WHY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS STEER CLEAR

Hi Bjorn, thank you for your interesting post (on my previous blog).  Apologies for not being able to c/p it over.

 

I don't think there can be any doubt that the 'media' in the UK have hidden or withheld much of the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance. Why?  Multiple answers I imagine.  

 

Firstly, the McCanns are so litigious.  They have already punished the newspaper barons with large libel payouts and they have led the charge of Hacked Off. This couple hits back - twice as hard. It would not be hard to imagine news agencies have taken the decision not to antagonise them until their claws have been completely removed.  I don't think the protection of the McCanns by the media is based on their likeability.  More likely busy news desks can't be arsed with getting every McCann story past their legal departments, so they dump, or put aside, the negative ones.  

 

But even having said all that, it is by no means the end of it.  One person, or several, at a very high level, had, or perhaps still has, the power to turn an obvious crime that was solved by local police in weeks, into an international search for a missing child.  The abduction story comes across as a tall tale by any normal thinking adult's standards, it just doesn't ring true, but someone, in authority, in the UK, deemed it not only true, but the biggest threat to children this century.  Since then, we have watched in astonishment as British police officers and members of the establishment, have continued the McCann narrative as if it were all real, and whilst managing to maintain perfectly straight faces! Bizarre.  

 

For an example, look at Martin Brunt reporting from PDL at the time of the Scotland Yard digs, explaining how 'the police' think a burglar, having murdered Madeleine, took her body with him and buried it in the vicinity of 5A. That was not MB's finest hour, but he topped it with the Brenda Leyland debacle. Martin Brunt could not be more mainstream, he is employed by Sky News. Now did he, as an investigative journalist go look for an internet troll story?  Or was it handed to him on a plate? I doubt he would go rogue on Rupert Murdoch, so Sky must have supported his actions.  

 

So why would RM protect the McCanns?  He has been stung by them several times, both with large libel payouts and the evidence they gave at the Leveson Inquiry.  Some might say the McCann factor influenced the downfall of his News of the World.   Richard Desmond too - his was among the first big news agencies to be hit with a massive libel claim.  It must be said however, that even though RM and RD may have justifiable grudges against the parents, large corporations are driven by profit.  Though it may seem personal to victims of Hacked Off etc, it rarely is.  News has a high speed turnover,  while those who had their moment in the spotlight are nursing their wounds or celebrating their success, the news desks have already moved on.

 

But you raised a very important question Bjorn, why do journalists, investigative or otherwise, steer clear of the Madeleine case?  In a nutshell, it is a fast track to having your career and life ruined.  It wasn't only I who was attacked after giving that interview to the Sun, so was the reporter who interviewed me.  Sonia Poulton has had fought long and hard to expose the deception surrounding the Madeleine affair, only to be met with brick wall after brick wall.  And my name has been trashed more than most, which is why I am still here speaking truth to power, I will never kowtow to them!

 

Apparently, if you spend 10,000 hours doing something, you become an expert, despite yourself, lol.  This is a new 'fact' for me, so I am having a lot of fun with it.  As a lifelong sufferer of OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), to 10,000 hours, I say pah!  Which, by a happy turn of events, makes me an expert in many subjects.  Including this one!  Only a fellow OCD sufferer, would understand how many 'attempts' we make at reaching perfection.  Be it a bacon and egg quiche (still not succeeded :( ) or the perfect prose (still trying) solving a murder mystery or knitting a child's hat.  I am currently trying to find a way to ship dozens of woollen hats to refugees, I seem to be producing them on an industrial scale!

 

I digress.  The mystery remains.  Not the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance, but the mystery of everything that happened thereafter.

NO TO LEVESON TWO

 

Hacked Off has quite rightly dropped off the public's radar - I think even it's most vociferous supporters can now see the dangers their demands posed to Freedom of Speech.  It simply isn't possible for journalists to do their jobs if their investigations are bound up by draconian rules and regulations that protect those being investigated.  We may not like the ways and means reporters get their stories, but we stomach it because they are the Fourth Estate, the people's protection against autocracy and corruption at the highest levels.

 

Earlier this month, the Courts ruled against an application by four prominent victims of phone hacking to go ahead with the 'promised' Leveson Inquiry Part II.  Gerry and Kate McCann were among the four.  Bizarre, because I thought Gerry and Kate would have had more than a bellyful of lawyers and court hearings, not to mention the ongoing enquiry into their daughter's disappearance, but there you go.  It would seem Gerry and Kate have been working quietly behind the scenes to silence the press and find ways in which to imprison journalists.  

 

Gerry and Kate feel that the news agencies and journalists have not been punished enough for their past misdemeanours, which probably translates to they haven't been compensated enough. And of course Leveson 2 promised to bring an opportunity for law enforcement to clamp down on social media. That massive thorn in the McCanns' side that opened the British public's eyes to the alternative narrative to Madeleine's disappearance - the not abducted one put forward by the Portuguese police.

 

The truth is Gerry and Kate were amply compensated by several large news agencies, apologies were given, and all these years on the tabloids and the MSM continue to treat these eternal victims with kid gloves, even though the McCanns were not themselves hacked, or so they claim.  The McCanns beef with the press, is 'press intrusion' - even though it was they who invited the press in!  A fact that did not go overlooked by the Portuguese Supreme Court.

 

I'm afraid the McCanns' endeavours to silence the media, both mainstream and social, is one of the reasons I continue to oppose them online.  Their need for vengeance against their enemies sends chills through me, though I do have a smidgeon of admiration that this tiny pair would take on Rupert Murdoch and Richard Desmond.  But, such is life, when they bit the hands that fed them, they fell off the front pages and their popularity nosedived. 

