Wednesday, 3 October 2018


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.

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!  


  1. "I am very happy to attach a link"

    Where is the link?

  2. The link is hard to miss.
    Ireally enjoyed this video,I think Sonia has brought lots of the WTF moments, especially those damning photos of Kate and Gerry coming out of the church on what would have been Madeleine's 4th birthday,and put them together. I hope it gets a wide audience. I enjoyed seeing you Rosalind, it's nice to put a face to a blog.

  3. Well I have just watched it all and from an anti point of view I think it supports a lot of things that antis have been saying for years.

    However I am a Mccann supporter and I can recognise that if someone just looks for and takes little negative snippets from over 11 years then yes - you can produce something which sounds convincing to people who want to believe it.

    It is not made from a neutral viewpoint and that is the problem with the video - it has a target audience which it probably hits.

    1. To Anonymous 18:06 I disagree as I think the film just points out the facts of the case. Facts the MSM refuse to report.

      MSM has never held a neutral position on this case.

    2. ruth bashford5 October 2018 at 09:30

      Apart from personal comments by contributors, every single thing had been reported in MSM, Sonia just did a personal slant on it.

    3. It may well be that everything has been reported in the MSM 19:02, but it is the journalist's job to highlight the important points that the average reader might miss. Not knocking the average reader, but we read about subject we are interested in with more intensity. For most readers, the continuing plight of Gerry and Kate McCann is a turn off. They have received more than any parents of a missing child in history. First with their massive Madeleine Fund, rumoured to have topped £4m or £5m, no-one knows, because the Fund is as transparent as an old London pea souper. [fog for the non Brits and those under 60].

      The MSM have never raised any suspicions about this huge Fund (not a Charity), they have accepted without question the use of the Fund to sue Goncalo Amaral, and the non use of the Fund to support Operation Grange who are searching for their daughter.

      Tracey Kandhola is stuck in the same time warp as Team McCann and Clarence Mitchell. Still putting forward this myth that the McCanns were cleared back in 2008, and should be treated as the heroes they are. The antics of Tracey Kandhola are almost as vomit inducing as Clarence Mitchell's 'because of people like you'.

      The MSM have skimmed over the huge holes in the parents abduction story, and have accepted their word and very bizarre behaviour, as not only normal, but worthy of praise and accolades.

      Beyond Leveson, we all now know that the MSM lie to us, quite regularly. We followers of the Madeleine story had already figured that out. And it is the constant lying that hasten the end of tabloids. Why would anyone bother to read 'reporters' like Tracey Kandhola in the Sun or the Mail, when there are so many other credible options available! As far as the Sun is concerned, it's just a shame Kate didn't have a larger bust.

      This documentary is much more than a personal slant 19:02, it draws attention to all the murky goings on behind the story that has been presented to the British public. And that's a first.

    4. Thank you 18:06 and apologies for my delay in replying. I often answer posts from bottom up rather than top down, which isn't fair at all.

      Well done you for voicing your perspective. Opposing views are always welcome, it is just a shame that they cannot put their views forward without being hostile and offensive.

      For you, I am guessing, as for I, the outcome of this case matters not a great deal. The world keeps on turning, what will be will be. Believe it or not, I would prefer to be in the position that you are. That hesitant step before enlightenment. Therein lies a happy place, the kind of place that fairy tales and biblical stories are made of.

      Of course, I am way too old, to take such a leap of faith. My views and opinions are formed by lifelong education and personal experience. I'm a writer, I watch people, I always have. I trust my own judgement above all others. I know that I know that my research is above and beyond, and I've never had to prove it. My word is my bond and I have never felt the need to explain that. The accusations of lying thrown at me by former detainees of St. Anne's convent, were to be expected. Those who went along with the system got an easy ride. However, my closest circle of friends, those there alongside me, share my memories, and then some. Like myself, they rebelled against the nuns and the freaky environment we were living in. Paddy and Maureen, Julie and Debbie, Angela and Rita, all much loved siblings with a shared horrendous experience. Yes, we hated the nuns, more than most people could imagine. They were evil to the core, beyond any logical or reasoned explanation. They inflicted cruelty on vulnerable children because 1)they could, and 2)they enjoyed it.

      Can you blame me for wanting to know why? Why a woman dressed in nun's garb who spent at least 12 hours of her day praying, laid into, physically, a 2 year old child? I couldn't make any sense of it, I as a 14 year old girl, put myself between the raging nun and the toddler. Don't hit her, hit me, I challenged, and she did. My upturned chin and defiance was all she needed to batter me. I was still dumb enough to turn the other cheek, but she punched that one too.

    5. In recent years, I have heard from the brother of the little tot I defended. I loved that that baby as if she were my own. Her name was Donna Marie ………, and I taught her her name over and over, I wanted her to never forget who she was. I turned it into a game, 'who are you?' I would say, and she would repeat with a cute lisp 'I'm Donna Maria.....'. Then I would scoop her up in my arms and tell her how brilliant she was! Her brother, only a couple of years older than Donna, phoned me from his new location in the US, to thank me for the kindness I showed to him. As a little lad being punished for all sorts of sins he wasn't even aware of, I took him out into the meadow and taught him how to make daisy chains. That he remembers the kindness of the 'older girl' touched me profoundly. I was powerless to take away the cruelties inflicted on the little ones by the nuns and lay staff, but I could at least make them laugh and feel happy at times. What hurt me more than anything else at the convent was that feeling of being powerless. For myself, I was fearless, it was a matter of 'do your worst, bitches', but with the little ones it was beyond my control. The nun, Sister Consolata was free to put them in line for 'Chinese burns'. I kid you not, I witnessed this. The little ones were in a queue for their punishment. So scared that they wet themselves and faced further punishment.

      In my opinion, it takes a special kind of evil and brutality to torment the under fives. Even as a young teenager, I couldn't tolerate it in any way shape or form. Ergo, I spent my early teenage years being battered by nuns, religious zealots and perverts.

      It makes me laugh, or more accurately, makes me sick,to see Child Protection, Social Services etc, take over the care and control of a child. From personal experience I can tell you that some of these monsters would never treat their own children as they do those abandoned to their care.

    6. It wasn't just I in that care home fighting back against the cruelty. There was a bond between we older children to protect the little ones as best we could. It was an unwritten law, that we would stand between the insane rages of the nun and the babies. We could take the punches, the babies couldn't. It was us against them, always. We protected each other, the bond we had was probably greater than normal siblings, we grew wiley enough to cover up and confine or spread the blame. Our only goal, to keep each other and the little ones safe.

      Well I have no idea how I got into that miserable series of anecdotes, perhaps I am trying to portray the character I am, and have always been. My first inclination is to protect the weak and the powerless.

      And in this story, it is the forgotten Madeleine, Maddie, who is weak and powerless. Maybe if it wasn't for the tenacity of Gonacalo Amaral, she would have been forgotten entirely.

      When the McCanns said they would never give up, they were blissfully unaware that quite a few real detectives were thinking the same thing too.

      No matter how much you spin it, this is not the outcome the McCanns wanted. They want a clear statement from Operation Grange detailing how and why they were eliminated as persons of interest.

      Only a statement from Scotland Yard along those lines will lift the cloud of suspicion that has hung over them since they were made arguidos in the late summer of 2007.

      A non result for the McCanns is almost as bad as an issue of arrest warrants. SY and the PJ have no-one else. No paedophile gangs, no night time predators, absolutely no-one to fit the CEOP profile of a bogey man.

      Robert Murat would have been perfect, but he is one of those delightfully charming people who's life is an open book. He not only spoke to the police, he gave them his full lie story. The actions of RM are not the actions of someone with something to hide. Deh, dumbasses, Bennett and Hall.

      Anyway, that is probably enough for me for one night, lol. I am off to find 'Could it be Magic' by Donna Summer, not the long nosed imposter Barry Manilow who'se ghastly rendition was piped into Sainsbury's supermarket this afternoon!

  4. Ros - were you interviewed specifically for this video or are the clips of you from interviews for Sonia's main production from years ago that has not yet been shown?

  5. " a brave new documentary"

    What is brave about it?

    1. Hi Anonymous3 October 2018 at 21:13
      "What is brave about it?"

      Doing such an investigation and publish it on the internet without asking the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Queen and the Prime Minister if they think it's appropriate to do so, makes it difficult for Sonia to be accepted by the official society and those who claim to represent it, one of whom is Clarence Mitchell.

      However, we must not forget that she has of course a growing number of supporters, whose support she's hoping to get in order to mentally survive. They're just called Human Beings and they're actually quite a few of them now, and we'll certainly see even more of them in the future if Sonia keeps on showing the courgae, that she's done so far.

      Have a Nice day.

    2. Yes brave 21:13, Sonia has shown all, or at least some, of the machinations behind the news that is reported by complicit journalists like Tracey Kandhola.
      Tracey for example, has never questioned the role or indeed, the need, for PR and spin doctors for parents of a missing child. It's unheard of. I wonder how much Clarence Mitchell has been paid over the years for misleading the mainstream media and the public?

      People on social media who follow the Madeleine case are aware that 90% of the reporting on this case comes straight from Team McCann press releases (published by tabloids verbatim as original stories)and pure spin quoted as a 'source' when Clarence is too shy to give his name.

      The establishment, the MSM and even the police have treated the public as a large solid mass who can be swayed in whatever direction they choose. The McCanns 'got it' within hours of Madeleine's disappearance, 'if you tell big enough lie and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it' (Goebbels).

      The British press have not questioned the McCanns abduction story, as doctors, church goers and professions, their word was always enough. As we are all sadly well aware, had Madeleine's family been impoverished like Shannon Matthews family, innocent until proven guilty would have meant nothing.

      The British media have been complicit in reporting only what the McCanns want the British public to know. In fact the entire British establishment have used the 'abduction' story to bolster the generic English fear of foreigners and bogeymen. Why? Because governments like it a lot when they can plant new fears in the collective psyche of their citizens. A threat to children is perfect.

