evidence that the authorities intended to use as a trump, during a questioning that only changed course on the next day, after the PJ failed to see their doubts clarified.

Kate began by replying all the questions, but when she was made an arguida, she stopped talking. She went silent, in the company of her lawyer, and accepted all the insinuations in a provocative manner. Less than 48 hours later, Kate and Gerry travel to England with the twins, leaving the investigation into the disappearance of their daughter, who meanwhile had become four, behind.

They later guaranteed that they would return if necessary – which they never did, although they were never formally requested to return – and they are no longer arguidos for the suspected involvement in concealing the child’s body. Today, CM reveals the 48 questions that Kate did not want to answer during the interrogation and which reflect the investigators’ doubts. More than a year after Maddie disappeared, many of these questions remain unanswered.

Jeers for the McCann couple

The day that Kate and Gerry went to the PJ’s offices in Portimão marked a turnaround in the relationship between the local people and the couple: the curious bystanders that spent the day on the street jeered at Maddie’s mother and father, mainly criticizing the “absence of visible suffering” from Kate. The foreign press also attended in great numbers.

The Judiciária’s 48 questions that Kate did not answer

  1. On the 3rd of May 2007, at around 10 p.m., when you entered the apartment, what did you see, what did you do, where did you search, what did you handle?
  2. Did you search in the couple’s bedroom’s closet? (said she would not reply)
  3. (Two photographs of her bedroom’s closet are exhibited) Can you describe its contents?
  4. Why are the curtains in front of the side window, behind the sofa (photograph is exhibited) ruffled? Did someone pass behind that sofa?
  5. How long did the search that you made in the apartment after detecting the disappearance of your daughter Madeleine take?
  6. Why did you say straight away that Madeleine had been abducted?
  7. Presuming that Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins alone at home while you went to the Tapas to raise the alarm? Even because the supposed abductor could still be inside the apartment.
  8. Why didn’t you ask the twins at that moment what had happened to their sister, or why didn’t you ask them at a later point in time?
  9. When you raised the alarm at the Tapas, what exactly did you say and what were the words?
  10. What happened after you raised the alarm at the Tapas?
  11. Why did you do to warn your friends instead of calling out from the balcony?
  12. Who contacted the authorities?
  13. Who participated in the searches?
  14. Did anyone outside of the group learn about Maddie’s disappearance during the following minutes?
  15. Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?
  16. What does the expression “we let her down” mean?
  17. Did Jane mention to you that she had see a man with a child that night?
  18. How were the authorities contacted and which police force was called?
  19. During the searches, and already with the police present, in what locations was Maddie searched for, how and in what manner?
  20. Why didn’t the twins wake up during that search, or when they went to the upper floor?
  21. Who did you call after the facts?
  22. Did you call SKY News?
  23. Did you know about the danger of calling the media, because that could influence the abductor?
  24. Did you request the presence of a priest?
  25. How was Madeleine’s face publicized, with a photograph, or other media?
  26. Is it true that during the search you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?
  27. How did you behave that evening?
  28. Did you manage to sleep?
  29. Before the trip to Portugal, did you comment on a bad feeling or a bad premonition?
  30. What was Madeleine’s behaviour?
  31. Did Maddie suffer of any disease or did she take any kind of medication?
  32. What was the relationship like between Madeleine and her siblings?
  33. What was the relationship like between Madeleine and her siblings, her friends and her colleagues at school?
  34. Concerning your professional life, in how many and in which hospitals have you worked?
  35. What is your medical specialty?
  36. Did you work by shifts, in emergency rooms or in other departments?
  37. Did you work on a daily basis?
  38. Did you stop working at a certain point in time? Why?
  39. Do your twin children have difficulty in falling asleep, are they unruly and does that upset you?
  40. Is it true that at certain times you were desperate over your children’s attitude and that left you were upset?
  41. Is it true that in England you considered the possibility of handing over Madeleine’s guardianship to a relative?
  42. In England, did you give your children medication? What type of medication?
  43. Within the process, you were shown films of cynotechnical inspection of forensic character, where the dogs can be seen marking indications of human cadaver odour and equally human blood traces, and only of human origin, as well as all the comments that were made by the responsible expert. After the visualization, and after cadaver odour was signaled in your bedroom next to the wardrobe and behind the sofa that was pushed against the living room window, you said that you could not explain anything apart from what you had already said?
  44. You said that you could not explain anything apart from what you had already said, concerning the marking of human blood behind the sofa by the detection dog
  45. You said that you could not explain anything apart from what you had already said, concerning the marking of cadaver odour in the boot of the vehicle that you rented a month after the disappearance?
  46. You said that you could not explain anything apart from what you had already said, concerning the marking of human blood in the boot of the vehicle?
  47. You said that you could not explain anything apart from what you had already said, upon being confronted with the result of the collection of Maddie’s DNA, which was analysed by a British lab, behind the sofa and inside the vehicle’s boot?
  48. Did you have any responsibility or intervention in the disappearance of your daughter?

The question that she answered

Are you aware of the fact that by not answering these questions you may compromise the investigation, which is trying to find out what happened to your daughter? She said “yes, if the investigation thinks so.”

Process becomes public tomorrow

From tomorrow onwards, the entire investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine will be made available to the arguidos, to the witnesses, to the lawyers and also to the journalists, because it is a case of manifest public interest.

The process, which was archived on the 21st of July, will also be available to the general public, a situation that will allow for an authentic scrutiny of the work that was developed by the Polícia Judiciária. This decision, which came as a surprise due to the fact that the case involves a child, was only announced at this point in time, after the Portuguese lawyers for the McCann family, Carlos Pinto de Abreu and Rogério Alves, requested the Portimão Court for priority in the access to the process.

Last Wednesday, the Court had requested the interested parties that had already asked for the consultation of the process to leave a CD at the secretary’s office, given the fact that the process will be supplied in a digital format.

The archiving of the investigation into the little girl’s disappearance, which happened on the 3rd of May 2007, in the Algarve, precipitated the lifting of the judicial secrecy, which had been extended precisely until the month of August.

425 Responses to “The 48 questions that remained unanswered”

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All

  1. 151
    G1 Says:

    Chris, as your mother, the former nurse, told you she thinks anything in particular about these modern doctors and their doctor friends, and how it seems, and possibilities, which you would share?

    The more I think about the potential ramifications of the possible scenario of Madeleine McCann just dying by accident on holiday, the more I realise there really aren’t any or they’re scarce. Acdident scenario-wise – unless little Madeleine just drowned the night before the 3rd on the seafront as her mother and father kissed and watched her jump into crashing waves to be pulled away forever, there’s really very little indeed they could have been afraid of.

    And, no – there’s no unless. People have built up this false scenario of shame and guilt after some imagined unpreventable, honest accidents. I’m nearly doing it as well, now, after trying to hammer out the absurdness of accident theories. If the girl runs into the sea and drowns, for example, then the girl runs into the sea and drowns. Inquest, accidental death, couldn’t have been prevented as the couple were watching and lost attention for seconds as she ran around, McCann’s go home, keep kids, happy, stay in jobs, care for lots of people, the end.