 

Imprisoning journalists is a bit like burning books.  It should shock and outrage every intelligent, educated, reasonable, adult.  Throughout history, reporters have had to go into areas where angels fear to tread. They protect our democracy, and the best example we have right now is Trump.  It feels as if every journalist in the USA is working night and day to expose every sordid, murky deal this 'president' has done, this is the Fourth Estate in action.

 

Presumably the McCanns are not now being harassed by anyone, and if they were, I am sure we would know about it.  This, it would appear is an old grievance, a bit like their grievance against Goncalo Amaral.  Punishing news organisations and Goncalo Amaral for stories that have already been published, read, and mostly forgotten from almost a decade ago has no practical advantage for Gerry and Kate whatsoever, none that I can see anyway.  If it is their reputations they are protecting, why bring those 'salacious' stories back into the public spotlight? 

 

Not surprisingly, this further Court loss of the McCanns didn't make it to the tabloids via the faithful Tracey.  Why?  Because it is not a popular cause and never will be.

 

SOURCES FOR THE GOOSE AND GANDER

It would be a lot easier to decipher the missing Madeleine saga if we understood the sources behind the stories that regularly appear in our newspapers.  Anything by Tracey Kandhola we can assume comes directly from Kate and Gerry, they have been close for many years and it’s unlikely Tracey is still meeting a hooded stranger in an underground car park. Tracey broke the news of the parents meeting with officers from Scotland Yard and floated the idea of two new leads.  Leads SY are keeping to themselves for fear of sending the suspects underground, but helpfully publicized by Tracey in several downmarket tabloids.  This story was confirmed by a ‘source’ from Whitehall, which is as vague you can get, but it implies someone political.

 

Then we have a ‘source’ from Portugal who says the Portuguese police are going back to the theory that Madeleine woke and wandered off.  Source from Portugal is even more vague than the source from Whitehall. Given their very strict Judicial Secrecy laws and the media fiascoes of the early years, how likely is it that the PJ are leaking? Could it come from the PR agency in Lisbon, hired by the McCanns to protect their reputations?  What does a PR agency do, other than manufacture stories for the press?  Just asking.

 

Finally, we have Gerry and Kate blasting the press (via a source) for insulting them with this latest theory (woke and wandered) and Clarence stepping in to state how ludicrous the idea is.  Hmm.  Simply looking at the sequence of events and taking them at face value, it would appear that the McCanns somehow managed to manufacture a very public argument with, err, themselves.

 

Now it may well be that I am confused, I often am, and reading the tabloids online is near impossible with all the ads and pop ups, but having waded (quite literally) through them, I'm pretty sure I have the gist. Actually, sitting back and looking at the overall picture, the entire narrative for this ongoing saga, at least the MSM version, seems to derive from 'sources'.  Even Clarence, their professional spokesman, is often described as a 'source close to the family'.

 

It was actually sources close to the family who planted all the initial abduction stories in the media.  So successful were they, that on the 4th May 2007, we all awoke to the news that the McCanns' apartment had been broken into and their 3 year old daughter abducted.  So successful were they that night, they immediately set up a media monitoring team, not only to create a narrative, but also to seek and destroy their critics.

 

That's the thing with success.  Once you achieve it, you spend the rest of your life trying to recreate it.  Team McCann learned very early on how easy it is to manipulate the masses.  It must have been very vexing for them that Goncalo Amaral and hordes online stood in the way of their grandiose plans for the future.  The mainstream media they could gag, but social media has always been beyond their reach.  When they brought out 'the big guns' to silence those they call trolls, it resulted in tragedy.  There was no public outrage on their behalf, no call to target and imprison online trolls, in fact the public were repulsed.  They had overstepped the line.

 

Despite their decade long battle against Freedom of Speech, they have failed.  They may have gone some way in stopping the MSM from going after individuals and corporations, thus contributing to the rapid decline in newspaper sales, but they cannot stop the rise of bloggers and commentators on social media who tell them the truth.  Controlling the masses is not as easy as it was in 2007.

 

But lets get back to 'sources'.  In the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance, the sources had names and faces.  Family and friends of Madeleine's parents, who were obviously way too distraught to speak to the media themselves.  It was these sources who claimed there was a break in, there wasn't, and who claimed that the police 'were doing nothing'.  Some might say they were setting the police up for all that was to follow. 

 

Some might also say the McCanns played fast and loose with Portugal's Judicial Secrecy laws.  They certainly used them in their many interviews to avoid answering awkward questions.  Who can forget Gerry's famous tantrum when asked about blood found in the apartment?  'He's a bit hot' Kate said, cool as a cucumber.  They tried the old 'judicial secrecy' again, when Sandra Felgueres asked about the dogs, 'yes I know about Judicial Secrecy, but we don't have it now', she told the flustered Gerry.  Gerry and Kate seem to have their own judicial secrecy, shared by two.

 

Gerry and Kate are very aware that anything they say on camera could be used against them.  Aware, but their love of the limelight helps them to overcome that, they feel the more the public sees them, the more they will like them.  It's kind of addictive.  Now it seems, it has finally sunk in, and any interview they do give, seems forced and uncomfortable. Crimewatch saw a distinctive turn in public perception of this case.  Sceptics rushed to social media and with minimum effort could see the huge flaws in the parents' abduction claim. 

