Friday, 29 August 2014


Many thanks to JJ for challenging the myths and legends that have sprung up surrounding this case.    

post JJ

My first interest is, I would like to know the truth of Madeleines fate and my second is how the myths and legends concerning the case, have grown up.

In the early days many of the myths can be found to lead back to Clarence Mitchell, and the reason is, a basic of life.He was paid, he did it for money the Macs are his clients.

But now a strange phenomenon, most of the myths of the last 18 months emanate from TB.  So what is his reason? is somebody offering him money, a deal, or is it his ego?

There are many myths we can explore some absolutely  crucial to the case where TB has deliberately lied  informing anyone who would listen.  But we need to begin somewhere that is simple to understand.

After CW in October 2013,  TB has taken every opportunity to dismiss the Smiths as liars.  Why, we can only guess but he wrote a piece on CMOMM on October 25th 2013 entitled Smithman 17 Remarkable Similarities between Smithman and Tannerman and listed the 17.

Certain people checked and although it sounds damming, there are not 17 similiarities.  Miuch discussion followed but he blasted anyone who pointed out his errors, many were banned. 

To keep this short, one example.  JT said the child was blonde.THIS IS NOT TRUE.

 If TB can produce any police statement by JT stating the childs hair colour, let him produce it
.He has lied but 17 remarkable similiarities have gained credence on the internet.
Several other statements on this one posting alone, are also untrue and that is just the start.

The errors cannot be genuine mistakes, as he has been shown his statements are false by many different posters.  He could recheck his facts and admit his error, we all make them, but does he do so?.

No, he does not, he blindly keeps pushing the blame in the direction of Murat and the denigration of the Smiths, strangely away from the Macs and the Tapas 7.  Why would anyone do that?

TB has stated on the Smithman thread that it could not be Gerry the Smiths saw, as a number of witnesses testify Gerry was seen around the Tapas between 9.30 and 10.30pm.

TB states among the witnesses who can confirm Gerrys presence are:
Gerry Mccann, Kate Mccann, Matt Oldfield ,Rachael Oldfield, Fiona Payne, David Payne,  DW,  RO'B,  JT.........

 As John McEnroe famously said "you cannot be serious"

Too many people believe his research, too few check it and if they do they will be shocked.


Wednesday, 27 August 2014


I feel a little bit like Adrian Mole, although I am an academic, I'm not very clever.  I had no idea of the can of worms that would be opened up by questioning the antics of Tony Bennett and CMoMM and it seems I am far from alone. 

I have now been doing the research I should have done before committing so freely to the JH Forum, and I am shocked at the murky history that lies beneath. I'm not going to libel anyone, but I strongly suggest readers use their google facility to do some digging of their own. I had no idea for example about the battles between the ex members of the 3 Arguidos, which seem to be ongoing.

A rabid anti, becomes a pro, and  the most vociferous anti campaigner is now doing his utmost to destroy the evidence for the prosecution. One thing I do know is, that the McCanns are very persuasive and have a way of getting people to do their bidding. 

I was asked to do a summary of all the comments that have come in. It has certainly been an enlightening few days for many of us, we are now seeing all the comments that would never have got through the censorship on CMoMM and indeed the other half of the story. Commenting at the moment however would be impossible because I haven't got a clue what is going on. 

Throughout the 7 years I have been commentating on this case, I have always been an independent, I have never belonged to any groups or teamed up with anyone.  I believed I was an 'independent' while posting on CMoMM,  but clearly I wasn't, the forum had an agenda and I was unwittingly part of it.

Much as I would like to drop this and get back to my real interests, I feel that I, and indeed many others, have been deceived and I want to know why.  If anyone knows the answers, please use the anonymity here to let us know.  Oh and please use this blog (Part V) to respond.

Sunday, 24 August 2014


Please put new posts on this thread to bring it back to front page. :)

I have started this new blog as there is obviously still interest and comments coming in.  I know some are protesting, but tis my belief if people want to say something, they should be able to!

But this incident will blow over because it is not what this case is about. I will continue to press for justice for the missing child, and thanks to some very kind assistance I will soon be setting up a new forum.  It won't be solely devoted to Madeleine McCann, it will cover topical issues, controversial subjects and whatever comes along.  I want it to be live and interactive.  If anyone is interested in being Admin, then please contact me

Meanwhile please bear with me, some posts are getting through that really shouldn't - I shouldn't do this whilst tired - and I apologise, its been hard to keep up.