    Each potential accident scenario would come out exactly the same way. I think it’s such an absurd suggestion, it’s foolish to waste time with it any more.

    Yet, is it an accident itself that the accidental death suggestion hovers there in the air? Perhpas that doesn’t mean anything solid.

  2. 152
    Chris Says:

    Hi Gi

    My mother would have nothing but praise for the NHS and the staff. She would be amazed at the salaries and concerned about the dress code and discipline.

    My father was a very interesting character. Doc Martin must have been based on him. He would not stand for any pussying footing as he called it. He used few words but straight to the point. Worked a seven day week when he was ‘on call’ then never less than five.

    I remember chatting to him about his experiences which he never talked about. He recalled three in particular. One was taking a fish hook out of the eye of Sir Peter Scott , he specialised in EE&T (eyes, ears & throat). Interesting Sir Peter Scott’s autobiography is called ‘The eye of the wind’. Turning down becoming a Brigadier it meant inspecting toilets in India, he hated India where he was stationed in WW2 as a Major. Having fun in Gibralter (WW2) and using the miles of tunnels to get into Spain with some of his mates. They were shot at on their return by the guards.

    So what would they think of the McCanns? Father refused to join the masons. As for the McCanns he wouldn’t give them the time of day they left their children alone. Mother would find some nice things to say………like I’m sure it was an accident

    Madeleine was last seen around 5pm. The more I think about it something happened not long after 5.00pm,. To shout out the words ‘she has been abducted’ (out of the blue) must have been rehearsed.

  3. 153
    G1 Says:

    Interesting stuff, there. It’s funny you post something like that, from your own life, because it’s really kind of relevant now, and when looking at the Madeleine McCann affair, to see how much the old world has gone.

    Nowadays, instead of standing up staunchly for certain things and principles in life, many people seem to just move against what is there, and against what is sensible behaviour in order to keep things working. It’s not just the youth generation anymore, as you could count on for a while int he old days. Many people of all ages seem to have “gone awol” from sense in the last decade or decade and a half or so.

    I don’t want to get into particulars right now, but the Madeleine McCann affair can kind of symbolise that for me. I’ll try to write something about what I think in the next days or a week at least.

    There’s stoicism in your mother, Chris. Maybe there’s sanity in resting it, not quite in concluding, “it must have been an accident” – as I think I’ve wiped out that possibility. But in concluding, “well something sick happened, somehow, it’s unfortunate” and leave it. That was how I felt initially, and for a few years – I didn’t get or want to get involved in thinking of or researching this affair. It was unlike me to do that and I had other reasons not to. I just thought it was some strange, unresolvable anomaly, but not my business. Why would it be? But slowly, curiousity of an unusual type, and some very strange, unidentifiable, quite queer feelings made me get interested, and I can’t shake it off.

    I suppose at times one can put that down to the strange reaction, which even comes months later but doesn’t go away, at watching the McCanns’s appearances with an open mind and not much deep interest in itself, at the time. It’s haunting and not right. I don’t know. I don’t know what could be happening, now.

  4. 154
    Chris Says:

    What sticks in my mind were the first few interviews. I’m sure Kate was on her own. No sign of any emotion. I have never seen that before. No tears just a boring voice. He has a boring voice too – they suit each other.

    It’s those early interviews……………There has never been a proper interview with serious questions asked.

    Abduction? It does not add up.

  5. 155
    G1 Says:

    What do you mean, on her own, about K McCann, Chris? That Gerry wasn’t there?

  6. 156
    norman Says:

    i have said right from the start kate and gerry mc cann are guilty… but i dont understand why david cameron has not had the mc canns arrested …. david cameron and his puppet goverment should get off there back sides and sort the madeleine mc cann case out once and for all in stead of taxing the british tax payer to the hilt and stop spending the tax payers money on the mc cann case… something he could have sorted out 3 years ago… if kate and gerry mc cann were taken to seperate police stations and questioned i think the truth will come out i think kate is the weakest link in the case as she never says anything when she,s with gerry as if he has some power over heri think the mc canns should be forced to do the lie detector test and made to answer the 48 unanswered questions

  7. 157
    G1 Says:

    Why, is the key, Norman. And my thoughts are this one could be (partially) without a why, as much as with a why, the without is the why.

    That, itself, is why understanding it is so extremely elusive. It seems impossible to understand normally.

    In the same way that gang warfare is essentially without a positive why, but is about primitive issues and destructionism.

  8. 158
    G1 Says:

    Replying to Chris in comment 154:

    “He has a boring voice too …”

    Not sure it seems boring to me. Personally, I’d call it frightening. He’s content, in the most part it seems, but not fully, to appear someone who isn’t stupid. I find him frightening. Then there are these parts where suddenly sympathy falls out of me (which I don’t choose) seemingly because of how he’s saying something. I think it’s my great confusion rather than sympathy but it seems like sympathy. I have been used a bit to some Scottish accents and turns of talking, I was on the east coast for a few years, and there were a number of westerners there.

  9. 159
    Liz Y Says:

    They are both speak in monotones, no highs or lows, just flat, which is strange when you consider that Glasweigian and Liverpudlian are dialects where there are more ups and downs in their accents (I know there is a word for this but it escapes me). The same for Brummies and Geordies. Also, to denote family in Liverpool she/he is called ‘our’ so it would be our Madeleine, our Sean or our Amelie, our this for sisters, cousins, brothers, nieces and nephews etc. I have only heard Kate say ‘Our Madeleine’ once, she’s from a working class background, but that wouldn’t make much of a difference anyway, it’s just Our whoever, it gives a sense of belonging, if you like. Maybe they’re doing this so that any natural tones don’t give much away, I don’t know. All I know is that Madeleine’s dead and has been from the beginning, she never left that flat alive. The total lack of forensics to support the abduction theory, are one thing, but two dogs marking the same places separately, are what I try to keep foremost in my mind, as I tend to wander a little, trying to make sense of the insensible. The whole thing is totally bizarre. There’s a supposed abdtction of a British minor, whose parents don’t even bother to search for, all hell breaks loose from the moment it (whatever it is) happened. There’s weird parents and their weird friends, Govenment interference, Prime Ministers, Home Secretaries, spin doctors, Consular support, official spokespersons, major media coverage from almost the moment IT supposedly happened. Seven friends who have a pact of silence, according to Payne, WHY? For what? The investigating officer gets the heave-ho! Conflicting statements that haven’t been explored, massive discrepencies and downright lies. The mcCanns calling all the shots then as now.
    Maybe it is about something they know about the death of Diana, it sounds good, but I continue to come back to the paedophile angle. With the Gaspars revealing the disgusting utterances of Payne and McCann, with no screams of slander and compensation to raise the coffers, then paedophilia it has to be. They (McCann and Payne) would mix in circles where their fellow lowlife, filthy scum inhabit. Making contact face to face or online, they’d know names, secrets, contacts. No bloody wonder the LP told the PJ that the McCanns didn’t have any credit cards including the virtual card that he lost in London. As I have said, I have read somewhere that McCann was put on the sex offenders register in 2002, how true that is I don’t know, but still no screams of libel from the compo-savvy McCanns. With all the news lately about horrendous child abuse allegations, whistling around the corridors of power, which, if investigated properly, with no further cover-ups, could possibly bring about the downfall of the government AND opposition. I’d say Bring it on!! but I am very much afraid that everything will change and remain the same.