      Sonia has cut through all the bullshit and spin and like the fearless journalists of the past, she has challenged all those aspects of this case that our MSM have deliberately ignored. They (the press) turned the McCanns into celebrities and heroes, are they among those police chiefs and criminal experts who will be hugely embarrassed should the truth ever be made public?

      As Sonia said, publishing or broadcasting the truth about Madeleine's disappearance is career suicide. I say, ain't that the truth, my own name has been vilified on social media and Amazon reviews - my blog is my only way of repairing my reputation.

      Yes Sonia is very brave, she has far more to lose than I, but one day as GA said, the world will know 'The Truth of the Lie', and I think that day is rapidly approaching.

  6. Hi Rosalinda
    just about to fall asleep now.

    I,ve just watched Sonia Poulton's documentary. You just have to read the comments on YouTube, regarding how ordinary people, who are gifted with common sense reacted to it, to understand that neither the authorities nor the McCanns can fool us for ever. Isn't it a shame that MSM aren't able/competent/willing to do what Sonia has done?

    "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"

    True, it really did. I was then reading Pat Brown's blog and also the comments on it, but I did not comment myself. A lot of people, who had been anonymous on her blog got so emotional and also disappointed with those who were chasing the McCanns' "trolls" on the internet, that they immediatly published their full names, addresses, showing how sincere they were in their quest for the truth, which demonstrated,that they cared more about Madeleine than about their own reputation and that they didn't care the least about whether they would be doorstepped by a clown like Brunt or not.

    Clarence Mitchell uncivilised manner when he ignored Sonia and then suddenly turned around to tell her that it's because of people like her his protection of the McCanns is/was so much needed, shows what kind of person this man is. He doesn't even deserve a comment, but still I cannot keep myself from doing it.

    1. Hi Bjorn, I agree Clarence doesn't deserve a comment, but how can we resist? It is so easy for journalists to get their own back - they only have choose an unflattering photo, and Sonia did, lol.

      I feel a bit sorry for CM, he too has seen his dreams fade and die. As spokesman for the McCanns, he was momentarily, the 'king of the world'. Unfortunately, he didn't use his elevated position to win friends and influence people. Quite the opposite. If the arrogant attitude he displayed towards Sonia was his usual mode of dealing with the press, I imagine he made a lot of enemies. But I think we all knew that already.

      Unfortunately, the kind of spin practised by Clarence Mitchell, has been overtaken by budding young apprentices and entrepeneurs, Clarence is now out of his dept. His trade is more suited to the bright young things who have edged him out. Ditto Jim Gamble, the Masters of the Universe in Silicone Valley, had no time for his demands and he was never going to get an invitation to go join them.

      Where does Clarence go from here? He has had so many years at the top of his profession, there is nowhere else to go. His attempt at becoming the MP for Brighton, was brave(ish), but it was never within the realms of reality. Brighton is the most enlightened and progressive towns in the UK, the only one to vote for a Green MP! It was always a lost cause.

      As far as I can see he still acts as spokesman for the McCanns on occasion, but I very much doubt he is still receiving the very large salary he had in 2007, and indeed for several years after.

      Which again begs the glaringly obvious question, why do the parents of a missing child need a spindoctor 11+ years on? Or even in the first place. The very idea I am sure would have been downright insulting to genuine grieving parents.

      From the Ziggy posts (where is he I wonder?), it would seem Team McCann have turned on CM. They are highlighting him as the government go between, the enforcer of a sinister plot contrived in the offices of Whitehall. I don't agree, not only because he would be hopeless miscast as a double agent - he has all the finesse of Inspector Clousseau.

      I think he and Gerry bonded on that flight back to PDL, that's the moment I would open with in any Hollywood film, lol. The moment they hatched a plan to make Madeleine's disappearance go global and beyond. They were like two adolescents in the first flush of love, they could see all the greatness was their's for the taking. I am sure, there was born the idea for an annual Madeleine Day for all the world, with pop concerts, sports events and 'something in the arts' (with all proceeds to the Madeleine Fund presumably).

      Gerry saw a multimillion pound corporation, CM saw lots of TV appearances, as too did Jim Gamble, who I am sure dreamed of a government funded missing child organisation with a dedicated TV channel. He too foresaw many TV appearances, like the McCanns, he mistakenly believes the more we see of him, the more we will like him.

      It will be interesting to see how it all pans out. Jim Gamble can, I suppose, say he is only human (even though he was a Chief of Police). Clarence however, spent 3 months with Gerry and Kate, I believe, is it possible he was still working on the assumption of an abduction? If so, why was he obstructing the PJ? Someone once said (who's name I cannot at the moment remember) that Clarence lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth. That's quite a lot for someone from the Judiciary to say, given their very strict laws on judicial secrecy. The PJ must have felt strongly enough about this issue to point it out. Clarence was lying - why? What was in it for him - maybe those dreams he and Gerry spoke about when they flew out to PDL.

  7. Thank you for this write up. I cannot get past the bizarre behavior of the parents. If she were kidnapped and from Apartment where they left her alone and with the door unlocked, how could they possibly behave as they did? And the same question if they know more and covered up. It’s just unfathomable. No other word.

    1. Unfathomable is a great word! And not one you can just throw into a conversation, as it takes a minute to think about the pronunciation. A bit like phenomenon, which I love, but can't say :( In fact I live it so much, I must of a way of turning it into a blog title!

      But I jest. Nothing of course gets past the bizarre behaviour of the parents. Suspicion of the parents began straight away, as they knew it would. They were already prepared with their team of media monitors who's sole objective was to seek and destroy anyone who questioned the abduction story. It felt as if there were hundreds in those days, they were prominent on every comments page and discussion group. And they worked in groups. They would select a target, then all dive in like pack dogs. It was very distressing to see, and indeed to experience, but for me, it only hardened my resolve to continue discussion of this case.

      Suspicion of the parents began long before Goncalo Amaral came on the scene. That is, there were hundreds of websites and forums aghast at the bizarre behaviour of the parents. Unfortunately, this gave ammunition to those who declared McCann critics haters and pitchforkers. In their heads, however, the McCanns will always blame GA, never themselves, it's just who they are.

  8. "It is an inescapable fact the net result of the McCanns’ multi-million dollar PR effort has become an all-out assault on good taste and freedom of speech.

    In so doing, the McCanns’ actions have aroused more suspicion about their role concerning the fate of their daughter than rallied support.

    By any stretch, their campaign to find Madeleine has been an embarrassing, vicious disaster summed up by the death of Brenda Leyland. The irony for the McCanns is she now looms larger offline than she ever did on it."

    1. Good post 08:14, and yes, their campaign was vicious. Why would the family of a missing child need a media monitoring unit to attack non believers of the abduction story online? Brother John McCann summed it up perfectly, they are a very proactive family. Their very aggressive stance didn't stop their critics, it merely sent them underground. That is, most people discussing the Madeleine case, had to do so anonymously, or see their lives, their families and their jobs viciously attacked by Team McCann. Exposing the Myths, the website behind the notorious dossier, contained hundreds of facebook pages and personal details of McCann online critics, all lined up for the 'Brenda Leyland' treatment. Their campaign was more of a war than a search for a missing child. I am sure it is a phenomenon will be discussed at great length in the future.

  9. Just a thought,but as someone well known on twitter (and apparently with history of similar) is claiming to have spoken to a Grange copper to dispel rumours that Grange has quietly closed,two things came to my mind.
    First, has she been reading here lately?
    And second, she says the coppers name was Mark.
    Now who do we know with that name? Lol

    1. Anon 4 Oct 08.39

      The person referred to on twitter is a Mark D. We know of a couple of Marks but I don't think a Mark D has been mentioned before.

  10. Rosalinda, thanks for the link to Sonia’s film. Informative; well done.

    Björn (3 Oct at 23:17)

    Sonia Poulton: “What they [the general public] want to know, why a family of a missing child would require a PR machine. Why would they require that Mr Mitchell?"

    Clarence Mitchell: “They require it because of people like you.”

    Not sure if Mitchell’s answer is in the McCanns’ favour. This is such a strange way to represent your clients’ interests. Also, not the best advertising for Clarence Mitchell Communications Ltd.



    1. NL 4 October 2018 at 11:39

      Hej NL och hur är läget.

      Mitcell could just as well have said, "that's because there're so many seekers of truth out there on social media like yourself Sonia, whom we have to mislead and intimidate to protect our clients from being prosecuted, which they would've been long ago, if they hadn't paid me a fortune for doing exactly what you suspect me of doing.

      "Limited?", that's not really how I'd describe his communications with MSM. You scored there NL.

    2. Yes NL, that was quite amusing, the 'line' obviously came to him after he walked away and he just had to go back and use it! No doubt he is still patting his own back for his wit.

      In the UK, 'limited' on the end of a company's name, means should the Company become bankrupt or whatever, their assets are limited to the Company, not the personal assets of the owners/directors.

      In the case of Clarence, his statements on the McCanns are limited to journalists who treat him like the God he thinks he is ;)

  11. Sonia Poulton: “What they [the general public] want to know, why a family of a missing child would require a PR machine. Why would they require that Mr Mitchell?"

    Clarence Mitchell: “They require it because of people like you.”

    Irony is lost on Mitchell then.

    1. Hi anon4 October 2018 at 15:21

      As far as Mitchell and the McCanns are concerned and whatever they say, nothing of it is ironic, satirical or sarcastic. They really mean every word they say, whether they are telling the truth or just telling lies, never the opposite, something between the lines or beyond the spoken words. So just as you ironically imply, irony is indeed lost on Mitchell, but apparently not on you and I'm of course happy about that.

    2. Hi Rosalinda re: NL:s comment 4 October 2018 at 11:39

      "This is such a strange way to represent your clients’ interests. Also, not the best advertising for Clarence Mitchell Communications Ltd.


      I think NL was just joking about Mitchell's "Communications Ltd" by making an ironic remark about his manipulative business actions being limited as the word itself could suggest, when they actually are illimitable

      As for Sonia Poulton's documentary, she's clever at focusing on what's essential in the case, which I hope will make more people take interest in Madeleine's fate by helping the PJ to solve the case.