 

Over the past 11+ years there have hundreds of sightings, and hundreds of stories suggesting Madeleine is alive, especially in the early years when the Search for Madeleine crusade was it's height.  Most if not all, stopped when Scotland Yard got involved.  The idea of England's finest trekking off to Morocco or the Amazon, was always ludicrous, and I'm sure any that came in were filed under 'W' for wild goose chases. 

 

So who has in interest in planting 'McCann' stories in the press?  Clarence Mitchell, obviously, in fact all the PR people the McCanns employ, both here and in Portugal.  On the opposite side.  The PJ - highly unlikely see above.  Goncalo Amaral, also highly unlikely, he seems to have moved on and has never played silly media games, so why would he now?  Woke and wandered would also make him look grossly incompetent, he was in charge of the original investigation.  Maybe it was someone well intentioned (towards the McCanns) who wanted to throw the baying press hounds a morsel of prime rib to see how it goes down.  An explanation for why the police are not looking for an abductor or a live child and reinforcing that they [the police] are not looking at the parents. 

 

At the moment I am pondering the enormity of running what must by now be a library of 'sources' and, since the Team McCann use the word frequently, trolls , who patrol social media looking for punch ups.  How do they ensure they all stick to the script?  How many are there?  I imagine there were hundreds in the early days, now, no more than handful, but even that kind of filing system would turn my head into spaghetti. And what if there are opposing forces within those sources and trolls? What if they don't agree among themselves?

 

Wherever it came from, woke and wandered is not an end of investigation theory.  It is something that is ruled out at the beginning, and it was.  Someone I think, is still trying to control the narrative, for what end, who knows. 

 

TWO NEW LEADS - SERIOUSLY TRACEY?

Seriously Tracey?  (Kandhola for the Mail) Do you honestly expect your readers to believe that 7 and a half years into their investigation, Operation Grange have two new leads and need more Home Office funding to follow them up?  What was the previous funding for? And how did they know that in the next 6 monthly cycle two new leads would suddenly show up?

 

The case of Missing Madeleine McCann has been investigated by the police forces of two countries and countless private investigators, in the full view of the entire world, yet only now they have not just one good lead, but two.  Overkill there Tracey, one [new lead] was pushing it, two is just taking the pee.  

 

I really don’t see the McCanns having high tea and a convivial discussion with Scotland Yard detectives as implied by the ever imaginative Tracey. No mention of reassurances from the police that they have been completely exonerated (that which they desire above all else) and no mention of where the two leads are, err leading, ie. to a murder or to a live child. One would imagine that is something the parents would want to know. Their reaction to the ‘police visit’ is a renewed message of Hope’ and a belated thank you to all those who stand by them, via an unknown friend who runs their social media.  Apologies for the Trump analogy, but it's a bit like Trump claiming the midterms were a great success.  Make no mistake, if the detectives had actually said there was hope of finding Madeleine alive, the McCann media machine would have had it on the front pages of the tabloids, before the officers finished their crumpets. 

 

The police of course are saying nothing about the two new leads in case it sends the suspects deeper underground. Regardless that they have already had 11+ years of unfettered digging, and are probably close to the centre of the earth.  Fair dues I suppose, the only two places not to receive Gerry and Kate appeals were the centre of the earth and outer space.  It seems six years in a coma man had two bedfellows.

 

But while we are on imaginary scenarios, imagine being at the centre of a police investigation for 7+ years.  No matter how innocent you were, you would go crazy knowing that detectives were going over your life with a fine-tooth comb.  Every lie you ever told, every secret you thought you had, none are safe.  And even living under this incredible stress for all these years, the parents still have no proof of innocence, no official declaration that states they have been cleared. 

 

When the original investigation into Madeleine's disappearance was shelved by the Portuguese Judiciary, their report stated that the parents of Madeleine lost their opportunity to prove their innocence.  This was all part of the report that along with 'never cleared' never made into the British mainstream media.  

 

Some might say, their lost their opportunity to prove their innocence at the time of the original investigation, but bizarrely have continued with the same strategy since.  That is, neither they, nor Operation Grange have issued any statements that categorically rule them out.  Arguably, OP have further implicated the parents by releasing that photofit (of Gerry) in that long ago Crimewatch.  Suggesting Madeleine may have died in the apartment and digging up the surrounding areas also pointed to the parents.  Why would an abductor/burglar hang around to bury his victim after the alarm had been raised? 

 

In the spirit of keeping it simple stupid, if the police have visited Gerry and Kate it is to tell them they have enough evidence to convict.  Perhaps they offered them a dignified way out, a confession that would spare them a trial.  But these two are finishers, Gerry's battlecry 'there's no evidence', but at this point, it is doubtful Gerry knows what evidence the police have. 

 

Even with the begrudged faux thanks, it is obvious, they parents of Madeleine do not have a good relationship with the police who are looking for her.  I have watched enough 'murders' as I call them, to know that victims families more often than not, grow close friendly relationships the detectives working on their case.  They share a bond and a common goal, they want to nail the fiend who took away their loved one.

 

Kate forgave the abductor too early on, way too early on.  I don't think any mother, no matter how holy and righteous, could ever forgive the monster who killed their child.  But I guess she had to forgive the monster, it was a pious reason not to pursue him to the ends of the earth as most mothers would do.  The detective who searched for her daughter, she did however, pursue to the ends of the earth.  She wanted him to feel misery and fear.  And she pursues him still.  How can anyone not see the disparity between this woman's quick forgiveness of the ultimate evil, and long, slow, festering pursuit of the detective who only ever acted on her daughter's behalf.