  10. 160
    Chris Says:

    Hi Liz

    “They are both speak in monotones, no highs or lows, just flat, which is strange when you consider that Glasweigian and Liverpudlian are dialects where there are more ups and downs in their accents (I know there is a word for this but it escapes me).”

    Monotones to me is another word for boring. My father was born in Cumbernauld. He had a very strong Glasweigian accent. Gerry McCann’s voice to me is also effeminate. When I go to the Doctor (my father was one) I expect to talk man to man. I would not be a patient of his.

    An aside

    I hate the modified female Glasweigan accent. Hazel irvine the current worst culprit. Totally spoils any sports programme she is involved with for me. That means the golf, olympics & snooker.

    The early interviews

    I am sure that Kate was on her own. I know I found that very strange along with the lack of any emotion. No tears, no regret – just Madeleine has been abducted.

  11. 161
    G1 Says:

    I understand, Chris, what you mean by a boring voice, as explained by Liz Y and yourself, and I’m very glad you mentioned it & Liz expanded on that. I think it’s something important – very, very controlled monotones in accents which typically, if one is naturally expressing one’s true emotions, have very noticable high ups and downs. It may not point at anything certain in itself, but I can’t but feel it’s very relevant, seeming to me as if the choice to speak truly, naturally had been taken away from the couple, or they gave that away.

    While I can’t remember thinking Gerry’s voice itself sounds effeminate (maybe it is & I didn’t notice), I agree there is a lot about him which seems effeminate. The way he seems to have chosen to be absolutely, happy to use his appearaances seemingly to grovel, defining himself as only an unfortunate animal who had no choice in misfortune. As with the accents, as you both have said, and other elements, it can nearly always seem too controlled, consistently sustained (never let go, never allowing a natural drop and just suddenly to be fresh), with strange, reasonless intent. I cannot help getting this unsought impression – pre-planned and with incredible, unnatural determination that always gives a sense of being totaally and unfathomably inappropriate.

  12. 162
    G1 Says:

    … And that is partly why I find Gerry’s speech frightening, I suppose. The next bit has these paradoxes which also won’t go away for me. Kate’s speech is less frightenning, it seems to mebecause she is better at it. So controlled, the fear of being hit with a candlestick by a Miss Scarlett is less, while there are worries Prof. Gerry Plum will just lose it, almmost I think the threat is latent, can seem meant to me, and I get the strange thoughts losing it is different altogether with him, and not included in typical Cluedo situations. Kate also seems to have some human sympathy & understanding in there, for those she feels could never understand sometthing aawful that waas genuinely in part beeyong them, unlike Gerry, which humanizes her slightly. This is the second paradox, that seems to anchor or steady the determination that she will never lose her emotionless control.

  13. 163
    Liz Y Says:

    I don’t recall Gerry’s voise being effeminate myself, he’s totally cold, cruel and calculated, and he thinks he’s been very clever. I think it was an interview with Jeremy Paxman, when he was asked whether they’d manipulated the press for their own ends, watch the look on his face, he practically grows horns on the spot, he’s soaking up the rays of his own imagined brilliance, he’s frightening. I wouldn’t like to be around him when he loses it. All the walking down lover’s lane holding hands, is fake. The only time I saw this pair showing their true colours, was when he and Kate were filmed sitting at a table, throwing all the public’s hard-earned cash donations, up in the air, and grinning like Cheshire cats. Conning bastards!.
    Gerry loves all the attention this tragedy has given him, he’s lapping it up, Kate seems worn out and in his shadow, not perhaps as badly as in the early days, but you can tell who wears the trousers in their household. I think that situation existed before Madeleine disappeared. He’s a control freak and a half, only allowing interviews with pre-arranged questions, he has to cover all the bases. When asked an question that he’s not prepared for, he can’t cope, storming off the set, or coming out with crap like ‘Ask the dogs Sandra’. He’s an upstart of the worst order and I think he has some serious mental health issues.
    I continue to come to this site, because I care about Madeleine, but I haven’t anything fresh to say, it’s all been said hundreds of times, but I can’t just quit, and walk away with good conscience.
    I am hoping that Mr. Amaral still has something up his sleeve, as he has hinted, no wonder they want him gagged permanently, and they accused him of making money out of Madeleine’s misfortune, they didn’t, of course,…….and I’m the queen of the May!

  14. 164
    G1 Says:

    It’s very interesting, Liz, you point out you find impressions of extreme egotitistical pride in Gerry McCann, in what he is doing in the media & external relations in the affair. And that he has amamazing confidence in what he sees as his unchallengable intelligence in handling everything. I hadn’t thought within the last year or two of such an attitude, I don’t know why I’d forgotten such thoughts – impressions. (I began thinking of the pair in another way, as having to see something through they’d started, just something they had told themselves, like brainwashed themselves daily and more often to cope with, however they did it. But certainly by pre-planning everything, agreeing very rare new angles or suggestions to put out there, and never deviating like they did at the start.)

    But you’re right in what I can see, that your impressions can clearly fit to me. “soaking up the rays of his own imagined brilliance.” The perception is very well put, and there is this, to me, undeniable element to be found of the persona who will dominate and win in the end, whatever comes, and who will thrive and be known to thrive off that. (It can be thought some or many may have to, in guess or estimate, put that down to righteousness.) What a persona! Even in a good many of his interviews with reasonably sympathetic interviewers he’s always ready to lurch, and / or to use the opportunity to place himself as someone who has a logical / physical requirement of huge amounts of natural sympathy. The latter practice is something that particularly sets aside Gerry & his public persona for me, and appears very strange. In the context, it’s what I find both part of an absurd effimminism in attitude and an untenable, very strange and signifying young boyishness. There’s no doubt this element of the persona has got him through many times without leaving his appearance verifiably, aabsolutely non-credible. And, as you say, Liz, he is prepared or is prepared to adapt and be more spontaneous at times, over certaain arguments he keeps, and seems to relish the chaallenge of bringing his public image out through this at the other side.

  15. 165
    G1 Says:

    ” … has prepared or is prepared to … “, the last comment should read near the end.

    About Amaral, who has done a lot of good, hard police work, Liz, I’d hope he’d begin to reconsider his theory that there was an accident. If you’ve read a lot I’ve wrtten, you’ll see one of the things I’m convinced of is that there was no accident. Even a benevolent, easy-natured soul who though can’t stand to see what seems to be truth obscured, such as Amaral, must sometimes find it hard to believe that 2 people create such a fuss, sue for huge damages, have books withdrawn from the world, merely after an accident. Instead of living quietly while policemen have their throeires as policemen do when there is no trial. Instead of trying to regain parts of a once quiet life away from a retained, ongoing media attention after 5 years.