      I haven't seen any real nasty comments here or anywhere about Sonia Poulton's research or about your own participation in it. Could that be because even people who've supported the McCanns for so many years are now begining to question the official truth?

    3. Hi Bjorn, yes I see the irony now, I possibly replied in too much haste.

      Yes, Sonia is clearly a mainstream journalist, and this should be a mainstream broadcast! She is ripping the curtain off the ridiculous narrative that has been fed to the British public by the British press for the past 11+ years.

      Sadly, we are now living into an era that is edging ever closer to the far Right, documentaries exposing corruption within the establishment will become fewer. In the 80's the catchphrase was 'Greed is Good', in 2018, it's 'Corruption is Better'.

      But no, I haven't seen any nasty comments about Sonia or myself either Bjorn, but I think these days the 'Mean Girls' keep their bitchy remarks within their members only lounges.

      I think, if a poll were held today as to how many people still believe the McCanns, it would go very heavily against them. Most people would say 'who?' or 'hell yeah'. It may even have reached the stage where believers of the McCanns are afraid to speak out - something their supporters online have always feared, which is why they support the parents anonymously. I found it quite bizarre that the lady handing over 'the dossier' to Sky News and the police, complaining about anonymous trolls, was herself anonymous and hiding in the shadows.

  12. Hi Ross, I have not posted on here for quite a while but I do always keep up with your blog. I was just watching a video on youtube by the armchair detective and saw something that I have never seen before (and I must have seen everything by now, or so i thought), and its this, a homeoffice spokesman saying that there were 8 couples on holiday with the mccanns and not 4. Please have a look at the link as I would be interested to hear yours or anyone elses thoughts on this. You only need to watch from the 1 hour mark exactly for 30 seconds to see the clip im talking about.

    Heres the link

    Anyhoo, hope you are well.
    Keep up the good work.


    1. 15:15

      Dr Graham Hill:

      “The McCann family went to Portugal for family holiday and they went with 16 friends, 8 other couples..."

      Strange. Sloppiness?

      Other links:

      "Graham is a Consultant Criminologist, former senior police officer and experienced SIO. He was the founding Head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre’s Behavioural Analysis Unit (BAU) and has been an advisor, behavioural analyst or SIO on some of the UK’s most notorious child abuse/murder investigations."

      13 MAR 2017

      This investigation has become a political football – Dr Graham Hill

      He is inconsistent IMO.

    2. Lovely to see you AFAN, and thank you so much for sticking with me :)

      This is completely new to me to be honest AF, I have never heard there were more families on that holiday. I wouldn't rule it out. As a legal secretary for 30+ years, I was always amazed how 'obvious truths' were bypassed by, well everyone!

      Whilst I acknowledge it is possible there were more in the holiday party than stated by the McCanns and the Tapas group, I'm not sure it would make any significant difference to the facts as we know them (the PJ files). Others may have distanced themselves from the Tapas group, for obvious reasons, perhaps even Jez Wilkins and his wife. Their meeting up in PDL, all a happy coincidence.

      I don't however, think those on the periphery matter that much. In comparison say, to the 'friend' of David Payne's who hand delivered burner mobile phones to each of them as they waited in the police station - so they had a means to keep in touch with each other. As you do.

      I am intrigues and will look at the video AF, but can you give me the video title, I still cannot c/p links :(

    3. Hi Ros,

      Heres the title to search for on Youtube, #17, Operation Grange "A living lie" and the uploader is, Armchair Detective vs the McCanns. Just skip to the 1hr exactly mark and watch for 30 seconds or so to see the bit im mentioning. Its the first and ONLY time ive ever seen this mentioned, and i have watched and read just about all there is out there on this "mystery". Personally I wonder if this is Granges stumbling block, other people there that holiday that may hold enough power/influence to prevent a conclusion being reached?

      Or maybe as anon above says, hes just inconsistent :-/ very sloppy if thats the case.

      BTW, you looked and came across perfectly fine on SP`s video IMHO.


    4. AFAN/Rosalinda

      Full interview:

      Madeleine McCann Abduction & Child Crime Investigation Explored with Dr Graham Hill

      at 1:36
      (“The McCann family went to Portugal for family holiday and they went with 16 friends, 8 other couples...")


      June 11, 2015

      "The Madeleine McCann disappearance in Portugal, the investigation of her abduction, and the controversy over how the case was handled internationally is explored with criminologist and retired UK police officer, Dr. Graham Hill. Theories that the parents killed Madeleine, and the reasons that the investigation was handled backwards, as well as how crimes against children–from Gary Glitter to Debra Lafave–are handled by authorities. Explore the world of forensic investigation on this uncensored Crime Time with Allison Hope Weiner"

    5. Hi anon 5 October 2018 at 22:40
      "He is inconsistent IMO" (Dr Graham Hill)
      Not just that, but also incompetent and a fool.

      I’ve just listened to him being interviewed , not so long ago, I assume.

      What most of all upsets me with this kind of frequent interviews with experts, is that the case is always described from the McCann's perspective. Yet there is not a single person outside the realm of the McCanns’ friends, who can confirm the truth in their story.

      Dr Hill claims (or did so some time ago) to know, that the McCanns were not properly investigated by the Portuguese PJ during the first critical hours after Madeleine had gone missing, and therefore the opportunity to really find out if they were implicated in a crime or not was lost.

      Once that chance had been lost, there was no point in investigating them later, as the PJ did, because that wouldn’t lead anywhere.

      Isn’t that what Dr Hill says? Native speakers of English, please help me. Maybe there’s something here in your language, that I don’t understand. Is he perhaps being ironic or is his brain just disconnected from his mouth and voice.

      He then goes on, as though he were a close family member, praising the McCanns’ civility and competence, and he bases his faith in Gerry’s and Kate’s innocence only on their intelligence and on their “greatness”. Is that not what he does? Hopefully the OG and the PJ do not equate professionalism and elitist doctors with innocence. Dr Hill apparently does.

    6. Many thanks AFAN, and others interested in Dr. Graham Hill. No Bjorn, your English is fine, he is just talking nonsense.

      Having watched the clip referred to by AFAN, I went on to watch (almost)the whole interview (39 mins I think). Hmm, well he doesn't look or sound like any Professor I have ever met. Professors never commit themselves to anything! They always manage to turn any question you ask of them, back onto you, lol. If they don't answer with a question, they go for the very curt 'prove it'.

      They don't put forward one option only. As if! They look at all options and they leave all doors open. It is not enough for them to tell their students the conclusions they have reached, their students have to find out why.

      Clearly, an television interview doesn't allow an audience to go do the research, but he should have had the skills to justify and back up his beliefs. Or as Freud said 'if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'. Being 'well spoken' should not be enough to clear you in the eyes of a Criminologist. He really needed to put forward something a lot more tangible than that!

      He mentions 8 couples, 16 people, on holiday with the McCanns a couple of times. It can't be that he hasn't read the files or doesn't know the details, because he was among the first to fly out to PDL when Madeleine disappeared. Instructed by the Foreign Office apparently. Again, hmm. Why would they Foreign Office send a criminal behaviour expert to PDL? What did Child Exploitation and Online Protection have to do with 3 year old Madeleine?

      He wasn't there to study the behaviour of the parents and their friends (as if!)and he wasn't there to help the local police pounce on an inept burglar. Perhaps he was the one, or among those, who compiled a 'profile' of the abductor for the Portuguese police, handily comping up with a match to a local single guy who had a bit of porn on his computer.

      Naming Robert Murat as the first Arguido, was further enhanced by anonymous callers to the police saying Robert used to chop up worms as a kid, or whatever, and the tip off from a Sun journalist who pointed out that murderer Ian Huntley, hung around the investigation and cameras. Such was the hysteria at the time, that RM was immediately pounced on and his life wrecked. They had their patsy!

      Dr. Hill is indeed performing gymnastic feats to defend the parents, basically it would seem, because they educated middle class professionals. Their chilliness he defines is a result of their methodical, academic mode of thinking. Hmm.

      I have tried looking him up on Wikipedia, but can't find any entry for him thus far. As a spokesman on child protection, it would be weird if Bennett has a wiki page, but he doesn't.

      Unfortunately for him, Jim Gamble, Clarence Mitchell, Mark Williams-Thomas and the entire McCann entourage, if the parents turn out to been involved, where do they go from there?

    7. ACPO state Supt. Hill was in PDL by Sun 6 May.
      Supt. Hill claims he first went on Wed 9 May at the request of FCO.

      ACPO are at pains to point out this was not at the request of any Portuguese official.
      What was he doing there?

    8. JJ (16:21)

      Det Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance.

      Martin Brunt April 20, 2011

      "The first UK specialists parachuted in to help Portuguese police find Madeleine McCann have left their jobs.

      Det Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan helped the investigators narrow down a list of potential suspects and offered interview techniques.

      They arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance nearly four years ago, but diplomatic sensitivities delayed confirmation of their presence for several days.

      They and colleagues later advised Leicestershire police who pursued British leads in the hunt for Madeleine.

      The two men led the Behavioural Analysis Unit at the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre and are the latest in a small exodus of its staff."

      "diplomatic sensitivities"?

    9. We have Supt Hill of CEOP "assisting" the Mccanns in PDL without the knowledge of the Portuguese authorities.
      Who told Supt Hill to go?
      Who signed his section 26?
      Did he have one, if he did not, his actions were criminal.

      Diplomatic sensitivities indeed!

  13. Hi Rosalinda,
    Re: Sonia Poulton film.

    What an amazing video. So well put together.
    Sonia Poulton is an angel walking among devils.
    Every lie the main stream media is afraid to explore she lays bare.

    I like what one of your readers noted about the final repartee between Clarence Mitchell and Poulton about why the McCann family would require a PR machine, and his frustrated retort: "They require it because of people like you" As poster 15:21 says, "Irony is lost on Mitchell then".
    However there's more in my opinion. This criminal hack was well aware of just how ironic his statement was. And laughing all the way to the bank.