Bennettgate will soon blow over, and hopefully lessons have been learned, I think many of us have had our eyes opened but that shouldn't stop the discussion, it should open it up. 

The people responsible for the cover up (in 2007) are no longer in power, and in any event there are probably very few left.  The powerful McCann media machine is down to its bones, all they have left are a few oddbods and misfits cobbling together playground insults to prop up a crumbling skeleton that's had its head knocked off.  This isn't an MI5 or covert government operation, its a handful of crazies pointing and laughing. 

Did Tony do a deal with the devil? Why has he worked so hard to discredit the witnesses and Robert Murat?  A job for the McCann Media Machine clearly, but they have never bothered.  Why did Carter Ruck write off nearly £300,000 in legal costs?  Why was  he reading forum members' private messages?  Why won't he answer these questions?

Friday, 22 August 2014


Still rolling folks.

Can new comments please reply to Part III, to get back onto the front page.

Thursday, 21 August 2014


I hadn't intended to kick off an internet war with my previous post, but it seems a lot of people have a lot to get off their chests.  It seems there are a lot of topics that we have been steered away from whilst under the forum umbrella and there are a lot of questions that need to be answered.  So much 'new' information has come in via the amazing response to my previous post, and I am beginning to see the extent to which the forum was being manipulated. Divide and rule, those of us with doubts could not speak to each other unless we had the foresight to exchange email addresses.

It is infuriating to be unceremoniously thrown out, without warning or explanation and of course, all rights of reply are removed.  That's it, you are being punished and they can say what the hell they like about you. You cannot even email Admin, all lines of communication are cut off.

Jill should have realised that one day, all those people would indeed find a voice and those roads we weren't allowed to go down are now clear - barred topics are open.  This is  of course just a temporary measure, I'm hoping someone far cleverer than I will be able to set up a new forum.

Meanwhile, I want to know why Tony is going to such lengths to smear me, and other former JH members in order to protect his theory that the Smiths lied and Murat is involved. 

Please post new comments on this thread, so they can be seen instantly. :)

Saturday, 16 August 2014

BURIED BY THE ANTI'S - Banned for having an opposing view

I started today as the angry girl I once was, the sullen little beastie, confined to the corner with my arms folded and my bottom lip sticking out in defiance at the sheer injustice of it all.  I knew it was on the cards, but I am angry just the same.  I am banned from Jill Havern's forum for telling the truth, but before I go into the lurid details, let me explain why I follow this case so closely.

Tis no secret I suffer from manic depression, I have discussed it on here in the past, it has plagued me for a lifetime.  I'm not ashamed to say that I have used the puzzle that is the mysterious disappearance of Madeleine McCann to distract my thoughts from bigger issues that would emotionally tear me asunder if I were to dwell on them.  I hasten to add that I would not have used this case in such a way, if the parents had not been involved.  Like every other decent human being, my heart breaks for genuine victims of such terrible tragedy, but that angry little girl standing in the corner simply can't keep quiet about the injustice dished out to another little girl by all those claiming to be on her side. 

When news of Madeleine's disappearance broke on the morning of 4th May, I was nursing my terminally ill mother and trying to run two homes and a job 100 miles apart.  Both my mother and I took an interest in the case.  She was an early riser, and a canny Irish woman with a gift to see 'exactly what people were' in an instant.  Unfortunately that gift didn't come with a stop button, much to my embarrassment as a child, but to my amusement as an adult.  It tickled her to see the shock on people's faces when she fired an arrow directly at their Achilles heels.  To the indignation of many, I appear to have inherited it, and we are both giggling.

As my mother's health deteriorated, I had much to escape from, each day brought worse and worse news.  I couldn't turn to religion, since I had become enlightened, and its a tough old road to go down when you haven't got a higher power to turn to.  No benefit to my poor mother either, who screeched 'tell him feck off' very loudly when I suggested a priest.  She could already see Dad and her long deceased siblings, she didn't need a man in black to guide her. 

To escape the living hell that was my reality at that time, I delved into researching this case, and having taken the blue pill (or was it the red pill?) there was no way back.  It has been a lifetime quest to discover what it is that makes people evil. For me this case has opened up the door to so much that I was unaware of and I am horrified by what I have found.  I have completely lost faith in the political party I once loved, and my belief in the old fashioned British principles of playing fair, have been shattered.  And it all began with this case.