  16. 166
    Chris Says:

    I thought it was time to rattle a few cages. So I have written to our local MP Andrew Tyrie the Tory boy for Chichester. I asked him for an update on the caase considering the amount of public money that is being spent on it and if the prime suspects had been properly grilled.

    I’ll let you know what becomes of it.

    I don’t think Gerry McCann can be flavour of the month after his attack on David Cameron regarding the Leveson Inquiry. Let’s hope he has shot himself in the foot.

    Still think he is waiting for his ….. to drop. That’s what his voice tone says to me.

  17. 167
    G1 Says:

    That’s a natural thing to do, Chris, and a good thing. I don’t know if anything of any substance would come of it. Others on this site and other McCann affair forum sites have tried writing and phoning officials. Some haven’t been given the time of day, others received letters amounting to a symbolic example of the forms of printed ink on paper, folded then mailed. I think no-one has been told what isn’t already commmon knowldge to those who read around a bit, just a bit.

    You are certainly keeping the right attitude, of course, and acting by it. When it seems to me we can be in different times to what used to be familiar, expected or acceptable humanistically. I hate to turn into one of those peoople who complain consistently about society and governnment and events, but that’s what seems relevant now. I finally gave in and admitted it does actually look like we’re controlled by faceless illuminati, each of the 3 main parties seeming indistinguishable in this now.

    It seems like a time of anti-politics. The few inquiries & investigations that make an opening are hailed in a flash of shiny style magazine like frenzy and glory, talked about for awhile as they develop, and then forgotten, ignored or hidden.

    I followed keenly Chilcot Inquiiry developments as I know that Blair and some of his old colleagues should spend years & years behind bars. (Recently watching part of Mike Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11” made me see even more how critical it is they are tried and jailed. Everyone should see that film, particularly the Iraq War footage in the middle, showing the real truth.)

    But the Inquiry was reported as concluded a long time ago, well over a year. Has everything been supressed or manipulated freshly for “a new perspective” in that time? Is any “perspective” going to come out at all? What happened? Cameron, only weeks ago was making atatements he was looking forward to the Leveson findings. And after all the attenntion of that Inquiry, and the pain and toil in order to even have an enquiry established, Cameron decides that he can feasibly decide as a politician to turn the report face down and ignore it outright.

    The characteristic fuss as if the end of The Yellow Brick road had come with relief and happy ever afters, with the announcement of “Operation Grange” into how Maadeleine McCann has been missing – taken or murdered – since 5 and a half years.

    And I think we can expect the end of The Yellow Brick road has indeed come, or is just coming within a couple of months or so. We are to meet The Wizard of Oz soon and perhaps be told, like Lion, we had confidence all along, as if we mistook the investigation for a self-worth seminar day.

    Perhaps there have also been someone or someones working very hard and very genuinely on Operation Grange. Perhaps it is doomed as someone or someones has “limited their scope”.

    Anyway, I hope you get a good response, Chris. It’s those acts, little or big, that might remind the very people who ought & need to know most that the world is still there, with every potential.

    Status updates ought to be online and modified at least weekly in this day and age.

  18. 168
    G1 Says:

    Liz Y and others refer to the increasingly common perception or awareness of corrupt, utterly debased, criminal elements in society, usually including more well known parts of society. Peadophilia is seen as an actual benchmark, and satanism. (Elemennts of satanism may be more palatably said as the old, controlling, subtly & unsubtly, slow and consistent, destruction & torture orientated secret power cult or collection of disparate secret societies, The Illuminati. But I’m also referring to deep, behinnd the scenes satanic group practices that usually aren’t meant to go public.)

    I haven’t been so familiar of this kind of thing in more recent times, unlike Liz and others. And the Site Admin favours these ideas at times with details I probably wouldn’t say myself. (Because they are totally unprovable from the start and so can seem to some pointless, a waste, hence maybe idle to read. But I’m convinced by particular details given by the Site Admin, even which my more strictly logical, maybe part-legal mind would normally have me shelve. In fact I see that’s at times how this case works, and it’s very surprising by “nature”. It will always confound a lot of willing, thinking, but understandably rooted people. It’s (after a while, perhaps predictably), perhaps uniquely outside the norm.

    At earlier times in my life I knew more about secret group, debased corruption by those of power or some sway. That includes the Jimmy Saville situation, for example, which got mentioned earlier in this thread, which many people knew of long, long before the truth openly emerged, posthumously, this year. (The government report into Newsnight’s pulling the story in favour of Savile commendation shows is a whitewash of course, by the way. There was a BBC cover up, and it couldn’t not have been a cover up, that’s evident and undeniable actually.)

    I want to post a link to an article toting the recent outing of Savile as merely a small gate to a huge, secret, connection rife, power orientated social cesspit. (Also, as I was aware, the article contends the 300+ current cases are the tip of the Savile iceberg, yes, that large; it doesn’t overtly state that Savile’s peadophilia and criminal procurement was not mostly limited to the 60s and 70s. My awareness is he was at least as or much more prolific since those two decades.)

    So, I’ll give that link in the next comment. The article may be a good way to prepare your thinking for my (late) answer I’m giving to what Chris’s asked me earlier in this thread – what are my own thoughts on what was behind the Madeleine McCaann mystery. I’m not writing anything new, but will give links to earlier comments I wrote in this site, soon after I started commenting, before I took the tag “G1” when I was returning here and being in discussions more.

  19. 169
    G1 Says:

    For my theory to what’s behind the Madeleine McCann mystery, it’s not fully developed, but these earlier comments may give a reasonable idea.

    Comments start at this link:

    The comments are in the name, Anonymous & start at
    comment 13, and go to comments 14, 15, 16, 18, 21.

    Then there’s a later, separate comment in the G1 tag I took, which is relevant (22).

    There’s a whole lot of text there. Some of it comes based on other people’s own personal theories and impressions.

    I stress, again, it’s theory, a theory I consider, which is just as valid to consider among the others, as I’ve just tried personally to maybe make some sense of the very confusing information available. To me it seems appropriate, and feels right, but, again, is just a theory, while nothing has come up to make me deviate from or abandon it. Another thing is, it may suggest the McCanns involvment somehow, or at least knowledge they haven’t divulged (a popular notion), but I don’t claim I think they themselves had to be the two singularly responsible for the death of their daughter. And I don’t even estimate whether Madeleine was not abducted away from the parents, or if she was taken while they ate Tapas and drank wine. That’s not clear to me, but as others have, including Site Admin, I am persuaded by the possibility that Madeleine McCann was dead before the parents left for dinner, May 3&d* a+d maybe before that day.

  20. 170
    Chris Says:

    Hi GI

    You say

    “I am persuaded by the possibility that Madeleine McCann was dead before the parents left for dinner”

    From memory

    She was last seen alive at 5.00pm

    Kate comes out with the words “she has been abducted” at around 9.00pm. This is not a real expression for a mother to make for a child who is not in her bed unless child abduction was rife in the area. It was not. Kate had to have rehearsed this in her mind for some considerable time.