    Anyway - Well done.

  14. Ros says: "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!"

    What on Earth has your appearance got to do with anything about this video?

    1. A mixture of vanity and insecurity I suppose 19:45, perhaps I secretly hoped someone would say, wow, your gorgeous, lol. Very unlikely I know, I keep forgetting how old I am, ha ha. Although I am a feminist, I secretly loved the wolf whistles, but it's been a long time, though I'm happy to say elderly gentlemen do start conversations with me in supermarkets.

      As one reader was polite enough to point out, it is good to put a face to a blog, I'm just not sure if mine was the kind of face she was expecting. I give so much away about myself and my life, I do wonder how readers picture me, the mad woman in the attic from Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre springs to mind.

      I am sure I am far from alone in wondering how 'I looked and how I came across' on video 19:45, I just happen to say it out loud.

  15. You look fine,but if you dont mind a little constructive criticism,slightly too much make up.It looks like you made a big effort to look good for the video in the same way people do over the top singing with their mouths wide open on Songs Of Praise knowing they are on tv.

    1. I look fine, thank you 23:13, miserable face smiley :(

      I am not entirely sure there is such a thing as too much make up. Make up is so much fun, I don't know why we aren't all slathering it over ourselves on a daily basis! On my bucket list, I have a make up lesson from a drag queen, and I am planning on making that a reality with a trip to Brighton in the v.near future! Also on my bucket list is attend an outrageous drag show! I simply adore the Drag Queens of London and so absolutely delighted to have members of the cast following me on twitter. I adore people who have the courage to be themselves.

      I have always thought I was quite discreet with my make up, but apparently not. Regardless, I have now taken to adding a huge kitten wink at the edge of my eyes, and loving it! My much loved brother, predicated many decades ago that I would end up as one of those mad old women who wear turbans, drink gin (I've just discovered the blue stuff, lol) and smoke cigarettes in long cigarette holders. I'm kind of three quarters the way there.

      I was always terribly, dreadfully, aware and ashamed of my batshit crazy mother's totally off the wall behaviour. Even as a very young child, I was painfully aware, that there was nothing normal about my mother. My brother, a little older and wiser, was more painfully aware than I. I was a willing participant in my mother's games, she only had to wink at me, and I would say and do whatever she wanted. I was in on the joke, the craic. She, like I, was always way ahead of any situation and we shared looks that were the eye contact equivalent of high fives. Funnily enough in her latter years, she was surrounded by all the gays in the village! All through my life I wondered how on earth anyone could possibly like her! I believed her outrageous behaviour was as objectionable to everyone else as it was to, the very snobby at the time, me!

      I was wrong. On just about every level. She was much loved, she made people laugh out loud, she was out and out offensive, out and out hilarious. She was idolised by her local gay community, as much as Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, not only forgiven for her political incorrectness, but applauded for it!

      It was an eerie experience it must be said, to go against everything I had been in the convent and there onwards, to accept that my mum, as out of step with society as it was possible to be, was a good and indeed, loveable person. I hate myself for those years of ignorance, when those 'helping me' told me to avoid her at all costs. Those were the lost years, once I accepted 'she is as she is' I began to enjoy (thoroughly), her eccentricities, her love of fun, her love of just for the hell of it, and the fact that those closest to her accepted and loved her, just the way she was. I couldn't have changed her, and shouldn't even have tried, she was outstanding, just as she was. I'm knocking on a bit now, but the twinkle I still have in my eye, is all down to her.

    2. Oops I have just attempted to re-read the above, and have to confess, the 'blue' gin has kicked in! I'm a terrible drinker, lol, whilst I want to discuss the terrible stuff, I always want to hear Millie Jackson singing 'Could it be Magic'? Where do you go from that? Put the glass down, and walk away from the computer...… lol

      Apologies, I have an irritating habit of turning the most dire of situations into a joke. Perhaps because I have a personal preference towards dark humour. I think it is a 'Paddy' or 'Celtic' thing, the Scots can be just as cutting as the Irish. Before the Ice Age, Scotland and Ireland were once joined, they all come from the same gene pool. I had the double whammy, an Irish mother and a Scots father. I was doomed even before nature or nurture took it's course. I'm speaking in jest of course, by doomed, I mean blessed, I have the smart gob of a combined Celtic gene pool. And also the laid back disposition of an honest broker who knows that one day, maybe soon, my writings will be seen for what they are, (I'm secretly hoping entertaining above all else)account of probably the most bizarre crime in history.

      I correspond with my readers as I would correspond with a dear friend, I share my thoughts, I share my changes in opinion, I try to explain why I think the way I think at any given time. God forbid, my readers would carve my words in stone, I don't do that, I accept that this is a never ending story (doh, cause I can't remember the name of the song). I actually feel pity for that person who will eventually one day, have to explain it. Where tf, do they start?

      Secretly, only revealed because I am drinking blue gin, lol, in the next few months OG will move in on all those suspected of covering up Madeleine's death. They may start with those on the periphery, Clarence Michell, Tony Blair, Jim Gamble, maybe even all those pushing the fake abduction story. Yeh, Lorraine Kelly that includes you. How about crime solver extraordinaire, Mark Williams Thomas, who prefers to believe a professional cleaning firm were involved, or the not quite four year old child wandered off, of her own volition. Sherlock Holmes he is absolutely not, and if nothing else, seeing his dumbness exposed to the world will be reward within itself. Ditto Jim Gamble. I thought Trump with toilet roll attached to his shoe was one of the most embarrassing things I have ever seen. But in the McCann case, there are several alpha males saying hold my beer I can top that. Those of us in the observer side of the gallery can only watch from the sidelines. The show didn't need our participation, it was a runaway train that was going to crash whatever.

    3. 23:13
      "Songs of Praise"
      Ziggy could do with singing a few of those for himself.

  16. I think Sonia has produced a polished and professional looking documentary there.

    The most impressive aspect is that it doesn't wonder into the realms of fantasy ( unlike those conspiracy theory fairy-tales that the geordie bloke made )

    Well done to her

    1. Yes indeed 01:38, the realms of fantasy brigade have added to the confusion surrounding this case. There are still little cliques on each side, both pro and anti, pushing the child abuse and paedophile theories that sprung up around Madeleine's disappearance. First brought to us by Gerry McCann via an indiscreet phone call in the first hour, overheard by a searcher. Why? Who goes to the worst possible case scenario within the first hour? Why isn't Maddie's dad out searching for her? It was too dark he said God forgive him. Imagine that dark from a 3 year old's perspective?

      If there were a paedophile angle, and I don't believe there is, this case would have been wrapped up years ago, and with as much speed as possible. The police cannot simply ignore known abuse of children. It would be criminally negligent. Could you imagine the world outcry if Operation Grange and the PJ were allowing a paedophile gang to carry on as usual this past 11 years?

      It's nonsense, but it's helpful nonsense. It takes our eyes away from the ball. The extremists, on both sides, could happily live alongside each other, they have more in common than the one or two issues, that divide them. In looking at CMoMM and the Myths sites, I get a deja vu moment, where all the animals are peeping in the window and seeing that the walking, talking, clothes wearing, drinking, smoking pigs had become indistinguishable from the humans. (Animal Farm, George Orwell).

      One thing the case of missing Madeleine has never needed was 'sexing up'. It had all the ingredients necessary to dominate the news each day. But of course the Sun was involved, so we had Gerry and Clarence (supposedly)asking Kate to do some bikini shots. If that weren't bad enough, we had Kate and Gerry in a Charles and Di pose on the front page of the Sun telling the world she couldn't make love with Gerry. The whole world replied, 'don't blame you, we couldn't either'. Wtf were they thinking? publicity at any cost? I cringe on their behalf. They went to so much trouble to suppress the voice of Goncalo Amaral (to save their reputations), yet they allowed that? No child wants to see that about their parents. Compare that to one twin distressed to hear on the school bus radio that Goncalo Amaral said his parents hid Madeleine to that Sun headline? So often, these parents have put their need for publicity, above discretion, good taste, and protection of their family. How can you complain about publicity whilst inviting it in? It's like a dozy teenage boy shouting upstairs, 'mom I've just let in a load of blood sucking vampires, what do I do?' and 'mom' shouting back, 'tell them to bring their mates'.

    2. More focus I think should be put on the 'cover up', all the reasons we are still here 11+ years on and there is officially still no suspect. I don't mean by trying to imagine what Operation Grange are up to, but looking instead at that which is right in front of our eyes. Everything that has been done in plain sight. The McCanns became media savvy within hours of their daughter vanishing. They were fully aware of the imagine they were trying to project. First stop the local church.

      The final straw for me on the being manipulated front, was Kate going into the police station with 'cuddle cat' strategically placed to peep out of the top of her rucksack. I didn't even notice the Madeleine belt badge. I gave my mum a good giggle in her final days, when she gleefully pointed out I was wearing odd earrings. I'm amazed I was wearing any earrings at all, but we both had chuckle. No only were these parents emotionless, they were just too well polished. Had they presented to the press dishevelled and unkempt from days and nights searching and lack of sleep, the public would have embraced them. Instead it became the Kate and Gerry show, everything was about protecting the feelings of the parents. They've suffered enough was the general consensus. Well, the consensus of those in charge of the media.

      I think they have probably suffered far more than they ever would have, had they just 'fessed' up at the start. Good lawyers could have got them all minimal charges or perhaps even just a slap on the wrist - given they have suffered enough.

      There it would have ended. Instead, we are going into the second decade of mystery, intrigue and speculation. The McCanns long for the social media critics to go away, whilst simultaneously throwing them press releases reiterating their supposed innocence and victim status.

  17. Comment from

    "A most impressive piece of investigative journalism. You must be applauded Sonia for your courage and tenacity in pursuit of the truth in this case. A majority of the British public are thoroughly disenchanted with the McCanns, they no longer believe the narrative shoved down their throats by the MSM and feel sickened by the self promoting, self serving, disingenous Gerry and Kate. One only hopes that the parties involved in the death and subsequent cover up will be held accountable for their crimes. Well done."