By scrutinising every detail, every statement, every video, I became more and more intrigued by the grieving couple.  Tis my belief the pair share a rare form of psychopathy, and students of psychology will be studying this case in textbooks for decades to come. I have studied body language, forensic linguistics (thank you Tigger and Hobs) and human behaviour.  I've studied the media in far more depth than I ever have before (and I used to teach it!) and I have studied and continue to study the politics behind the cover up.  At the  end of 7 years, I am much wiser and more cynical than I ever was before.

My dear old Mum saw through Kate and Gerry straight away.  I took the opposing view, on the basis that she was as mad as a hatter.  But try as I may, I could not understand their constant TV appearances and trips to see the Pope and Oprah Winfrey.  Whatever 'innocence' everyone could see went completely over my head.  I went online and soon discovered I was far from alone, but that is another topic for another day.  My enemies will accuse me of being pro in the early days based on the fact that I refused to criticise the parents until I was 100% certain that they were involved. 

Returning to the Jill Havern forum, my days there were always numbered. As a lefty, anti establishment, libertarian, tree hugger, I had been dodging bullets from the moment I joined!  In fact on joining, I received a long winded diatribe from one of the more prominent members telling me off for my immoral and louche approach to life and my support of legalising drugs!  For anyone trying to form a mental image, I am more Hyacinth Bouquet* than Janice Joplin. 

But lets not digress.  Why was I banned.  Firstly, I was set up and I fell for it.  I'm not proud of that, doh!  After reams of posts criticising me, Sharon (moderator) stepped in to ask posters to take it to the Members lounge.  I posted, 'I will reply in members lounge, if I can be arsed'.  Bingo, they got me, instant ban!  I was set up M'lud.

But I am not going to be sidetracked by silly conspiracy theories. They wanted me out, and they have achieved it.  Now they are free to place Tony Bennett back on his pedestal, where he can continue preaching to the converted.  A forum that only permits one view is not a forum as there is no exchange of ideas, but a single (tedious) and worshipful flock of sheep.  Well baaa to you a'holes who forced me out, I wear my black fleece with pride.

For those unfamiliar with the Jill Havern forum, it was set up to support most famous anti McCann activist Tony Bennett and his campaign The Maideleine Foundation.  Tony Bennett took civil action against Kate and Gerry McCann for child neglect.  The case was thrown out, but it attracted a lot of (negative) publicity.  Tony also printed leaflets listing 60 facts about Madeleine's disappearance and at one point, he and others distributed the leaflets in the McCanns home town of Rothley.  Again, this attracted much publicity.  Tony was barred by the Courts from distributing his leaflet and has gone through many legal battles with the McCanns, the upshot of which, he is gagged and must make a monthly payment to the parents.  An angry man? If I were Tony I would have stopped those payments the moment the diggers went into PDL, mind you, I would have cut my arms off and spent weeks in prison hanging upside down before paying that pair a penny!

As I am now able to post 'unbound', I can state that I never supported any of the tactics used by Tony Bennett and the Madeleine Foundation, as I believed them to be tasteless and harmful to those seeking justice for Madeleine.  Whilst I admire Tony's hard work and diligence, I do not agree with his conclusions, nor the way in which he is pursuing the matter, and in fact I believe that he may even be harming the official investigation by trying to meddle with the witnesses.  Some on the Jill Havern forum are demanding the Smiths come forward and make a public statement to rebut Tony's (frankly ridiculous) accusations - oblivious to the fact that this family are witnesses in a major criminal investigation, who cannot and should not, speak about anything pertaining to a future trial! Deh!

I believe Martin Smith replied to Richard D. Hall, because he is a reasonable man, but didn't reply to Tony, because banging their heads against a brick wall would have been more productive.  Even now, admin are saying on the site that Martin Smith's email might be fake! 

My disagreement with Tony and indeed the reason for my ban rests on the evidence of the Smith family. Tony is adamant they are involved and 'we' (JH forum) have a right to investigate them.  I believe they are innocent witnesses and that we should respect their privacy.  Tony also believes that the investigation by Scotland Yard is a whitewash, a  means to cover up Madeleine's disappearance and clear the parents of any involvement.  I am not so cynical.  There are good people in this world, like Goncalo Amaral and the Smith family, those who are brave enough to stand by their truth in the face of so much hostility.  And I believe there are good people in the police, men and women just like Goncalo Amaral who stay focused on the victim of the crime and won't give up until she gets justice.