    I have always believed, from her parents reactions, Madeleine died shortly after she was last seen.

  21. 171
    Chris Says:

    My letter to my local MP has beed passed to Damian Green, Minister of State for Policing, for comment.

  22. 172
    G1 Says:

    Firstly, I forgot the article link I meant to post in comment 168 above (well over a month ago). It’s about Savile and I thought it’s relevant as it part of a base to my ideas from suspicions on the Madeleine mystery. This admits somehow the involvement of peadophilia in the affair, while this is thought may only be a part of connections within a deeper satanist culture – this line of thinking says the real agenda, somehow.

    Article link:

    Also, I thought “enochered”‘s comment after my comments on the discussion page I linked to above may suggest more of a base for my feeling to a kind of affair the young girl’s disappearance was bound up in.

    Enochered suggests (site link 3 comments ago, scroll to cmt 23) similarities in ways with the Birr Castle scandal (Irish Republic, but hosting international visitors, especially British). That is known to have involved children from the old Kincora Boys Home in Belfast and other child victims. (Site link 2 comments ago, scroll down to cmt 23.) I haven’t bothered to wonder about if the disappearance of Madeleine, during the “holiday” time at least, involved so-called establishment figures or royalty, It’s not what I’d been thinking about particularly. Where other people suggest that seems relevant seems to me would tie-in later in developments, but I’m not sure what such theories suspect exactly.

    Chris, as well as saying “she has been abducted”, Kate McC is said to have said or shouted in the early minutes of the time of alleged disappearance, “She’s gone”, with, “They’ve taken her”.

    It’s the last comment that seems strangest. Why not, “He’s taken her”? And if that, who would “he” be?

    It would be such a particularly thing to say, it can obviously link a disappearaance to a man the McCanns had knowledge of or were somehow involved with, and probably would even suggest nothing other than that. But isn’t “They’ve taken her” just as strange and exactly the same? Why would someone choose either “they” or “he” suddenly when they had no knowledge of a he or group?

    Who are “they”? It’s a very strange thing to say unless Kate was thinking of certain people. That would hold whether or not this part was staged, or if Kate was referring to something that had happened in the past, now enacting something at this time because they had to. It holds for communicating something to the rest of the Tapas group, relevant for a case where they had a good idea what this meant.

    Also, it would hold for an actual abduction by persons recently involved with the McCanns. The exclamation suggests – again, it is a commmunication for some reason, it can’t not be that – the Tapas friends group needed to be told that or Kate couldn’t help telling them for her own reasons. So then Jane Tanner’s alleged sighting of a man, which came within the appartment very soon after Kate’s alerts, serves to change their position from what they’ve been told. Kate made a statement. Jane Tanner very soon makes an act which seems to change the story, something new.

    Tanner strongly pulls the McCann’s and the group’s focus in how they describe things solidly away from the strange, loaded “they” to a “he” now. (While the detail of the alleged sighting has been taken with great scepticism by most). As is known, there are numerous discrepancies around this. For example, Tanner clearly stated a long haired man just before the group pubicly, strongly tried to implicate (or be seen to implicate for a while) neat, short-haired Robert Murat. One thinks of what could have been planned. And that Tanner’s description could, after a fuss, mean Murat could not actually be tried while the group were still seen at a crucial time to have emotional beliefs in abduction, and a potential abductor. This has been suggested by others before. I’ve written in another comment on this site that Murat was the very one man that pinning the business on would be most unlikely to stick.

    (Comment link:

    On that article page, I have to click “Switch to mobile version” after the desktop version loads, in order to display my comment.)

    Chris, I’ve read the Site Admin express the view a few times that there’s no real evidence Madeleine was alive on 3rd May. The theory she died or went before then was suggested by numerous people. What is your understanding of the sighting evidence that has the girl alive at 5pm, May 3rd? I’m not really trying to pin you down to accept or reject that evidence. Actually I steered clear of examining it much (and it was some time ago, I can’t remember much) because at the time I was looking for someone to analyse it comprehensively, but I couldn’t find that.

  23. 173
    G1 Says:

    I want to ask does anyone have any good information about those photos.

    I remember trying to read around at the time, and I read some people said they were taken on the holiday and some people said they were taken after the so-called “last photos”. They may have been speculating and the photos came from before the holiday. But I don’t think I could ever find anything definitive, more or less proving when they were taken or by whom or if there was ever a description given by the McCanns of those photos.

    They may be from some party in England sometime. I just don’t really know anything I can conclude is really accurate about them. So if anyone knows, I’d appreciate the help. (Press Association copyright image linked.) maddie11.jpg

  24. 174
    G1 Says:

    Sorry, I somehow cut off the first part of the comment I wanted to write.

    It was to say that when I was reading that article I linked to (finally linked to! sorry), “The Doorway to the Cesspit”, about details of hidden histories (a tiny amount of details compared the long strains of episodes over decades, most probably not known about beyond inner circles) what happened to come up in my mind were those photos of Madeleine dressed up.

    The thoughts of those photos wouldn’t go away – so that’s why I am asking.

  25. 175
    G1 Says:

    News is beginning to come out linking Savile’s child abuse to his devil worship practises. (I don’t doubt only scratching the surface, but I guess most victims won’t admit, maybe even remember clearly enough to be able to speak about it). Clearly this positions Savile as having been within a ring of practising satanist hardcore sexual abusers. (I say hardcore because it involves rape, however one ought to be aware of reports over the years of rings being involved in deaths of victims.)

    Site Admin: At the peak of the Madeleine McCann story in the summer/autumn of 2007, several forum posters and bloggers claimed that she was killed as part of some kind of sacrificial ritual. It hasn’t been discussed much in this context but bear in mind that there were 10 little blonde girls aged 3-4 staying at the Ocean Club Resort that same week. Most of the parents were doctors and that coincidence has never been properly addressed or explained. From memory I think there were about 110 people staying there that week and the high percentage of blonde girls aged 3-4 always did seem odd. That gave rise to theories about cloning and other clandestine reasons. Knowing what we know about Savile, the theory that Madeleine was ritually sacrificed cannot be totally ruled out. Here is a link to the Bridget O’Donnell story talking about those 10 little blonde girls:

  26. 176
    Jackie Franklin Says:

    Don’t actually have a comment at this time, I just want to register to receive updates from this fascinating site!

  27. 177
    Miss Wilcox Says:

    Hi all

    I think I have read almost everything now to a degree. I am not any kind of great intellectual detective, nor am I particularly stupid. I am struggling with this whole affair in regard to the fact that I have said fully from day one of madeleine going missing that the parents were responsible. In what regard I dont fully know and for what reason I kind of think I know.

    Everything about the case just tells the truth. Madeleine died and the parents were responsible.You do not have to read between any lines and there is nothing hidden the evidence is all there as far as I am concerned.

    What I am struggling with is the sense of injustice. My questions are thus: what can we do? who can we speak to? when up against (seemingly) your own government, where do you turn?