 

Sadly, just as I am losing interest in this case it appears to be livening up.  The McCanns get their first house call from the officers of Operation Grange, not to tell them 'your f*cked', but to let them know they have two new leads and assure them of their loyalty and devotion.  OK, I made the last bit up, but Tracey was only two swigs of chardonnay from going there.

 

Even if Operation Grange were looking for an abductor, the real suspects know they will not find one.  And either the police are as dumb as they thought they were, or they are playing cat and mouse with them.  They have rushed this story out via their friend Tracy Kandhola, because there is probably more, and worse, to come.  It would go against everything we know of human nature to expect relations between the McCanns and the police are cordial.  And Gerry and Kate are a prickly pair, reluctant to speak to those they consider inferior, and sadly that includes police officers, as we saw from the way they treated the first police officers to arrive. 

 

They may have a new respect for the British police, particularly as they are the ones who pleaded for a British investigation, but methinks they have no choice.  Since OG began, they haven't dared launch a private investigation of their own, campaign for funds or get new leads on the front pages of newspapers.  All the sightings stopped.  They are in the very uncomfortable position of having to thank the police investigation they despise.  They cannot condemn Operation Grange via friends of the family and sources or Clarence Mitchell.  They must smile through gritted teeth and say how grateful they are.  They are probably spitting feathers. Happily, they have the ever loyal Tracy to run them through the spinner.

 

 

THAT OPEN WINDOW

 

I have to say I was very impressed by a recent Blacksmith blog where he has placed the entries in Kate’s book alongside the entries in Gerry’s blog. Something I have often pondered doing, but never quite got around to, due to it being quite a monumental task.  In a nutshell he has shown us a small sample of all the thousands of lies that can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Thanks JB, and thanks for the links, you clearly went to Uni, lol. I somehow wriggled through without ever understanding Harvard Referencing!  But thank you for showing it is OK to revisit old ground, to discuss those huge red herrings that seem to have bypassed all those diehard Gerry and Kate McCann supporters.

 

That open window.  Here’s what I think happened. Just an imagined scenario of course, not an accusation. Ok, that’s pathetic, I’ll go with ‘Some might say’.  Some, those who think like the first two policemen who responded to the call, that an ‘abduction’ scene had been staged. Some might say, the purpose of Gerry’s return to the apartment was to force open the car park window to make it look as though there had been a break in. Unfortunately, he bumped into Jez Wilkins and could not get to the window.  Kate was then left with no option but to open the window herself. Her’s were the only fingerprints found and the window had been opened from the inside not the outside.

 

After Kate raising the alarm, almost the first thing Gerry did was to tamper with check the window.  A strange thing for a doctor to do, especially if he suspected a break in and an abductor. In at least part of his medical training he must have learned about pathology and forensic science. That window, potentially contained the fingerprints and a direct link to whoever took Madeleine.  

 

Bumping into Jez Wilkins was not part of the plan, some might say it threw all their other plans awry.  And by ‘their’, I mean all those who took a collective decision.  Not only did it prevent Gerry from doing his bit, it left Jane Tanner loitering with intent and wearing purple.  

 

I think we all know by now that ‘breaking news’ is the news that sticks.  We are wiser now, but were we in 2007?  The McCanns were.  Not only did they tell the world their daughter was missing, they also told the world how innocent they were. They used the local church for photo ops, and they visited the Vatican. Not only were they displaying their innocence, they were displaying the support they had throughout the world. Well Morocco anyway. Kate’s deluded ‘Rome is preparing itself for our visit’ remains as it is. Deluded. Maybe all the more bizarre and grotesque 11+ years on.  It brings to mind that cringingly embarrassing oscar acceptance speech by Sally Field ‘you love me, you really love me’.  It grieves me to say that about Sally Field, because she should definitely play me should a film of my life ever be made (ok, I fantasize a lot, I also have an Oscar acceptance speech). Not only do I resemble her or she resembles me (especially when playing Sybil) and she can’t hide the crazy behind her eyes, lol.

 

But let’s get back to that window.  It was crucial to the abduction story, it was proof that someone had broken into that apartment with criminal intent.  The ‘break in’ was integral to the parents’ claim that a stranger/abductor had stolen their child.  After all, nobody would be stupid enough to leave 3 vulnerable toddlers alone in an unlocked holiday apartment, judy as they sure as hell wouldn’t leave their money and passports.

 

Gerry changed his statement. Err, alarm bells, major alarm bells.  He didn’t in fact enter the apartment via the locked front door using a key, he entered the apartment via the sliding doors at the back like, err, everyone else.  (how the feck did he get that essential detail wrong?).  Regardless, he later (10 days) remembered that he entered the apartment via the patio doors, no key was involved, but he ‘sensed’ the presence of an intruder, hiding behind the children’s bedroom door. A suggestion Goncalo Amararl demonstrated as ludicrous in his documentary.

 

Of course, had the abductor been in the apartment when Gerry returned to check on the children and use the bathroom, then that window in the bedroom would have been wide open with the curtains whooshing just as they did for Kate. And of course, the bedroom door would have slammed shut.  It didn’t, it remained open through Gerry and Matthew’s checks on the children, it didn’t slam until Kate arrived.

 

In one of their civil actions, I can’t recall just now which one, various witnesses appeared on behalf of Goncalo Amaral. They confirmed that the open window was not an entry or exit point. That is, they proved beyond doubt that the open window was a red herring.  Kudos to Team McCann on that one, they claimed the ‘red herring’ theory as their own. A cunning plan by the abductor to fool the investigators.  What a shame the McCanns don’t have a real enemy to blame for Madeleine’s abduction, there is so much they could project onto him.