  18. I can't vouch for it's accuracy,but the Shining in Luz blog is suggesting Grange has closed. (
    The Met prevents the Wayback Machine from logging it's pages so the exact date all reference to Grange was removed is not known.Probably Oct 1st though.

    1. 11:02

      Last date web page "Update on the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann Oct 28, 2015" saved in Wayback archive is July 10, 2018

  19. Oh I see you are talking about "burner phones" again Ros - how dramatic and incriminating!

    You are wrong with your interpretation and should stop watching crime drama.

    1. I appreciate my use of the term 'burner phones' is a little out of step with my usual vernacular 20:19, but just as I use ye olde English when it suits, I also take a dip into the urban dictionary.

      Burner phones are used as secondary phones, usually for illegal purposes, such as drug dealing. Gerry, Kate and their Tapas friends were fully aware that data held on their usual phones could incriminate them. Why did Gerry and Kate take time out to delete records of calls (on their regular phones)they made and received?

      Tht they were worried about the costs on their regular phones is nonsensical and offensive. Who would worry about running up expense when a child's life was as stake? Ditto, the idea that they (the collective they) left their phone chargers at home. Pathetic.

      What's my interpretation? The McCanns and their friends were hiding an almighty secret and those burner phones were to enable them to keep in contact with all those in of the almighty secret. The whole scenario of a friend of Dr. Payne's turning up at the police station to distribute burner phones to the Tapas group, is like something out of the Sopranos. Who thinks, my friend is in the police station I'd better go straight out and buy disposal phones for him and his group with 40 Euros credit on each and get them straight along to him?

      Kudos to you 20:19 however, for spotting just how incriminating the supply of these burner phones to the Tapas group was.

  20. 1485 "And what phones were they' Do you remember what sort of, what make they were"

    David Payne: "Err they were Samsung phones, err and I think they were Vodaphone SIM cards. Err the actual model, I can't tell you the Samsung phone but they were, something like the Samsung three hundred, something like that.'

    1485 "Yeah, how many phones were there"

    David Payne: "There was, there was two err and we ended up, err again, we ended up keeping one and Kate and Gerry had one, I think we gave the second one to Kate and Gerry as well after a while but we were err you know because they'd got credit put on to them so we were just using those phones rather than run up the expense of our own phones."

  21. Why is Ros wrong talking about "burner phones"?
    Please enlighten us all as to why her interpretation is wrong?
    Would attention in this area be welcome,the Leics Police won't thank you.

    1. The validity of your contribution to solving the Mccann case is zero.

      On that basis I am not prepared to "enlighten" you - I am sure Ros can do that for you.

      Do you think LP are not aware of everything that is in the files?

    2. How typically childish

      7 Oct 21:31

      You state Ros is wrong about burner phones but bluster when asked to explain why.
      The phones are like the dogs in that there is no reasonable explanation, so diss them at every opportunity.

      The Leics police may be aware of the contents of the files but they never thought they would be released to the public.

      This is a blog for discussion I am unaware anybody has solved the McCann case so why do you feel the need to disparage this blog 24/7
      What do you fear and why?

    3. Many thanks JJ, and I think mention of the burner phones hits a raw nerve. Innocent people caught up in such trauma, don't immediately think how can we keep in touch with each other without the police knowing? They would have far more important things on their minds, like the missing child.


    4. Hi Ros, Enjoyed new video well done Sonia and yourself glad there is people like you both about! Would not be surprized if some kind of burner or app. of somekind was added to the phones they all used to communicate with best available flip samsungs well topped up probably used for months. SE

  22. "The Chinese authorities suspect Interpol President Meng Hongwei of corruption, local media reported Saturday citing sources."

    1. 'Interpol tweeted Sunday night that it received Meng's resignation and that Kim Jong Yang of South Korea, a vice president representing Asia on Interpol's executive committee, would serve as acting president until Interpol's general assembly picks a permanent president next month.

      Interpol has asked Chinese authorities for information about Meng Hongwei. The disciplinary arm of China's Communist Party released a statement saying Meng "is under investigation by the National Supervision Commission for alleged violations of laws."'

    2. Many thanks 11:48 and 22:04 for the updates on China. I'm afraid however I am at a loss to understand what the relevance is here?

  23. Some clown on Textusa says Grange is over.
    Do they not read here also,the 'in' place for all things McCann?
    If they did, they would know the blog owner has full confidence in Operation Grange and expects all perpetrators to be brought to justice.

    1. @ 7 Oct 19:42
      Maybe the 'clown' doesn't believe in fairies.
      In fact I know he doesn't, as I wrote it.

  24. Maybe Ros will turn up soon and explain exactly what she means by "burner phones" and the implication she draws.

    It is obviously important to the case because she has said it a couple of times now - it must be leading somewhere otherwise she would not use the phrase.

  25. Anon 7 Oct 09.36

    With reference to David Payne's last sentence " we were just using those phones rather than run up the expense of our own phones".

    I remember distinctly but I can't recall who said it was the fact that they bought new phones was because they hadn't taken their charges with them to PdL.

    Perhaps someone may know who said that, it could be CM but I can't remember at this moment.

    Not that it matters that much I suppose but I thought I would mention it as it shows how out of sync they are with their statements, one person says one thing and another says the opposite. I thought it was strange at the time as why take your mobile phones on holiday with you if you don't take your chargers, what would be the point?

    1. @ 7 Oct 21:57
      I read somewhere too I seem to recall that the phones had 40 euros credit each on them.That's a lot for 2007.
      Who paid for that?

    2. Anonymous 7 Oct at 21:57

      Perhaps you mean David Payne's "their [McCanns' phones] batteries were running out or something like that"?

      David Payne: "The, I mean, the other, there was a, the other person who contacted me which I didn't mention while I was at the Police Station was one of the Portuguese err newspapers and err you know asking, you know for comments and err so that could have been what the, you know, the number. I spoke, I did speak to the other, the friends of Simon ALDRIDGE'S who you know who kindly bought the phones and they actually bought the phones to the Portim' Police Station and I went downstairs and got the phones and then err brought them back upstairs. Err in terms of you know whether I, we spoke to them on the next day sorry, was that the question?"

      1485 "Well you spoke to them on the next day, the next day yeah that Madeleine went missing, on the fourth."

      David Payne: "Right."

      1485 "That's when, well, there's text messages but what I'm asking you is, did you speak to them?"

      David Payne: "Err I don't remember having any text conversation with any err Portuguese newspapers so I presume that Portuguese number, they, sorry yeah the other, the, the other Portuguese person I spoke with was err there was err a Solicitor in err Lisbon who err the conversation it may well have been with Lisa LACARNIE because that was a friend of their family who they, they've got a business in the UK but they deal with Portugal and Lisa said if you need any err Portuguese advice then there's err Paolo, and again I've got his number in my other phone which might clarify that bit."


      David Payne: "Yeah, I mean err it may well have been SA gave us a contact of someone that was a friend of the family in Portugal who err could get us mobile phones because Kate and Gerry you know hadn't got any contact, you know way of contacting, their batteries were running out or something like that so SA had basically said err you know there's, there's these people that we know there and you know that could have been it."

    3. Anon 8 Oct 11.17

      Thank you for your reply to my mention of not having any phone chargers.

      Thinking about it again, the reason I really wanted to pick up on (I forget to mention it as it was getting late) is whether a pay as you go phone as the McCanns had after Madeleine "disappeared" show up their locations on the local mobile masts or do they only show up on masts if they are contracted to a phone company i.e. BT, Vodaphone, 3 etc.

      I haven't got a mobile phone so I don't know how they work with regards to "pings" on mobile masts.

      I was just wondering as to whether the McCanns and others wanted pay as you go phones so they couldn't be tracked by the PJ as to what they were up to and where they were when using the new phones.

    4. 16:11

      In order for an anonymous pre-paid phone to be traced, police must first know the telephone number.

    5. How come the police were daft enough to let suspects/witnesses have different phones in the first place?
      And they were delivered to them at the police station too.
      In my view that's incredible.

    6. Anonymous 8 Oct at 22:16

      Good question.


      According to Kate McCann (‘madeleine’) 8 May 2007 Kate McCann had a call from Cherie Blair and 9 May 2007 Gerry McCann spoke to John Buck, Margaret Beckett called Gerry and Gerry called many friends and colleagues.

      “Gerry’s mobile phone appeared to be permanently attached to his ear the whole day long. I can remember even feeling slightly irritated that he was able to function in this way and to be so busy. Why was his pain for Madeleine not crippling him, as mine was me?”

    7. As a follow on from my post (22:16)
      I wonder if the phones came via a friend or through a friend from another 'source'.

    8. It has since occurred to me that if the Mccanns and others were talking to cabinet ministers and such like,then they would surely need special encripted phones so they couldn't be hacked into.
      That might explain why the PJ allowed them to have the phones on the quiet or maybe strings were pulled to make the PJ agree to it.
      If any of that is the case,then the phones certainly didn't get bought by a friend,but rather from official sources secretly through the friend.

    9. Anon 8 Oct 21.25

      Thanks for your reply. Yes, of course, I never thought about that, silly me!! Hmmm, does make you think though. I wonder if the new phone numbers were given to the PJ for them to keep in touch with the McCanns regarding progress or not.

  26. Gerry is hiding something, that a fact. He was our test subject on our deception analysis course. 34 participants pointed out 27 signs of deception from three interviews.

    1. Thank you for posting that 09:13, unfortunately I am unable to get to the link. Perhaps you could email it to me I would be very interested to see them.

      For anyone doing a degree in psychology or behaviour science at the moment, the case of Madeleine is filled with resources! Gerry can't resist the urge to gloat, the smirk is never far from the surface.

  27. I see that clown Verdi is having a meltdown over at CMoMM.
    Having a right old go at one of the more nicer posters.
    It's cretins like him/her and Bennett that make that place so bad and give it the name cesspit.
    The poster Phoebe who is at the brunt of the rage,seems decent enough.