    Bless Madeleines soul. May she rest in piece because I will not.

  28. 178
    Miss Wilcox Says:

    *rest in peace.

    damn corrective text..

  29. 179
    Miss Wilcox Says:


    Another question unanswerable: Why is there no available information about Kate and Gerry McCanns life leading up to the disappearance? I thought in this day and age. Info was so easily obtained? How come neither of them appear to have a credit history indeed not even a current account??
    Help me out please??

  30. 180
    G1 Says:

    Thanks for your first comment. I’ve not read or heard that for a long time. That really helped.
    Yes. Rest in peace.

    I wasn’t intending to post much or anything early this year, but you’ve made me think of something really important, Miss Wilcox, that will help me as much as anyone else reading.

    First, though, I suppose about the parents’ information, their lawyers, investigators and other aides were employed quickly. There are professionals whose job is make private existing and conceivably accessible information in this digital information age. They may have been contracted. I suppose it’s good to remember that that’s anyone’s right, to be able to do that, whatever they have or haven’t been involved with. (It’s not good to let anyone’s life and right to life play havoc with your own. I know certain people can seem to be being provocative in this way, but you should try not to let such thoughts get to you. I know, personally, they really can get to you, and so prise a kind of ready to faint, uncaringly, forget, take anything stance.)

    Miss Wilcox, I want to say, it’s alright. Many things like this happen in this world. I was just reading in the news of a boy who died who’s body has recently been identified. The body was found dismembered, limbs and head severed in a clean, professional manner, inside a bag in The Thames, back in 2001, but only officially named recently. Investigators supposed his death was a ritual worship murder (which really means satanism, there really aren’t ordinary religions or cults otherwise who naturally murder people in this way as part of their belief and worship.) It may have involved the torture, of whatever degree, of dismemberment whilst alive.

    When I say, it’s alright, it’s to stem your worrying personally, because this world is not the be all and end all and anything terrible can, and to extents does happen. It’s not going to change in respsect of what can happen. Of course, that means the world is far from “alright”, but you can say and mean “it’s alright”. Many, many, share your feelings. Personally I think angry senses of injustice, though of course partly very natural, come when you don’t realise how awful the world is. (There are people who organise to portray a “nicely ticking over” world, but which is a world of hidden foulness.)

    I think really unsettling confusion can occur when someone is not, in the forefront of their mind, so aware that a particular awful event happens (which shocks for a few years or more and with good reason) is not however even the half of the half of the half of the half of the half of the half of the half of the half *etcetera* of “it”. The next thing to be aware of, something worse, is that, to extents, parts of “it” are connected (though this may seem likely to always remain determinedly hidden). And that parts of “it” thus are intentionally, falsely concerned with also promoting the rosy world, ticking over well. Some people talk about that being in the fabric of parts of news publishing, including some of the biggest elements of news publishing, and of course, not for any postive reason.

    I hope you can feel better. Madeleine is gone. It’s hurtful to see that whatever happened, whoever was involved, however many were involved, they pull others’ lives away also. So, maybe, try not to let that happen so much. It’s OK. The world is not a place of justice, actually. Many people want and do good things to try to make it orientated so that justice can be respected, that’s all they can do and they can never get it perfectly, whatever happens. Because the world in itself is a justice-less world and can’t change its spots. I’m not saying people ought to let things go, but there are limits to what you can do. Justice has never been and never will be supreme, nor at all something we could ever take for granted. People just try.

    With good wishes.

  31. 181
    Liz Y Says:

    Just out of interest, Yahoo News message board re Madeleine, accepting anti McCann opinions – a small step forward maybe???

  32. 182
    Liz Y Says:

    Hi Miss Wilcox, The PJ wanted bank and credit card details, they were told there weren’t any, this in spite of the fact that payment for the car hire was by credit card, and Gerry supposedly lost a credit card in London on a trip over there, though it was handed in quite quickly??? Stupid things like this infuriate me because they insult my intelligence. You’re right about the lack of history about not just the McCanns, but also the Tapas 7, there is also a total blackout of any information after the fact (except for McCann controlled pieces), the small stuff really, there is nothing at all about this group. Normally when people who’ve been a part of a significant investigation like this, there are usually snippets of info about little things, births, deaths, marriages, bitten by a dog, or any number of silly things, just to pad out the papers, but not a scrap. I share your sense of injustice, and the mute anger it causes. Why oh why have they been allowed to get away with it. All I know is that this is something big, the amount of backing (not all financial) they have had is unexplainable, unless they know something huge, maybe it is about Diana, maybe about paedophilia and/or satanic abuse, maybe something that no-one’s thought about, whatever it is, I hope I know before I die. All we can do is tell people to do their own investigating on the net. I have discussed this with people, and they know nothing about it. So many say they had doubts about the McCanns but left it there, a lot of people would delve further into it if they knew these sites existed. The McCanns will fight like hell to prevent people from finding these places because they know that a hell of a lot more people suspect them, but a hell of a lot do not know where to take their doubts. I came here by accident myself, I knew something wasn’t right, and the McCanns themselves, with their weird statements, actions, body language and pure arrogance, convinced me that I was right. I have written all these things so many times, and I won’t ever go away, because of a three year old little girl called Madeleine.
    Back to Yahoo, the anti McCann posts are supported more heavily than the pro, so everyone seize the day!!
    Welcome Miss Wilcox!

  33. 183
    Chris Says:

    Liz Y Says:
    February 15th, 2013 at 11:45 am

    Just out of interest, Yahoo News message board re Madeleine, accepting anti McCann opinions – a small step forward maybe???

    Hi Liz,

    Do you have a direct like? Not sure you can do that here so a few more clues please. Some swine put a virus on my PC so I’ve been out of action for 3 weeks at least!!

  34. 184
    Chris Says:

    Liz for like please read LINK

    You will not be able to post a direct one here so a little more specific would help.

    Watch out for ransom viruses. If you get one I know a good site that will help you remove them.

  35. 185
    Liz Y Says:

    Hi Chris, I would have more chance of landing on the moon, than setting up a link… I am a total technophobe computer illiterate. I had a Yahoo email address some time ago, and somehow wandered back there and found the boards, so I think you have to set up an email account, then log in with your name and password. Sorry I can’t be of more help.
    Liz x

  36. 186
    G1 Says:

    News in today or last night, a judge has ruled Mr. Bennett committed contempt of court and defied a previous order not to make certain allegations about Gerald and Kate McCann. Mr. Bennett had said before the ruling that he didn’t intend to defy the previous order and was not aware that he did, if he did.

    For something where there may be a grey area – it is anyone’s right to publish personal suppositions and theories while pointing out undeniable truths and that can’t be denied nor removed and many, many people have been doing this, it’s their legal right – there was a harsh jail sentence imposed upon Mr. Bennett. 3 months imprisonment, suspended for a year. Mr. Bennett has been ordered to pay all costs.