 

They daren’t unleash any of their usual anti police spiel on the British detectives charged with investigating this case. It directly contradicts their British police good, Portuguese police bad message.  Up until 2011 the ‘only’ people searching for Madeleine were her parents.  The Portuguese police had given up searching for Madeleine and/or her abductor. The clear message being, they knew who was responsible but (at that time) did not have enough evidence to prosecute.  

 

Madeleine’s parents believe they are intellectually superior to the police, and yeah, it must be said, they believe they are ‘above’ most people.  You could not get a better illustration of that than looking at who they chose for their holiday companions.

 

They are nouveau riche of the worst variety. For me they bring to mind ‘the working class can kiss my ass, I’ve got the foreman’s job at last’ - an amusing little ditty from the 70’s that has become ageless. It pretty much sums up why tories still win elections in the 21^st century.  

 

I truly believe that Gerry, Kate and their intellectual equals, thought it would be a piece of cake to outwit the bumbling third world police forces of Portugal and to charm their way into the far reaching protection of Mother England. Sounds delusional, but kudos to them, they pulled it off.  And probably would have pulled it off if they hadn’t been so greedy as to return to the public again and again for donations.  The donations they had already received were beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, Certainly, no single family hit by tragedy has received the global response and financial aid that the McCann parents received.

 

Gerry and Kate are definitely of that demographic who believe ‘if we build it, they will come’.  They imagine what they want, then move hell and high water to get it. ‘We are finishers’ Kate said. And I believed her.  I’m a finisher too, thought I, I have climbed mountains, metaphorically, to tick off the boxes in my ‘things to do before I die’ list.  I attained a degree, tick. I had weekly column, tick. I had a play nominated for a Sony award (twice!) tick, I had a book published, tick, I have freedom of speech, tick, tick and a few Irish jigs!

 

Apologies for turning that into a tickbox list, but while I’m at it get drunk with Jack Nicholson in New Orleans and sleep under the stars in the Valley of the Kings remain blank :(  Oops, also coffee in the Seinfeld cafe :)

 

But back to that window. Was it a good idea for Kate to release that ‘red herring’ statement? Did it make them look more guilty or less?  I tend to think genuinely grieving parents wouldn’t give two profanities as to what the public thought about the finer details of the crime scene.  They wouldn’t give two profanities as to what the public thought of them period. Creating a viewer friendly public image is the last thing on the minds of parents and loved ones who are reaching out to the public for help. They don’t need image consultants, they don’t need to stage public events and invite the press. They appear on our TVs reluctantly, they are always close to tears, and we the audience want to reach out and hug them. Whoever advised Gerry and Kate to show no emotions is a moron. If it comes from the McCanns themselves, then it is chilling.

 

Again I digress, forgive me.  Imagine you (a generic you) wanted to create a scene from which a child was abducted, how would stage the room so it coincided with your story? If I held a poll I think we would all raise out hands for ‘open a window’. A stranger couldn’t just walk in an unlocked door could they? That is preposterous. The co-signatories to the collective decision also saw this as a complete distraction for the intellectually inferior Portuguese Judiciary. An open window and the word of six (British) doctors, case closed.

 

Unhappily for Gerry and the collective co-signatories, the police officers of the original investigation failed to give these God Complex doctors, the respect they believed they deserved. Literally no-one was taken in by the open window.  But it served it’s purpose on the first night.  That is, it enabled Team McCann and all their accomplices to spread the word that the apartment had been broken into.  The first news that hits the stands is the one that sticks.  Bizarrely, Team McCann knew that.  

 

Unfortunately for Gerry and Kate their past media exposure has not stood the test of time.  Perhaps, in a rare moment of clarity, that is something, Kate foresaw in the future when she declared her book ‘an account’ of the truth.  Some solace perhaps for her children, but still not the truth without the word ‘account’ in front of it. It’s halfway to an apology, the rest will follow later.

 

But back to the subject. That window does indeed deserve a blog of it’s own.  It cannot be used as evidence of a break in, because Kate, by her own admission, says it may have been a red herring.  Clearly that window had left Kate et all extremely vulnerable, enough for Kate to break her silence on the matter.

 

The open window was all the McCanns had to support a stranger abduction - that is, until Jane Tanner came forward with her sighting of a man carrying a child at the significant time.  Open window, JT sighting, parents in the clear, case closed.  Kate’s claim that the open window fooled them just as much as it fooled the watching world, didn’t work. Actually, on a scale of what didn’t work for Team McCann, it is right alongside Gerry’s interview with Paxman and pretence that he was invited to a media conference in Edinburgh. ‘Why are you here Gerry?’. Hmmm.  Who knows.

 

Had Gerry been a few moments earlier, or had Jez Wilkins not appeared, the state of the window may have been more convincing as the point of entry.  Instead opening the window was a spontaneous act by Kate who needed more than a missing child to cry abduction.  The McCanns have stated over and over that little Madeleine would not have been capable of opening that window.  Nor indeed, the patio doors and the two garden gates.  And of course, they accept without question that the abductor was courteous enough to close the patio doors and curtains, and the gates at the top and bottom of the staircase.  How thoughtful of him, particularly as he had a child in his arms at the time.  It is easy to see why the McCanns and their friends have been so reluctant to return to Portugal for a reconstruction.  