  28. Rachael Oldfield:

    "The door to the bedroom, the twins bedroom and Madeleines bedroom, erm and I mean afterwards you know, he [Matthew Oldfield] said he thought that was unusual because he thought the door would be shut, cos I mean we always shut Graces bedroom door, erm or at least if we did, I mean we always shut it but yeah I know some people would kind of probably just pull the door to, but he didnt expect it to be as wide open as it was, erm so he, well he said you know from kind of standing close to the doorway, he could see that the twins were in their cots and there was no sound, erm so he just assumed everything was alright, he didnt put his head round the door to see if Madeleine was in her bed, but he said he did wonder where she slept, erm poked his head, well you know kind of looked into Gerry and Kates room, just saw there was a double bed there, so you know, assumed they were all in together or, I mean I think he knew that they were all in together, erm but he didnt actually look to see whether Madeleine was there or not."

    Matthew Oldfield wondered where Madeleine slept?

    1. Hello Anon 9 October 2018 at 12:01
      "Rachael Oldfield witness statement"

      This had been just perfect and logical if Madeleine had been snatched by "tannerman" shortly before MO offered to watch on Maddie and the twins, which Gerry in particular tried to make everyone believe. Unfortunately for Matthew Oldfield, Dr Totman reappeared after six long years and claimed that he was the one that Jane Tanner saw. Thus Dr Totman, dramatically sabotaged the tapas friends’ hypothesis or blatant lie about a stranger having taken Madeleine around 21H15, which would’ve been just minutes after Gerry had left the apartment. Rachael may not be as implicated as the rest of them, though she must of course know what her partner and the other friends have done.

      There’s also something very odd about MO offering to watch on the McCanns’ children, after Gerry had returned from his watch, rather late around 21H20 or even later, due to his toilet ”visit” and his chat with this Wilkins.

      However, I cannot find anything in the PJ files about Gerry then telling Kate why he was so late. Therefore, she couldn’t have known that he had not come directly from the apartment and from Madeleine’s bed. Yet she insisted upon doing her check in accordance with a previously established schedule, even if their children could have been alone only for 10 minutes. How on earth could she then have known, that Gerry had been doing other thing after having watched on Madeleine. Even Matthew Oldfield must have seen Gerry coming back late. Why didn’t he say to Gerry something along the lines; ”You have just watched, haven’t you, so Kate or I can go a little, can’t we? Common sense imo.

  29. Does anyone else ever get the feeling that the whole Madeleine story is one big lie?

  30. Anon 9 Oct 12.01

    Thank you for that statement from Rachel Oldfield.

    Her words do beg the question, which has been mentioned many times before, is how could MO see the twins in their cots when one of the cots had a solid end, facing towards the door, so he wouldn't be able to see anything that was in the cot without having to walk further into the bedroom. Then he states "he didn't put his head around the door....." but he didn't have to put his head around the door as the door opened from left to right giving a clear view of Madeleine's bed on the left of the bedroom, although on the reconstruction on the Crimewatch programme does show the door opening from right to left obliterating any view of Madeleine's bed which is a complete fabrication.

    The only other explanation is that MO never did a check in the apartment and had never been into it or the twins and Madeleine weren't in apartment 5A at all but were elsewhere, the twins having been brought into apartment 5A before the police arrived.

    1. 15:17

      I can't make head nor tail of Matthew Oldfield's check, all the more so because Rachael Oldield said that MO did wonder where Madeleine slept, but he didnt actually look to see whether Madeleine was there or not. One could be forgiven for thinking he never did a check into apartment 5A.

  31. Hi
    Anon 9 October 2018 at 15:07
    Anon9 October 2018 at 15:17

    Something quite different from the official version of what happened on the night Madeleine disappeared must have happened.

    Matthew Oldfield probably never was in, not even outside, the McCanns apartment. If he still was, it must have been for another reason than to check on the McCanns' children.

    As for his friend Russel O’Brien, he wrote down two versions of a time line for the McCanns’ planned checks on their children on two separate pages, which were torn out of Madeleine’s little sticker book, one of which was complemented by Jane Tanner’s sighting.,

    None of the tapas friends including the McCanns have ever claimed, that any detail in O'Brien's time schedules would or could be incorrect.

    Anyway, when the Madeleine case is described in traditional media, it is always this time schedule, that underlies the presentation of what happened the hours before Madeleine allegedly went missing, which is something we should always keep in mind.

    However, there’s no one outside the tapas 9, who can certify that these collective testimonials are in line with what really happened. The media, especially British MSM, should therefore take their responsibility and clarify whether their reporting is based on facts or subjective claims.

  32. Rachael Oldfield said: "he said he did wonder where she slept, erm poked his head, well you know kind of looked into Gerry and Kates room, just saw there was a double bed there"

    That door was open, too?


    You Mccannot be serious! - Rodolfo Ragonesi

    "With apologies to the amiable John Mc­Enroe for borrowing his signature line and turning it around to address an issue far more serious than tennis, let me begin by stating that I will not attempt to second guess a court of law and pass judgement on what happened to Madeleine McCann on or around that fateful night of May 3, 2007.

    However, considering that the case is still unresolved, it is pertinent to highlight a number of inconsistencies that indicate that the abduction theory has remained just that, a theory, and one that many professionals have claimed does not hold much water."


    "The McCanns’ statements have raised far more questions than provided answers to the circumstances surrounding the tragic disappearance of their daughter"

    Rodolfo Ragonesi is a lawyer and researcher in history and international affairs.

    This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

  34. Hello Anon 9 October 2018 at 15:17

    "the reconstruction on the Crimewatch programme does show the door opening from right to left obliterating any view of Madeleine's bed which is a complete fabrication"

    Very interesting observation, makes me even more suspicous about Oldfield's witness statement and his involvement in an awful crime, and why cannot Met/SY/Crime Watch get things right. It's not corruption, but pure incompetence.

    I also believe that there’re discrepancies between Matthew’s and Rachael's testimonies. Matthew said, if I remember correctly, that he saw the twins in their cots,and the mysterious light that may have come from the street outside, but nothing about looking into Gerry’s and Kate’s bedroom (I may be wrong here, I haven't looked into the files lately).

    Anyway, if he couldn’t see that Madeleine was sleeping together with her siblings, he must of course have been a little bit worried and it’s therefore quite understandable that he looked elsewhere for Madeleine, as he did, when he looked into Gerry’s and Kate’s bedroom.

    Just seeing an empty double bed in that room reassured him that Madeleine must have been in the other room, although he hadn’t seen her there a few seconds earlier. Had he just looked into Madeleine’s room a second time, he would have known whether Madeline was there or not. So, why didn’t he?

    No one can deny that there’s is a web of inconsistencies in many of the McCanns’ and their friends’ official and unofficial statements. I sincerely hope that the OG are dealing with their irrational behaviour and with their memory losses in one way or another. A reconstruction would’ve sorted out things, but probably not in the favour of team McCann.

    1. Bjorn 10 Oct 21.13

      I've now looked more into MO's statements and photos of the children's bedroom, these are the PJ photos from the PJ files. Foto 4 is of the children's bedroom, the corner of Madeleine's bed can distinctly be seen on the left as you look through the open door. The cots for the twins are straight in front of the door. One on the left has mesh all the way around, the one on the right has closed in top and bottom, the bottom part having a towel thrown over it.

      See Foto 4:

      Now this is MO's rogatory statement of 9th April 2008. He starts mentioning the cots, then pulls himself up when he realises only one has a mesh side when he says that he could see the "twins". Notice that he says "twins" and not one "twin". He couldn't see both twins unless he walked right into the bedroom. How could he see them breathing as well from the door, when he said he didn't enter the room therefore didn't see Madeleine in the bed on the left hand side.

      It's a huge statement and you have to scroll down past two solid lines across the page, down to a huge chunk of text which starts -

      00.23.05 4078 "Okay"

      Go down to the 35th line, MO starts:

      "I didn't actually go in because you could see the twins in the cots, and one of the, you could see the twins in the cots .................. you could see them.

      I hope you can find the text I'm referring to.

    2. Hello Anon 11 October 2018 at 18:14
      I've now looked more into MO's statements..."

      Thanks a lot for feed back. I shall look it up. I've read a lot of those witness statements. Still I've to go back in order to really see if I remember things correctly.

      The whole solution of this tragic case should be searched for in the pj files, but not in the lies of the British MSM.

    3. Bjorn 12 Oct 09.35

      To add to my comments regarding MO's statement, I forgot to mention that when you look at Foto 4 which is the children's bedroom you will see that the door is opened from left to right, the knob on the door is plain to see and it closes against the wall on the right of the door opening with the wardrobe sticking out just in front of it.

      Yet GM said that the "abductor" may have been hiding behind the door when he went in to check on the children, but the "abductor" must have been as flat as a pancake to hide behind the door.

    4. Hi Anon12 October 2018 at 18:19 and thanks for info

      What you're pointing out here, would've been so obvious to any police investigators if the McCanns' friends hadn't refused to participate in a reconstruction. So, again, I claim, that team McCann systematically did everything, and still do so, to hide the truth and confuse those who're trying to solve the case.

      There couldn't have been any intruder inside the apartment, and that imo is what the investigation should focus on now. No one but Kate claims to have seen the open window and she cannot even remember if she closed it before she raised the alarm or after and Gerry's nonsense talk about the open window being a red herring is just ridiculous.

  35. That clown Verdi is at it again.
    Having a go at all and sundry and threatening to delete peoples perfectly valid comments if they dont shut up and agree with him and Bennett.
    What a pit eh!

  36. Poor verdi being given a real beating at the cesspit and is now threatening deletions - as is usual on the forum where all views are respected and welcome (cough cough for bennett)

    Link provided as verdi says: "I'm confident in saying, sometime in the future, CMoMM will be a reference source for academics across the globe - I don't wish to see that future jeopardised by careless commentary.
    Please respect the forum as the forum respects you. Thank you."

    Oh please - stop laughing at the back will you!