Farewell to the posters on JH who continue to fight for truth and justice.  The ban is for a week, but after this blog, I doubt I will be back.  I entered the McCann fray to discover the truth behind the disappearance not the truth according to Tony Bennett and other commentators who demand we believe them or they will take their ball and go home. 

*I have and use a cakestand for afternoon tea :)

Tuesday, 12 August 2014

RICHARD D. HALL response Smithman controversy

Hi Richard, thank you for taking the time to respond.

First, let me start by saying that I think you did a phenomenal job, the videos were so compelling, I watched them until the wee small hours.  You have got so many facts out there that the Mainstream media have failed to report.  I think they are essential viewing for anyone trying to understand the complexities of this case.  There are so many aspects to it, I can only imagine what you had to wade through to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I think you have done a terrific job, but if I may be so bold as to say, it needs a few tweaks to make it great.  The title of Goncalo Amaral's book for example is 'The Truth of the Lie', and it is Martin Smith not Malcolm. Minor points in the whole scheme of things, but irksome to the thousands who follow this case.

I think you have vastly underestimated the importance of the Smith family sighting.  It is an integral part of the abduction story.  It was so important that when Goncalo Amaral  was arranging for the Smith family to return to PDL, he was removed from the case.  The Smith family evidence has always been there, but it was tucked away whilst the fake leads were promoted.  Why was it so important for the McCanns to suppress this vital evidence from the Smith family?  The efits presented in last October's Crimewatch have been in existence since 2008, yet they have only now come to the public's attention.  They have been advertising Jane Tanner's sighting for 7 years and still do, even though SY have dismissed him as a suspect!

The Smith family have done no more than come forward to say what they saw, their civil duty in fact, and given the huge security wall that surrounded the McCanns, I think it was very brave of them.  In trying to understand the reasons for another person's actions, why leap to the assumption it is because they are involved in a major crime?  There could be all sorts of reasons why there was a delay in their sighting coming to light, waiting for 'pal' Robert Murat to be picked up as suspect being the least likely.

If we try to imagine the chaos that ensued after the McCanns and the Tapas gang hit the phones on the night of 3rd May, we might be able to understand why there was a delay.  The PJ were inundated with calls and leads in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance - as Uncle John told us, the McCanns are a very proactive family.  Within hours of Madeleine's disappearance the world's media were descending upon PDL.  Not only the world's media, but all the powerful people listed in Part 1 of your documentary.

How much evidence did the PJ have to sift through?  Additionally, they had to interview the parents, the tapas gang, and everyone in the immediate vicinity when the incident occurred.  Martin Smith's report may have lain among mountains of papers and may have seemed unimportant at the time.  The police are only human and as we know, TM were doing everything they could to saturate the investigation with all sorts of nonsense including messages from psychics and mediums!

We can see from the Smiths' statements that they did not fully understand the importance of their sighting. They were in a holiday resort and the sight of a man carrying a sleeping child, did not seem out of the ordinary. They themselves had children with them.  From their perspective there could have been dozens of men walking around PDL carrying sleeping children - there was a night crèche.
If the Smiths didn't think their sighting important, and neither did the police, we can see how it sunk further to the bottom of the pile.  Again, we have no idea how many hundreds of sightings and leads the PJ were chasing up at that time and nor did the Smiths. Martin Smith, a modest man, may have felt there were other sightings more important than theirs, particularly if they did contact the police and the call wasn't followed up. 
Goncalo Amaral was trying to run an investigation alongside a sensational media campaign, the like of which we have never seen before, where the McCanns were encouraging every loon on the planet who saw a 3 year old blonde girl (in the flesh or in dreams) to telephone the PJ.  In addition they were being pressurised to lay off the parents and focus on Tannerman.  That the Smith family sighting ever came to light is a miracle in itself. 

As for Robert Murat, he may have been a bit of a player, or that was the way he saw himself.  He was a salesman with an outgoing personality, he had no ego or confidence problems as demonstrated by his active participation in the circus that was building up around Warners.  How CEOP managed to squeeze him into the profile of a child murderer is bizarre,  We also know he had a geeky interest in mobile phone pings and spent over an hour having a friendly chat to a police officer with similar interests.  Again, it is a huge leap to assume he is involved in a major crime based on his interest in gadgets.

I hope that my criticism is taken in the spirit in which it is mean't Richard.  I think your work has the potential to knock the socks off this establishment cover up, and hopefully we can keep it circulating online. As I said before, I was hugely impressed with your work, and I applaud your bravery in stepping up to the plate and exposing this sham for what it is.

Kindest wishes to you.