 

The staging, such as it was, was clumsy and ill thought out - the timeline written on a torn out page from Madeleine’s colouring book, shows how desperate they were. They were not armed with A4 writing pads, subject dividers and colour coordinated folders and post it notes.  They were right slap bang in the middle of a major disaster. All their careers and futures were at stake.  Unfortunately, their preconceived ideas that the Portuguese police were in some way backward soon hit them full frontal, and none have had the guts to return since.  For the record Operation Grange, filming the reconstruction in Spain (wtf?) with actors, screams you do not have the co-operation of the people you are assisting, ie. The parents of the missing child, and of course, those who were part of the holiday group.

 

That open window has of course, been lost in the sands of time. No-one, not even Kate and Gerry believe the intruder came in via the window.  Kate would of course never admit to opening the window herself, but has gone so far as to say, it may have been opened by the abductor as a red herring. Whilst I don’t wish to project any super powers onto this horrendous fiend, he does seem to have the ability to enter and exit buildings without leaving any trace whatsoever. And the two babies who shared the room with Madeleine carried on sleeping soundly.  Madeleine too slept on, even as she was lifted from her nice warm bed, and passed through a window, or carried off by a stranger.  The voice of her daddy close by, yet she did not scream or call out to him.  

 

Blacksmith has opened, or at least led us to the doors of perception.  The foundation lie was the first one we were fully aware of, but how many were there before?  What if, as we, or most of us, believe, it is all a lie, a great big hoax? Does the UK accept that it has been duped, or does it add a few more layers to the web of lies?

 

As a kid learning board games, we had a saying, ‘cheats never prosper’, I can’t say that turned out to be true, especially with Monopoly, but in the real world, karma is never far away.

 

 

HOW ABOUT WE JUST FORGET IT?

There’s clearly a lot more to little Madeleine McCann’s disappearance than the simplistic narrative put forward by her parents and their friends on the night she vanished. A narrative accepted without question by the entire British establishment and senior police officers who should have known better. Madeleine was stolen in the night by a bogeyman - yeh, the mythical monster we use to make naughty children stay in their beds and go to sleep. Guess what kids, he’s real.

 

Child snatchers are mostly grotesque characters from children’s story books, comical caricatures of the dangers that surround us, if we don’t eat our greens or go to sleep when the light’s out. We take comfort in the fact they are not real, our parents will protect us, or we can always hide under the duvet.

 

Gerry and Kate made this mythical creature very real. So too did their entire bandwagon. Not much tops a child stealing predator for front page news.  Whilst New Labour were calling out for us to carry ID cards and line up to submit our DNA for a National Database and Jim Gamble wanted to police the lawless internet.  What better way to promote all these causes than the cherubic face of a missing child?

 

But, let’s put all the intrigue aside for just one moment, because I want to reply to a very interesting question posed by one by one of my regular contributors, JC (probably not Mr.Corbyn :( or the other ‘JC’)). How about we just forget it? Not JC’s exact words, but you get the drift.

 

To those of use who can merely observe, it would seem both Operation Grange and indeed the PJ, are caught in ‘check’, that is not quite check mate, because there appears to be a tenacious few, who, like Goncalo Amaral, will never give up.  A police investigation isn’t about protecting people from their crimes, it is about getting results, and by results, I mean convictions. The police build the case for the prosecution, not the defence.

 

As most of my readers know, retribution is the part where I wuss out.  Punishment is something I just cannot get my head around.  I find the word medieval and it's connotations barbaric.  I was never able to smack my children, the idea of it was abhorrent to me.  And before any smartass jumps in, they have grown up to be kind, decent, gentlemen with impeccable manners.  No smacks were ever needed.

 

But back to punishment.  This is where myself and other gentle folks back away.  We are not emotionally involved, Madeleine wasn't ripped from our lives.  I can only speak for myself here, but the face of Ian Huntley incensed me!  And if I am honest, it incenses me still.  If I were in his presence, I fear I would physically attack him.  When I see shattered mothers speaking on behalf of their children, I feel their pain, and I feel their anger and I fully understand their need for retribution.

 

I don't feel any of that in the case of Gerry and Kate.  They are the ones who had their beloved child ripped from them.  I don't think there was any malice intended that night, in fact I feel much the same as Goncalo Amaral, that is, there was a tragic accident.  On those grounds alone, we could all say, how about we just forget it, these people have suffered enough.

 

But it doesn't end there.  Because if Madeleine died on 3rd May, everything that happened thereafter was a crime.  Some might say there were multiple crimes carried out by multiple characters, some who were reporting directly back to the British Government!  If the McCanns were to be prosecuted, they could and probably would, name names.  Any trial of the McCanns and/or their friends, would reduce to farce if they claim they did not act alone.  Who's idea was it to start a Fund? Hmm Who's idea was for the parents to take Amber Alert to the European Parliament? Again hmm.  The police had the mobile phones and all the numbers the McCanns and their friends phoned that night.  Perhaps even 'who arranged the burner phones?'.

 

When you start to look at the number of witnesses etc, you can begin to see the scale of potential crimes committed in this poor child's name.  Gerry and Kate may indeed have been the unfortunate victims of fate on that night, but everything they did after that was premeditated.  Now that's cold.

 

Along with an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, society also dictates that no-one should profit from crime.  I don't know what the exact laws are, but some might say, the McCann family, all those lawyers, spin doctors , and psychologists who flew out to PDL.  Maybe too all those police agencies despatched from the UK to assist the Portuguese police. 

 

The biggest charge of course is perverting the course of justice.  Is it possible the UK will despatch to Portugal all those lied to the PJ? How  many would that be?  You can see  why the Tapas 6(?) requested a private  plane.  The number liable to those very serious charges could run to dozens.  All those of watching the shenanigans going on in PDL, could see how disruptive the McCanns media campaign was to the Portuguese police.