    1. 22:07
      Yes it is all kicking off over there.
      A few rebels making their point.
      It wont last long though and order will soon be restored.
      There is only one theory allowed,that of Bennett.His sidekick Verdi sees to that.
      What a nasty piece of work s/he seems.
      I suppose you need to be being at Bennett's side though.Two peas in a pod and all that.

    2. Bennett himself is at it now.
      Calling the 'rebels' the 4 crusaders.
      How dare they challenge his theory.
      It's heresy!

    3. Who are "the 4 crusaders" TB is talking about, would you know?

    4. Reverend T. Benn. Nit12 October 2018 at 08:48

      Good God!
      It's blasphemy!
      Dont listen to these false prophets and heretics,with their wretched tales.
      I am the light and the good and all knowing.
      Turn to me,not the dark side and save yourselves before it is too late!
      Years gone by these miserable creatures would have been burnt at the stake.
      Bring back the old days and ways I say.

      Amen to that!

    5. @ 23:41
      One of them, Ruffian, is running rings around Bennett.
      Another 'Crusader',Pheobe, can as well,but I think she is keeping her powder dry at the moment as Ruffian is doing such a good job.
      I expect Bennett will wheel out his other persona's soon to back him and attack the 'rebels'.He usually does when anyone challenges his supremacy and Verdi and others help is insufficient.

    6. Reverend T. Benn. Nit (aka One-year-in-a-coma-man-Jules)

      “Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the Law and the Prophets.”

      Do you know who "the 4 crusaders" TB is talking about are please?

  37. With all due respect to Bjorn's comments about the fake or not fake witnessing of events by Mathew and Rachael Oldfield.

    One has to consider whether any of the Tapas 9 witnessed anything at all or if they are liars who fabricated a story to protect their McCann friends and themselves from their own children's abandonment at night in the Warner hotel while they were otherwise engaged in nightly carousing at the Tapas bar.

    My opinion is that nothing in the way of child checking ever happened.
    Jane Tanner lied about seeing a different man carrying a child as a cover story for the real sighting by the Smith family of Mr McCann carrying his daughter's dead body down to the beach.

    The alleged conversation between Warner resident Jez Wilkins and his friend Mr McCann outside the 5A apartment at the time of the faked "abduction" never happened. The never met. It was another cover story.
    The only true part of the macabre affair was the hasty plot to create a cover story on torn pages of the dead girl's coloring book back at the Tapas bar as they desperately searched around for alibis.

    Sorry to speak the plain truth.
    But their were NO witnesses to the child's death except the two McCann parents.
    These parents somehow eliminated their daughter from the face of the earth and with the help of their liar friends have been laughing at the world ever since.

    The Portuguese knew this from day one of the investigation but for lack of a body have been unable to prosecute.
    It's a pity some news person has never asked the McCanns where they hid their daughter's body.
    Although when asked "Did you kill your daughter" Mr McCann staunchly replied with a stumbled negative, "that's an emphatic no", The most sickening moment in TV history.

    So for better of for worse nothing happened. These criminals were simply liars concocting a story.

    Obviously the 11 million pound intellectual might of English police forces were too dumb to figure out what any schoolboy could have told them about what really happened in the death and cover up of a dead English girl.

    1. jc at 04:25

      When asked by Rahni Sadler "Did you kill your daughter?", Gerry McCann replied: "No, no, never. And there is nothing with any logic that could, you know, you would have to start with why, you know, how, when, who. And there’s just simply, you know, no answer to any of these things, there’s nothing to suggest anything. So no – that is an emphatic no."

    2. Hi jc
      ”Jez Wilkins and his friend Mr McCann outside the 5A apartment at the time of the faked "abduction" never happened. The never met. It was another cover story”

      Most of the tapas witness statements are imo false, but still jc, I believe that Gerry very unexpectedly met Wilkins that night, which made things worse for him.

      Gerry had to be polite and talk to Jez and tried to look as relaxed as he possibly could, though he at that point of time must have been extremely busy doing what he had to do.

      Jane Tanner, very soon, took advantage of that spontaneous meeting by fabricating the story about an abductor, whom neither Gerry nor Jez had seen. In doing so, JT also gave Gerry an alibi for not being the man, who carried Madeleine away, at least till the Smiths witnessed about ”another” man.

      One thing, however, puzzles me jc, and that is Jez Wilkins’s unwillingness to participate in the reconstruction, which the PJ asked him to do. Why wouldn’t he like to help the PJ to solve a heinous crime and help his friend Gerry to find his precious little daughter, if he’s truly innocent. Maybe Jez was just as uninterested in assisting the Police as Dr Totman was for six years, because it wasn’t about their own daughters, but just about someone else’s.

  38. Virgin London Marathon 2013, 21 Apr 2013
    Jane's 26.2 Miles for Missing People

    KGMSA xxxxx

    What can we say? Twice? You're definitely bonkers....but we love you.....and thank you for everything!! Big hug.



    1. Anon 11 Oct 09.31

      I've read your comment a few times but didn't understand it. I've now done a search of KGMSA and have found two mentions:

      1) Kitchener Minor Girls Softball Association (it's obviously an American Association looking at their website)


      ii) Reference to a cancer hospital in Korea which also carries out liver transplants etc.

      - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      I may have the wrong end of the stick but were you referring to the McCanns' friends raising money through the guise of "Missing People" and giving it to other charities. Obviously if Madeleine was never "missing" and Jane Tanner knew so then there is no need for her to feel bad giving the money to another charity. Whether the Missing People charity have any say in where the money goes through fundraising is another matter perhaps.

    2. 18:52

      KGMSA are the initials of first names McCann family (Madeleine included).

      I was referring to Kate's "You're definitely bonkers....but we love you.....and thank you for everything!!"


  39. The Mccanns may have reasons to lie, the Tapas friends may have reasons to lie but what is the excuse of the UK Police?

    Superintendent Graham Hill of Surrey Police, seconded to CEOP, was in PDL that weekend as confirmed by ACPO.

    He was not there at the request of the Portuguese Government officials nor the Portuguese Police, therefore he could not have a lawfully issued Section 26.

    Any activities concerning the Mccanns, therefore, would have him engaging in criminality as confirmed by ACPO.

    Many think Superintendent Hill's boss was Jim Gamble of CEOP but his boss at Surrey Police then and for several years was Mark Rowley.

    The same Mark Rowley overseeing OG.

    Would OG fearlessly investigate Hill's actions, one would hope so but neither Redwood or Wall are of sufficient rank to interview Hill Gamble or Rowley.

    Perhaps it was left to the fearless tub of blubber, Craig Mackey, which would explain the delay in OG.

    1. @ JJ

      What have you ever achieved by spamming blogs and forums with your opinions of the validity of the various UK Police presence in PDL and whether it was "approved" or not - in you opinion?

      The answer is absolutely nothing and it will never lead anywhere.

      You do not know everything - only what the Police themselves have released to the public.

      Pathetic waste of time on your part.

      This comment is made on the basis that Ros allows all opinions and is not offensive and is saved.

  40. "The senior Scotland Yard officer who locked himself in his car during the Westminster terror attack is due to retire within weeks, as pressure mounts on the police watchdog to investigate his conduct.

    Deputy Commissioner Sir Craig Mackey will step down from the force in December after 34 years of service.

    But his admission that he failed to intervene when he witnessed terrorist, Khalid Masood, attacking and murdering Police Constable, Keith Palmer, has sparked widespread anger among the public and many of his policing colleagues."

  41. Bloody pathetic that Amaral and the PJ did not even know that the Mccanns were using "burner phones" "as secondary phones, usually for illegal purposes, such as drug dealing" and "Innocent people caught up in such trauma, don't immediately think how can we keep in touch with each other without the police knowing".

    What a crap Police force they were.

    1. Anon 11 October 21.59

      There is quite a long explanation on the following link regarding the phones the McCanns were given on 4th May 2007 in the Police station and why the PJ did not know of their existence:

      As mentioned in the article the topic regarding the phones is covered in David Payne's rogatory statement of 11 April 2008.

      With reference to your words "what a crap Police force they were", I don't know if you have looked at the PJ files but they are astonishing as to the work that was put in by the PJ regarding their investigations and attention to detail. If they were hindered by the McCanns and the Tapas friends, not forgetting the swarms of people who arrived from the UK to cover their backs, then I think the PJ did a bloody good job under the circumstances.

      Perhaps you just hate the PJ for some reason.

    2. @ Anonymous12 October 2018 at 17:53

      Why on Earth would I be interested in a blog by shininginluz (also known as AilsaCraig on CMoMM)? He lived in PDL and provided some good photos - he started off quite neutral about the case but for some reason has moved to being anti Mccann. For God's sake he calls his dog Goncalo and offers ghoul tours of PDL!

      I don't hate the PJ - I just think they were crap if they didn't know what mobiles they had - I wonder what phone number they used to contact them?

      I hate the use of "burner phones" and the implications that Ros has used to try to explain them.

    3. October 26, 2016

      "I [Elça Craig] found out a short time ago that I have been banned from CMoMM (the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann) aka the Jill Havern forum."


      "This leaves just one important point, which is my stance on the case. I am not a McCann supporter. I am not a McCann critic. I simply would like to see justice for Madeleine. I am pro-Madeleine."

    4. Godfrey of Boullion14 October 2018 at 09:18

      I didn't see your name among Bennett's 'four crusaders'.
      What did you get banned for?
      The same reason, being a heretic?

    5. @ Godfrey of Boullion14 October 2018 at 09:18

      The post at 22:40 was quoting what Elça Craig said. The hint is the quotations marks!

      (I did not make the post by the way - I am a different Anonymous)

    6. 17:15
      Well Godfrey is a crusader leader and the good bishop Bennett and his ever faithful servant Sister Verdi did say the crusaders were very stupid people.

  42. NPIA and ACPO are groups of top UK policemen.

    In their official report they state:-

    Superintendent Hill was in PDL on the weekend of 5/6th May.
    Superintendent Hill was not there at the invitation of Portuguese officials.
    Superintendent Hill was unable to communicate with any Portuguese police official for a week and when he did the PJ had no idea of what assistance he could be.