    It is also anyone’s right – particularly someone trained and who worked in an area of social work as a legally trained and qualified person, as describes Mr. Bennett – to petition certain authorities about certain acts of persons which it is legitimate to say are at least questionable objectively. (Personally I have not been able to get to read the words of what Mr. Bennett wrote yet, I hope to do so soon. I am commenting on general issues.)

    The news in which I have read is slight. Links to full law reports would be appreciated if anyone finds them.

    I’d also really appreciate a link to a fund for supporting Mr. Bennett’s legal costs, does anyone know the web page? I’m quite sure I’ve donated a little before, but I can’t find a link. There must be many people who would donate a little or a lot but who give up after a few minutes searching for a link to such a fund for Mr. Bennett.

  37. 187
    G1 Says:

    Judge Tugendhat: “I am sure that he intended to allege that the claimants are to be suspected of causing the death of their daughter, and did in fact dispose of her body, lie about what happened and covered up what they had done.”

    But that is Tony Bennett’s, and anyone’s, legal right – to “allege that the claimants are to be suspected of … etc.”

    It is very different and utterly distinct from alleging that the claimants were responsible for … and in fact did do …

    Of course it is to be alleged that the McCanns are to be suspected of what the judge spoke of.

    The British and Portugese police’s position remains, as it has been for years, that there is no evidence whatsoever which can exclude the McCann couple from suspicion of exactly what Judge Tugendhat spoke.

    So, the British and Portugese police, present EXACTLY the allegation that, at least as much as anyone else concerned known about or not known about, it is right and natural that the McCanns are to be suspected of causing the death of their daughter, and that it is to suspected that they did in fact dispose of her body and lie about what happened and covered up what they had done.

    Moreover there are many “small matters” (one might whisper in some fear if one might not be obliged to forget now) after such a judgement, for example the inexplicable hounds and the cadaver scent and subsequently found blood at the same locations in an appartment where no-one is recorded as having died.

    It can only be a severe breach of the most basic, undeniable and inalienable human rights that any person is sentenced as Tony Bennett has been by those words of the ruling I’ve quoted. (Not having read the law report, I can’t tell if these words are core elements of the decision or not.)

    The judge attatches his abuse of Mr. Bennett’s human rights evidenced in the judge’s words quoted to what he calls Mr. Bennett’s “campaign”.

    Any campaign, by anyone, keeping within what was described by the words of the judge which I’ve quoted here, could only be a legal campaign, protected in law by human rights, well before the recent HRA.

  38. 188
    G1 Says:


    A longer article than the other, short few. It is early yet, though.

  39. 189
    G1 Says:

    Mr. Bennett has been ordered to pay legal costs of his own and to the McCanns (known for their very expensive lawyers) in their pursuit of him in the courts. (In addition to a jail sentence for saying what most people who say now seem to be saying.)

    For persons interested in donating to help Mr. Bennett, here is the link:

    *** ***

    At this point, it may be worth pointing out that many people have implied potential connections within the so-called British establishment and this case. More particularly – as has been verified – it has been described this has existed in very unusual and potentially utterly illegal interference in the Portugese authorities’ enquiry to not have the McCann’s found guilty. Also, what is very likely, in concerted, successful attempts to have had the head, independent Portugese policeman removed from the enquiry altogether. (Very strange things in legal investigations indeed. Very, very strange, at the very least.)

    At this point, it is worth nothing that the McCanns have been successful, at least in the interim, in swinging the British legal system which exists as a marketplace, adversorial service which often charges people in dire need well over £120 per hour to be helped (over many, many hours), against Mr. Bennett. It is worth noting what is conceivable in particular achievement of this within a larger scheme and symbolically.

    (Don’t forget that the McCanns were treated softly when they did what they allege Mr. Bennett has done against them, clearly against Mr. Robert Murat with no evidence but a great deal of fervour and strangely specific intent. Mr Murat sued newspapers who continued the McCanns’ circles’ lies but chose not to victimise the very troubled people who were the McCanns and their publicly secretive circle. The Bennett case is an obvious demonstration, yes I say again, a clear demonstration, of that the McCanns are happy to show they have one rule for themselves and others for other people. This is an undeniable, objective, impersonal truth, examining the history – the Murat allegations and the Bennett case. It is not in anyway at all a spurious suggestion, it is a simple, blunt, undeniable analysis.)

    This sems to me to be a very serious moment indeed in the McCanns’s campaign.

  40. 190
    Chris Says:

    One good thing about our current Government they don’t waffle.

    I have had a response to my questions. They were basically about the unjust costs the public are bearing on this case.

    The letter is not P & C so here’s for starters:-

    The costs between 12th May 2011 and March 2012 totalled £1,916,531. Additional costs for the financial year 2012-2013 are expected to be in the region of £2.2m.

    Now, not sure I agree with this statement nor will I expect anyone here too.

    “It is worth noting though that, whilst the McCanns were ‘arguidos’ (or suspects) during the investigation by the Portuguese Judicial Police, they were exonerated and the case was eventually closed by the Portuguese authorities in 2008.”

    I like to know where the word exonerated came from? Out of the blue comes to mind. Perhaps someone here knows better please?

    More to come…………

  41. 191
    G1 Says:

    Hi Chris, good to hear the “progress”.

    – Did the letter state the costs are thought unjust upon the public? What words did it use?
    (Is this not a disrespectful attack at, firstly and most importantly, a little girl who was, once known as Madeleine, the police, the government decisions, the British public, even valid concerns of the McCanns and every relative whatever happened is entitled to an investigation, they being involved or not. One can argue, especially if involved, they are entitled to be found out and helped.)

    – Who were the signees and in what department?

    – What a strange thing to be told, as you say Chris. Exonerateed? That certainly isn’t the official position of the Portugese police, nor the British, police, of course, that the McCanns are exonerated of anything.

    What kind of legal systems have such notions short of official “pardons” coming from heads of states or people very high up in home office or justice departments?

    Imaginary legal systems? What kind of people believe this is how Western legal systems work? These people sound like pre-school age people having fantasies. No such pardons anyway were issued here, of course.

    It shows a complete lack of respect for the Portugese systems and legal notions. The “arguidos” concept boils down to meaning * persons it appears in seriousness WORTH investigating due to concerns, evidence or simply there being no evidence to exclude *. For someone to be “exonerated” of being an arguido is impossible – it’s not only like kicking the good Portugese system in the face with disrespect but it’s not even giving any value to this world and concepts.

    The arguidos concept doesn’t accuse anyone of anything – it is actually looser than the concept “suspect”. Any parent in the UK where such an event would happen would immediately become a full suspect, among other suspects, due to the known fact that in most cases, the guilty person(s) is close to the victim. There is no way that, whatever happened, the parent anyway could become “exonerated” from being a suspect. That’s the way these things must progress, it must be accepted. These people are living in la-la land.

    It’s very strange that these people are commenting in quasi-legal official ways about legal issues.
    Are they spelling out that they never have taken and never will take the whole thing seriously?

  42. 192
    Chris Says:

    I see she has been spotted in Cyprus!!

    The letter.

    We believe, though times are difficult, the Government does all it can to support the search for Madeleine and that is why the Home Secretary, with the support of the Prime Minister, asked the then Metropolitan police Commissioner to undertake a review of the case in May 2011.