It was a circus of Team McCann's making. 

 

Should they get away with all that?  And indeed, everything they have done since Madeleine disappeared? Starting with their very cruel campaign against Goncalo Amaral, the detective who searched for their daughter.  It could be said that they have suffered karma in bucket loads, they still don't have that 'innocent' statement from anyone who matters.  Simply by trying to keep up the pretence and the unrealistic image they created for themselves, they are already in purgatory. 

 

I think the decision not to just let this case drop, was made a long time ago.  Probably an agreement was made between David Cameron and his Portuguese counterpart and it would not have been to cover up for the two doctors.  No former Prime Minister wants 'authorised a cover up' on their  historic record.  From a diplomatic perspective, the Portuguese were much maligned for their investigation into Madeleine's disappearance with Goncalo Amaral labelled as a 'disgraced detective' and the PJ labelled as incompetent and corrupt.  The parents of Madeleine were successful beyond their wildest dreams, in getting the entire British establishment blaming the Portuguese police for Madeleine's loss.  There was much for DC to put right.

 

They may not have been aware of the number of players when they first began, but their continual requests for more funding suggests they don't intend to leave anyone out.  But again, back to that crazy scenario of the McCanns, their extended family and all those ambulance chasers who were on the first flight, being taken back to PDL to face charges and possible imprisonment.  Like almost everything in this case, if you scratch the surface there is always another layer beneath.  The reality of all those who should be charged flying out to face a Portuguese criminal court has to be miniscule.  Will Portugal ask for their extradition?

 

For older members of the McCann and Healy clans it seems ridiculous, but how about the Tapas friends, their siblings and Clarence Mitchell?  Will they all fly out to PDL willingly?  What about those experts? Superintendent Hill, Jim Gamble, the psychologists, the family liaison officers?  All are witnesses to the beginning of the Fund and the spectacular media campaign, not to mention the highly irregular separate [from the police] 'search' by the McCann family.

 

Quite a few people face quite a few  charges I would say, which is why I'm not screaming at OG.  On the other hand, all those who forcibly pushed the abduction story, will never be able to relax until OG is filed away stamped 'abduction'.  For them, their weakness and greed, is always just a breath away from public exposure.  Those crime experts who have staked their careers on the parents being found innocent. 

 

Sadly, it  is only strangers who fight for justice for Madeleine.  Kate has forgiven her daughter's abductor.  Again, not normal.   I am sure that madness that possesses me when I see the face of Ian Huntley, possesses the mothers and fathers of murdered  children every time they think of their loss.  I can't help but be cynical about Kate's bizarre 'I forgive the abductor' press release.  I don't see pious and self sacrificing, I see,  'I've got nothing to say about the abductor' (because there isn't one).  It also carries the connotations, 'ffs don't ask me to speak directly to the camera'. 

 

It's difficult however, not to compare this case to that of missing Shannon Matthews.  Shannon was of course found alive, and her disappearance basically mimicked Madeleine's but the donations were much, much, lower.  Shannon of course survived, but there would have been an outcry if the powers that be had said, how about we just forget it.

Karen Matthews faced justice in a criminal court, in front of a jury of her peers and she was sentenced to prison. 

 

For Karen Matthews there was no stampede of lawyers, CEOP and government appointed press officers rushing to Karen's side.  Karen was a graphic illustration of broken Britain and the broken benefits system.  The family and friends of Karen were as proactive as Team McCann, but without the online shop and good quality wristbands.  The friends of Karen however, believed her implicitly, until they didn't.  When the truth dawned on them, they were genuinely shocked, none of them said, let's keep this going, it's a good earner, they went to the police. 

 

What happened  on the night of Madeleine's disappearance triggered a complex web of lies that spawned, who knows how many, crimes, who knows how many suspects?  Which begs the question, how did OG and the PJ split the case up?  I am guessing the PJ will cover Madeleine's disappearance and those directly involved.  The original crime.  OG I presume will handle the British end.  Those crimes that might relate to fraud etc.  Is it mere coincidence for example, that the McCanns hired not one, but two firms of private investigators who were criminally corrupt?

 

I actually feel so closely involved in this case now, that I am finding it quite frightening to think of the reality of a prosecution or several prosecutions taking place.  I don't even like Kate, but can see that she is very fragile and emotionally over  wrought. I don't think she could handle any form of questioning, especially not in the witness box as a defendant. As for being sent to a Portuguese prison?  Kate's fragility, the real and the fake, has I am sure endeared her to many.  It is hard, if not impossible, to see the cunning and the conniving underneath.

 

Gerry however, gets what he deserves.  He has a real struggle to hide the 'smug'.  He has Trump's 'still winning' air as he taunts the police with noooooo evidence.  One image of Gerry that chills me to the core, is the press conference the parents gave with an aged progressed image of their daughter behind them.  For some reason Gerry got the giggles, and was struggling to contain them.  To see a picture of your child as she would look if she were alive can't be anything but traumatizing for a parent.  I broke down whilst watching the same on an episode of Quincey!  But to laugh, may God forgive him.  On my last blog I received a post from some  students who had spotted Gerry lying 37 times, just on the parts of the case they studied.  He's a bad liar.  He has no control over his micro expressions (duping delight) or his body language.  On occasion he looks as though he is  suffering a flea infestation. 