    Even Brunt of Sky states Superintendent Hill's presence in PDL was hidden for several days due to diplomatic sensitivities.

    How could there be sensitive issues if the PG has asked for him to come and welcomed him at the airport. G Amaral states Superintendent Hill arrived in Portugal on Tuesday 8th May.

    So again, what was Superintendent Hill doing skulking around PDL the previous weekend. He had no rights or permissions to be there and therefore, according to ACPO would be engaging in criminality.

    Who authorised him to find a patsy in PDL, called Robert Murat?

    These are among the facts nobody wants to discuss.

    Close OG and FOI's will flood in.

    1. @ jj
      I have mentioned this before and I'm sure it will get the same reaction this time too.
      Murat could have been an Mi6 asset/operative whose role was to spread confusion and even attract suspicion on himself to create even more of a distraction while more important events were taking place.
      I wouldn't be surprised either if the journalist who first suggested Murat as a possible person of interest was also an intelligence asset.

  43. @ JJ12 October 2018 at 12:05

    And your conclusion is?

  44. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Is the rebellion over then?
      No more 'Crusaders'? (Geez,are Bennett and Verdi loons or what?)
      And anon 21:02, who is Jules?

    2. Blacksmith's latest blog entry has quite a bit about Bennett and the cesspit in it.
      Worth reading.

    3. 10:34
      I had to chuckle when I read the bit about Bennett being like a dribbling tramp with stained trousers selling matches on a wet street corner.

      JB does have a way with words.

  45. Peter the Hermit13 October 2018 at 12:36

    @ 9:29
    Is it over?
    No, Phoebe to her credit is still battling away.
    As for the others,that remains to be seen.
    Will they return,or have they fallen on their swords?

  46. Hi Rosalinda,
    I've come to think it might be better for the Portuguese to leave the McCann case and let it hang out to dry.

    The effort of a prosecution would need the extradition of the McCanns to Portugal to stand trial. Also the extradition of a least most of the Tapas seven as witnesses(if indeed witnesses can be extradited to a foreign country).
    All the above would be defended by formidable lawyers, plus Detective Amaral as a prime witness might not have the stomach to go through with such a struggle again.

    The McCanns have already lost any credibility they ever had when the Portuguese Supreme court ruled on the outcome of their libel suit against Amaral's book and declared the English duo NOT cleared as suspects in the disappearance of their daughter.

    Since that moment the world has come to recognize the true criminal actions of the parents.

    But... most horrific of all would be if the Portuguese Judiciary lost the case (or there was a hung jury) and these criminals were acquitted. From that point on the McCanns would truly be in seventh heaven endlessly crowing about their innocence.
    News media and bloggers would be even more muzzled.

    So from a technical point of view maybe better to do nothing and let the McCanns continue fighting their way out of a paper bag of lies much to the amusement of the world.

    1. Good heavens JC, are you quite yourself?

      I must admit on occasion I too have wondered if they should all just 'forget about it'. It wouldn't be a satisfactory ending, but everyone could at least be left to get on with their lives.

      The problem with that however JC, is justice will never be done, or be seen to be done. Portugal may be seen as saying 'you can come to our country, dispose of your child, and we won't do anything'. To that you could add 'you can trash our judiciary and police as much as you like and we will accept it without question'. In other words, we will just roll over for the Great British Empire.

      Then there is the question of retribution. Not my thing as I have made clear many a time. An eye for eye a tooth for a tooth, etc, is the basis for most constitutions. If you break the law, you must be punished. The ultimate goat of an investigation is to bring criminals to justice, that is to face a jury of their peers.

      We are all by now aware that the disappearance of Madeleine is not confined to one crime committed on the night of 3rd May 2007. Multiple crimes began that night, involving multiple characters. Arguably, Madeleine's disappearance kicked off a chain of fraud and corruption that is more than worthy of a Public Inquiry. Currently, here on this blog, some are discussing the involvement of Superintendent Hill, despatched to PDL, for what?

      I don't think the Portuguese Judiciary would lose the case JC, they are clearly not going to take it to Court until they are absolutely ready.

      The only glitch could be that the McCanns could claim they are prejudiced by all the publicity that has surrounded them, that they will not receive a fair hearing. I don't know how the Portuguese legal system works on that score, but again, I expect their prosecutors will be well prepared.

    2. Ros 14 Oct 12.46

      I read somewhere a very long time ago that the Portuguese Courts don't always use jurors but have Judges (I think, that's who they use) sitting on cases which are complex.

      So if the PJ think the case may have been compromised by all the years of media coverage they could go for the Judges option.

      Perhaps someone living in Portugal could clarify that. It has always stayed in my mind so I must have seen it somewhere.

  47. 05.05.2017

    Gonçalo Amaral:

    “A direcção da PJ e o próprio procurador estão a fazer o politicamente correcto. No Reino Unido e aqui a direcção da polícia andou a passo com a Scotland Yard. Não investiga nada que possa comprometer os pais ou os amigos. É um erro. [Além disso] pode ter havido canais paralelos de investigação, até porque não é normal que um embaixador de um país estrangeiro venha ao local para pressionar no sentido de que "isto tem de ser rápido". Depois dessa reunião, o director da PJ leu um comunicado a dizer que estávamos à procura de um raptor que era coisa com que nem eu nem outras pessoas concordavam. Se o embaixador e mesmo o cônsul não tivessem aparecido, a investigação teria sido direccionada para o que é normal que é suspeitar daqueles que têm a responsabilidade da guarda da criança. Houve diplomacia a mais.”

    (The PJ board and the prosecutor act in a politically correct way. In the United Kingdom and here, the police’s lead goes hand in hand with Scotland Yard. Do not investigate anything that might compromise the parents or their friends. That is a mistake. [In addition] there may have been parallel channels of investigation, even because it is not normal for an ambassador from a foreign country to come here to exert pressure in terms of "this should be done quickly". After that meeting, the PJ director read a statement saying that we were looking for an abductor, which neither I nor other people agreed with. If the ambassador and the consul had not shown up, the investigation would have been directed to what is normal procedure, to suspect those who have responsibility for the custody of the child. There was too much diplomacy.)

  48. I have been reading quite a lot of Textusa recently and I have since changed my mind about him/her.
    I still think s/he is wrong about swinging as the reason for the apparent cover up.And regulars here will probably know I have my own views on the reason for that.(I'm not Ziggy btw,but also a Bowie fan amongst other artists too.)
    Yet I am coming around to the idea that Textusa is right about most things and no one can dispute the amount of time and effort s/he puts in.
    I have a feeling that Textusa is trapped in the swinging lark theory having painted him/herself into a corner and secretly wants out.
    No doubt they will strongly deny this now lol.
    But anyhow,I now view him/her in a different light.

  49. Based on the statements, photographs and video footage I'm beginning to think Madeleine never made it to Praia da Luz.

    There's also far too much indicating the whole thing was pre-planned, including the Wayback Machine.

    1. @ Anonymous14 October 2018 at 14:19

      Consider this:
      1. check in with passport & get boarding pass
      2. passport control
      3. boarding procedure showing boarding pass.
      4. on board check before take off that everyone who got a boarding pass is onboard
      5. arrival in Portugal and passport check before allowing entry.
      6. transfer to OC club checked against booking details.
      6. arrival at OC and checked in against booking details and passport.

    2. Sorry I didn't make it clear, I meant Madeleine never got on plane to go to Portugal. She was never there.

    3. "I meant Madeleine never got on plane to go to Portugal. She was never there"

      Unfortunately she was, but never got the chance to go back on the same plane as her parents, who left her and the Portuguese justice behind.

    4. "Anonymous14 October 2018 at 21:36

      Sorry I didn't make it clear, I meant Madeleine never got on plane to go to Portugal. She was never there."

      Look at my post @ 14 October 2018 at 17:36 and tell me if the police in Portugal and UK missed all those checks!

  50. @ anonymous 11/10/18 at 04.25:

    Interesting theory which I broadly agree with. However I think Jez Wilkins is a person of interest in the case. Dr Amaral clearly thought he was. Was he going to play a role but pulled out at the last minute? I have long thought this might be the case. He and his wife appear to have spent quite some time with the McCanns that week and I think it's too much of a coincidence that the pair work in the media and journalism and that Jez 'just happens' to have seen Gerry just after Gerry last saw his daughter alive (allegedly!) for the last time. Even if the account of the circumstances of their meeting is not true, it is quite clear that the McCanns and their friends wish to place Jez in a very key place at a very key time. Not only that, Matt in the company of OC resort manager apparently wakes up the slumbering Jez and his wife Bridget in the early hours of Friday morning to let them know the news that Madeleine had been abducted. How come the pair are sleeping peacefully when the whole resort is in utter chaos? Very peculiar! You would have thought Jez would have been out there searching.

    It is also curious why Matt was sent to the couple's apartment rather than Gerry himself going, and even more curious that the McCanns and their friends apparently waited at least three hours before contacting Jez. Surely he would be one of the first people they would want to talk to as he was such an important eye-witness? (Although I suspect that the group were in quite close contact with him throughout the week.)

    I tend to believe that Gerry is likely to have witnessed his daughter dead at around 9pm on that fateful Thursday evening. This would make his comments about how she was sleeping peacefully and so beautiful particularly reprehensible. But it is on record I do believe that police think Madeleine was dead by then.

    Had word got out around some guests at OC that all was not well with Madeleine and was Jez sent along to find out what had happened? And/or perhaps to sabotage a plan? Perhaps Gerry wanted a favour from Jez and Jez refused to cooperate? It is on record that Jez changed his account of what he was doing and where he went that night. Why?

    Were there people who were prepared to go along with a plan for the faked abduction of an alive child but who drew the line at the faked abduction of a dead child? The list of questions that Dr Amaral urgently faxed to Jez is interesting. And Bridget in an article written later in 2007 claimed that the Portuguese police never contacted Jez which is clearly not true. Why lie?