Ps.  So sorry I have been unable to copy Richard's reply into my above post, but it is among the comments.

Pps.  Herewith a link to the Smith family statements.  One of the witnesses was only 12, are we to believe she too lied to the police?  I urge readers to scroll down to the bottom of the witness statements, the reports at the bottom explain exactly why the McCanns did not want their evidence made public.

Join the discussion at

Sunday, 10 August 2014


Bravo to Richard D. Hall and Richplanet for exposing the truth behind the McCanns' media circus, I hope the videos are spread far and wide.  For the first time, we have a professionally produced factual account of what was really going on behind the scenes in the 'search' for Madeleine.

However, for me Part IV was spoilt by the assumption that the Smith family were lying about their sighting of a man carrying a child.  It seemed to me that Richard Hall made a huge leap from factual information to speculation, and in doing so he is insinuating that a family of 6 have conspired to lie for 7 years, perverting the course of justice in a major crime.  One of the family members was only 12 at the time, yet we are to believe she too lied to the police to protect a casual friend of her father's. 

I wonder sometimes if those accusing this family of lying have any idea of what they are accusing them of?  This case involves a heinous crime, the death of a 3 year old child.  Their 'lies' have misled the police forces of two countries for 7 years and they will likely face prison sentences and will almost certainly end up with criminal records.  Yes, including the 12 year old, thanks Dad.  Not forgetting of course, how they will be pilloried by the press and public for obstructing the police in missing child investigation.

I'm not buying it.  Lets unravel this Smith family and Robert Murat mystery, Those who disbelieve the Smith family, believe that Robert Murat, the first Arguido, is somehow involved in Madeleine's disappearance.  I was disappointed to see that Richard Hall has c/p most of the arguments put forward by Tony Bennett on Jill Havern's forum*, without challenge.  It seems to me that both men are trying to ram the wrong piece of the jigsaw into place to complete the picture, and in doing so they are building the case for the McCanns' defence!

Lets imagine for one moment, the grieving family and friends in the aftermath of Madeleine's 'disappearance'.  As Richard Hall pointed out, the dash to PDL of numerous high powered government figures, legal eagles, and control risk specialists was unprecedented (Part I is superb), every expert in crisis management in fact.  Then you have, err, Robert Murat.  Where exactly does he fit in amongst this establishment elite?

But lets get back to the grieving family.  In those early days they needed a patsy PDQ in order to take suspicion away from themselves.  A profile of an abductor is drawn up and would you believe it there's a guy next door who fits it exactly!  What are the chances?  An anonymous phone call is put through to the PJ accusing Robert Murat of being peculiar and watching child porn, but he's not picked up immediately.  Time to up the ante.  A quick word from Lori Campbell, Sun Reporter, 'he reminded me of Ian Huntley'.  Then we have a covert operation led by British police, where Jane Tanner, friend of the McCanns positively identifies the man she saw as Robert Murat. Just to make sure there is no doubt about it, two more members of the tapas group come forward to say they saw him on the night.

Just to establish the facts, Team McCann and all their little helpers were putting Robert Murat firmly in the frame.  Now they are being assisted by Tony Bennett and Richard Hall!

I could give an in depth psychological profile of Robert Murat that would explain why I do not believe he is involved, but I wouldn't put him through it, the Murats have suffered enough.  Suffice to say he is basically a nice helpful guy, but like everyone else his eyes lit up at the pound signs.  It really doesn't matter if the Smiths knew him, or he knew Gerry, its all moot.  How well do you have to know someone to ask them to help you cover up the death of a child?

I'm appalled at the way the Smith family are being treated by those investigating this case.   They are the only independent, credible witnesses to what may have happened that night, yet some of the antis are publicly calling them liars.  Its hardly surprising that people are so reluctant to come forward as witnesses, in some cases, this one especially, it can be life changing.  By putting their names out there, they become vulnerable to all sorts of intrusion into their private lives, particularly now, with so much information being available on the internet.  However, in my opinion it is wrong to make assumptions about this family on the very limited information we have.  They have behaved impeccably, they have stayed well away from the media circus surrounding the McCanns and they have never sought to cash in on anything. Yes, lets get to the truth, but lets not persecute innocent people!

Before Jayelles et al give themselves wedgies with this one, the McCanns have been lying and cashing in on their daughter's disappearance for 7 years, if they lie to the public they must expect the public to challenge them.  The Smith family haven't been making statements to the press or asking for donations.  See the difference?