 

My own personal favourite is the parents interview with Sandra Felgueiras, where Gerry shows all the finesse of a trembling adolescent in the presence of the attractive gym mistress.  I'm not knocking him, I too became a blabbering heap when I met the Cadbury's Milk Tray man.  He was even more handsome in the flesh than he was dressed in black and sneaking into ladies' bedrooms.  I offered him tea, coffee, anything - quite literally anything.  But back to Gerry's performance in that interview.  In his defence he was equally smitten with Jeremy Paxman.

 

But this was confident Gerry, talking to a woman (easy peasy), he had the air of man that said, we just had a drink out back together, they were on first name terms.  Gerry went straight into flirt mode, despite the fact that Kate's claws were digging into his thigh or the palm of his hand.  I think he was sending her telepathic messages, 'don't worry, I've got this'.  Kate is weirdly possessive of Gerry, but that's too big  a subject for here and now. 

 

Because this case has gone on so long, most people don't really care one way or another what happens to those who made the child disappear.  Happily there are no angry mobs, or seekers of vengeance.  Even Goncalo Amaral who has suffered more than most at the hands of Gerry and Kate, seems content to let fate run it's course.  He has back, that which was taken from him, his freedom of speech.

 

BRAVE NEW DOCUMENTARY

 

I am very happy to attach a link to a brave new documentary by journalist Sonia Poulton.  And it was hugely refreshing to watch a documentary based on the facts of the case rather than the very creepy speculation of a handful of oddbods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw8ednZYRbI&t=58s

 

Firstly, I would like to thank Sonia for putting to bed the ludicrous and frankly offensive idea that people who question the unbelievable abduction story are filled with hatred for the parents of a missing child. As Sonia pointed out, there are ‘antis’ and ‘pros’, and it was the ‘pros’, the supporters of the parents, who planted the medieval idea that non believers were haters and pitchforkers.  

 

Thankfully, Sonia skilfully avoids the pitfalls of actually stating it was Colonel Mustard in the library with the dagger, the police work and the forensics, she rightly leaves that to the officers of Operation Grange and the PJ.  As a professional, she knows that the police cannot be held to words they have written or spoken during an ever changing investigation.  And they have said very, very little, but for some what they have said is carved in stone. 

 

Sonia picked up on, what most of us picked up on, and it began long before we knew anything about the forensic evidence or even heard the name Goncalo Amaral.  As the McCanns opened an online shop, went to see the Pope and embarked on a European tour, we were the ones saying WTF, while Team McCann insisted no-one had the moral right to question what is normal.  Who knows how the parents of a missing child should behave, they opined, they saw the use of lawyers and spin doctors as innovative and brave.  But let's dispel this once and for all.  Yes there is a line between normal and freaking crazy, and it should be ok to say that. It was good to see American profiler Pat Brown put into words what so many of us were thinking, to sum it up 'the behaviour they [Gerry and Kate] exhibit, is so out of whack'. Indeed.  Most of us know what we would feel, and have an inkling as to how we would act, beginning with searching every bush, every ditch, and every inch of the vicinity.  Pat picked up on those huge anomalies, that distinction between normal and not normal.  Gerry's chatty, newsy blog for example, stands out as a major 'WTF' (please do see my WTF series of blogs).  What father of a missing child, possibly in the hands of paedophiles, could write such light hearted dross? 

 

Goncalo Amaral has recently raised the question of the massive Madeleine Fund being wasted on legal proceedings by Gerry and Kate McCann. The McCanns and their Board of Directors (including Esther McVie) at the time promised transparency, and promised the Fund would not be used for legal fees. Clearly that did not last long, because forensic accountant Enid O'Dowd, couldn't even find the name of a single employee.

 

The segments chosen by Sonia perfectly demonstrate very strange behaviour of these parents and the topics that have kept social media buzzing for all these years.  Social media has picked up where the mainstream media have opted out. Why won't the MSM publish the truth? The answer is probably quite simple, they know how litigious the McCanns are.

 

I hope this documentary is seen by everyone and anyone with an interest in what could easily be described as the crime of century.  Sonia has gone much further than other documentary makers in this case, in that she has tackled those behind the scenes players directly. Ouch for Richard Bilton, but much deserved, his 10th anniversary documentary was appalling. How dare he intrude on the lives of those Portuguese workers with such heinous suggestions, he was racist, classist and the BBC at it's snobby worst.  But Sonia was far from finished.  What have you got to say for yourselves Jim Gamble and Martin Brunt?

 

Saving reputations shouldn't cost lives.  In order to protect Gerry and Kate McCann, a multi pronged attack was planned on those who dared to criticise the McCanns.  Jim, and I have no doubt it was Jim, chose, or helped choose, Brenda Leyland because she was so 'ordinary', Jim is fixated with monsters disguising themselves as normal people.  Poor Brenda was labelled a troll, at a time when internet trolls were public enemy number one.  Sky News and indeed the tabloids were merciless. Who can forget Carol Malone's 'fecked up bitch' remark?  Brenda's tragic death was a result of a group of sadists thinking up ways in which to destroy this woman's life completely.  Brenda Leyland was the example used to silence the rest of us.  I am sure she would be pleased to know it totally backfired on them.

 

This documentary has the quality and professionalism of award winners.  Sonia has bravely trodden where other journalists have said, 'no way'.  She has taken away the taboo our of not believing the parents, and shown that forums such as mine, have plenty to talk about!

 

 

Ps.  There are a couple of appearances by moi!  I have to say, although I am a narcissist, I also suffer from body dysmorphia (quite rightly says Smart Arse Son), so I am relieved not to look as hideous as I think!