    The review by the MPS is progressing well and officers are going through material nmethodically – some 40,000 pieces of information, equating to approximately 100,000 pages. The intention is to identify from that material investigative opportunities which they will present to the Portuguese authorities, who as mentioned above retain primacy for the investigation. The objective of the MPS review team is to work with the Portuguses authorities with a view to having the case re-opened, in due course.

    Officiers so far have identified around 195 such opportunities within the historic material, and also developing what they believe to be genuinely new material.

    Minister of State.

    So, so far, and it sounds like just the beginning, it’s £40 a page or £20,500 per opportunity. It must be PUBLIC money……………..

    Not sure the Portuguese authority is in the least bit interested which is more worrying to me.

  43. 193
    G1 Says:

    Thanks, Chris.

    I’d thought that the notice being made to unjust costs from public money came from the letter, rather than yourself, as I understand now. (Is that accurate?)

    I’ve not concluded on that personally. Of course, if a £40 per page (with hundreds of thousands of pages) investigation goes on which is paid by public money. And the investigation is not a proper investigation and leaves out elements or begins with and operates from improper notions which are not detatched or fully objective, there is something wrong.

    While I’ve always held myself back from siding with any of those people who give off about the investigation being a waste of funds. If an investigation is properly carried out, I’d really be totally averse to the views that it is wasteful. I guess most people who state the operation is wasting public money have a pretty surely formed view that it is from the word go, unobjective, a botch job from the blueprints, a facade.

    One can only hope that is not the case. Yet, by most of what has been published, the ineffective, improper investigation view would seem to be in keeping with much of this state’s acts, or interferences, in the matter up until that investigation. Also, any botch job from the blueprints investigation, or candidly negligent investigation, knows it relies upon people resting on the hope it is fully proper to get away with it.

    It is worth saying something in the abstract here, then, I feel. A fully proper, objective (as is always necessary and expected) investigation into the mystery of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is fully appropriate and a proper and very desirable use of public funds.

    I know many peoples’ objections to the millions of pounds going on this comes from the perception that it is a through-the-motions establishment act, without a real intention to be objective or fully honourable in being detatched from particular influences upon in.

  44. 194
    Liz Y Says:

    Gi, The investigation is a waste of funds, because the outcome has already decided, it will be found that the McCanns have no case to answer. I cannot fathom out (and I have tried very hard) a reason why the McCanns are being protected to the extent that they are. If it is because they know something extremely damaging, something that another person(s) or organisation(s) want to keep quiet, then that will always be the case. Even the McCann’s somewhat elevated positions of GP and consultant don’t explain why political and judicial figures have just rolled over for them, I mean who the hell are these people??
    As for the sighting in New Zealand, the McCanns must have seen a photo of this girl, who was so like Madeleine, that it needed a DNA test, why the hell weren’t they on the first flight out there??
    They couldn’t be doing with a wasted long haul flight to NZ, what would be the point, because Madeleine is dead. They make me feel physically sick.

  45. 195
    Chris Says:

    Gi, good morning,

    “I’d thought that the notice being made to unjust costs from public money came from the letter, rather than yourself, as I understand now. (Is that accurate?)”

    No, I asked, considering the amount of public money being spent on this one case, had the prime suspects been properly interrogated. That question has not been directly answered. The answer is, I believe contained in the words – they have been exonerated.

    What you are saying is that the case has not been properly investigated by the Portuguese authorities. I am sure they do not agree with that. It will be very difficult for the MPS to work with them or with the Portuguese people who clearly have distaste for the McCann’s – child abandoners.

    The MPS seem to have an unlimited budget and we will easily top £5m on this.

  46. 196
    Chris Says:

    Good morning Liz,

    “They couldn’t be doing with a wasted long haul flight to NZ, what would be the point, because Madeleine is dead. They make me feel physically sick.”

    Many of the things the McCann’s did and do make one wonder whether they actually liked Madeleine.

    Here’s the latest sighting. Interestingly the Huff Post will not allow comment on this article or any connected with Madeleine. I wonder who is shutting them up? The articles they write, are written for comment!

  47. 197
    G1 Says:

    Liz Y: OK. Thanks.

    Chris: Thanks for explaining that, I hadn’t understood.

    Also, I was not making any comment on the Portugese authorities’s enquiries. I think I have refused to and still refuse to. I think it’s a bit too complex to analyse that to come to any clear cut confusions without really going into depth.

    No, I was referring to what people have commented upon in the money spent on the home investigation (British, sorry though, I know this is an international site!) that is now going on, not any previous enquiries. Liz Y explains it well. And after what she has put, I’ve no comment to make.

    Liz is right to say what she says. Strangely it is because I’m actually too jaded rather than too hopeful or strong that, at this point at least, I don’t side with comments about the British Operation Grange being wasteful of public money before it publishes a conclusive report. I’m too jaded.

  48. 198
    G1 Says:

    (Last comment)

    “I think it’s a bit too complex to analyse that to come to any clear cut confusions without really going into depth.”

    Oh dear. Hahaha. “Clear cut confusions”. Let’s not jump to any confusions. Conclusions meant, of course!

    Funny thought, though. Maybe it would work, to plan to jump to clear cut confusions. I’ve never done it, at least not for years. I might have a go and see where it gets me.

  49. 199
    G1 Says:

    Yes, I see fully, Chris. I’m really slow – I only kind of understood. Dim tonight.

    The official state response to your enquiry into the multi-million pound Operation Grange reports that it has been decided that the parents of the missing Madeleine McCann have been “exonerated”. The nation’s authorities report that, not only are the McCann couple not being investigated now for any involvement in connection with the 100% mysterious disappearance of the little girl nearly 6 years ago; but they have also strangely been “exonorated” of ever being glanced at with any suspicion.

    That must be a first the couple are in receipt of. The couple may not even be legally investigated or even suspected or considered in connection. Or, well, you’re sent to jail as Tony Bennett is proof of.

    Yes, I see now what you mean from your letter about what may easily seem clearly to be the waste of millions of pounds of public funds from the blueprint stage probably. One would, of course, start to wonder about what their procedure would be with other “leads” also – some kind of roulette system – bin it or play it, odds on.

    I’m sorry Chris, I hadn’t quite realised the full effect of what you were saying, of what your letter states. Have some office got it completely wrong and are not reflecting the views and acts of the officers in Operation Grange? That would seem to be a fanciful way to deal with the unequivocal report.

    Why isn’t this public knowledge? Your letter seems to me important enough to be picked up upon by newspapers.

  50. 200
    G1 Says:

    I see why you thought I was talking about the Portugese investigation, Chris:

    “Yet, by most of what has been published, the ineffective, improper investigation view would seem to be in keeping with much of this state’s acts, or interferences, in the matter up until that investigation”

    I meant – by most of what has been published about implied (or perhaps known, by some) British interference in the McCann affair prior to Operation Grange.

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All

Leave a Reply

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.


Log in | Designed by Gabfire themes