Sunday, 14 October 2018


There’s clearly a lot more to little Madeleine McCann’s disappearance than the simplistic narrative put forward by her parents and their friends on the night she vanished. A narrative accepted without question by the entire British establishment and senior police officers who should have known better. Madeleine was stolen in the night by a bogeyman - yeh, the mythical monster we use to make naughty children stay in their beds and go to sleep. Guess what kids, he’s real.
Child snatchers are mostly grotesque characters from children’s story books, comical caricatures of the dangers that surround us, if we don’t eat our greens or go to sleep when the light’s out. We take comfort in the fact they are not real, our parents will protect us, or we can always hide under the duvet.
Gerry and Kate made this mythical creature very real. So too did their entire bandwagon. Not much tops a child stealing predator for front page news.  Whilst New Labour were calling out for us to carry ID cards and line up to submit our DNA for a National Database and Jim Gamble wanted to police the lawless internet.  What better way to promote all these causes than the cherubic face of a missing child?
But, let’s put all the intrigue aside for just one moment, because I want to reply to a very interesting question posed by one by one of my regular contributors, JC (probably not Mr.Corbyn :( or the other ‘JC’)). How about we just forget it? Not JC’s exact words, but you get the drift.
To those of use who can merely observe, it would seem both Operation Grange and indeed the PJ, are caught in ‘check’, that is not quite check mate, because there appears to be a tenacious few, who, like Goncalo Amaral, will never give up.  A police investigation isn’t about protecting people from their crimes, it is about getting results, and by results, I mean convictions. The police build the case for the prosecution, not the defence.
As most of my readers know, retribution is the part where I wuss out.  Punishment is something I just cannot get my head around.  I find the word medieval and it's connotations barbaric.  I was never able to smack my children, the idea of it was abhorrent to me.  And before any smartass jumps in, they have grown up to be kind, decent, gentlemen with impeccable manners.  No smacks were ever needed.
But back to punishment.  This is where myself and other gentle folks back away.  We are not emotionally involved, Madeleine wasn't ripped from our lives.  I can only speak for myself here, but the face of Ian Huntley incensed me!  And if I am honest, it incenses me still.  If I were in his presence, I fear I would physically attack him.  When I see shattered mothers speaking on behalf of their children, I feel their pain, and I feel their anger and I fully understand their need for retribution.
I don't feel any of that in the case of Gerry and Kate.  They are the ones who had their beloved child ripped from them.  I don't think there was any malice intended that night, in fact I feel much the same as Goncalo Amaral, that is, there was a tragic accident.  On those grounds alone, we could all say, how about we just forget it, these people have suffered enough.
But it doesn't end there.  Because if Madeleine died on 3rd May, everything that happened thereafter was a crime.  Some might say there were multiple crimes carried out by multiple characters, some who were reporting directly back to the British Government!  If the McCanns were to be prosecuted, they could and probably would, name names.  Any trial of the McCanns and/or their friends, would reduce to farce if they claim they did not act alone.  Who's idea was it to start a Fund? Hmm Who's idea was for the parents to take Amber Alert to the European Parliament? Again hmm.  The police had the mobile phones and all the numbers the McCanns and their friends phoned that night.  Perhaps even 'who arranged the burner phones?'.
When you start to look at the number of witnesses etc, you can begin to see the scale of potential crimes committed in this poor child's name.  Gerry and Kate may indeed have been the unfortunate victims of fate on that night, but everything they did after that was premeditated.  Now that's cold.
Along with an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, society also dictates that no-one should profit from crime.  I don't know what the exact laws are, but some might say, the McCann family, all those lawyers, spin doctors , and psychologists who flew out to PDL.  Maybe too all those police agencies despatched from the UK to assist the Portuguese police. 
The biggest charge of course is perverting the course of justice.  Is it possible the UK will despatch to Portugal all those lied to the PJ? How  many would that be?  You can see  why the Tapas 6(?) requested a private  plane.  The number liable to those very serious charges could run to dozens.  All those of watching the shenanigans going on in PDL, could see how disruptive the McCanns media campaign was to the Portuguese police.
It was a circus of Team McCann's making. 
Should they get away with all that?  And indeed, everything they have done since Madeleine disappeared? Starting with their very cruel campaign against Goncalo Amaral, the detective who searched for their daughter.  It could be said that they have suffered karma in bucket loads, they still don't have that 'innocent' statement from anyone who matters.  Simply by trying to keep up the pretence and the unrealistic image they created for themselves, they are already in purgatory. 
I think the decision not to just let this case drop, was made a long time ago.  Probably an agreement was made between David Cameron and his Portuguese counterpart and it would not have been to cover up for the two doctors.  No former Prime Minister wants 'authorised a cover up' on their  historic record.  From a diplomatic perspective, the Portuguese were much maligned for their investigation into Madeleine's disappearance with Goncalo Amaral labelled as a 'disgraced detective' and the PJ labelled as incompetent and corrupt.  The parents of Madeleine were successful beyond their wildest dreams, in getting the entire British establishment blaming the Portuguese police for Madeleine's loss.  There was much for DC to put right.
They may not have been aware of the number of players when they first began, but their continual requests for more funding suggests they don't intend to leave anyone out.  But again, back to that crazy scenario of the McCanns, their extended family and all those ambulance chasers who were on the first flight, being taken back to PDL to face charges and possible imprisonment.  Like almost everything in this case, if you scratch the surface there is always another layer beneath.  The reality of all those who should be charged flying out to face a Portuguese criminal court has to be miniscule.  Will Portugal ask for their extradition?
For older members of the McCann and Healy clans it seems ridiculous, but how about the Tapas friends, their siblings and Clarence Mitchell?  Will they all fly out to PDL willingly?  What about those experts? Superintendent Hill, Jim Gamble, the psychologists, the family liaison officers?  All are witnesses to the beginning of the Fund and the spectacular media campaign, not to mention the highly irregular separate [from the police] 'search' by the McCann family.
Quite a few people face quite a few  charges I would say, which is why I'm not screaming at OG.  On the other hand, all those who forcibly pushed the abduction story, will never be able to relax until OG is filed away stamped 'abduction'.  For them, their weakness and greed, is always just a breath away from public exposure.  Those crime experts who have staked their careers on the parents being found innocent. 
Sadly, it  is only strangers who fight for justice for Madeleine.  Kate has forgiven her daughter's abductor.  Again, not normal.   I am sure that madness that possesses me when I see the face of Ian Huntley, possesses the mothers and fathers of murdered  children every time they think of their loss.  I can't help but be cynical about Kate's bizarre 'I forgive the abductor' press release.  I don't see pious and self sacrificing, I see,  'I've got nothing to say about the abductor' (because there isn't one).  It also carries the connotations, 'ffs don't ask me to speak directly to the camera'. 
It's difficult however, not to compare this case to that of missing Shannon Matthews.  Shannon was of course found alive, and her disappearance basically mimicked Madeleine's but the donations were much, much, lower.  Shannon of course survived, but there would have been an outcry if the powers that be had said, how about we just forget it.
Karen Matthews faced justice in a criminal court, in front of a jury of her peers and she was sentenced to prison. 
For Karen Matthews there was no stampede of lawyers, CEOP and government appointed press officers rushing to Karen's side.  Karen was a graphic illustration of broken Britain and the broken benefits system.  The family and friends of Karen were as proactive as Team McCann, but without the online shop and good quality wristbands.  The friends of Karen however, believed her implicitly, until they didn't.  When the truth dawned on them, they were genuinely shocked, none of them said, let's keep this going, it's a good earner, they went to the police. 
What happened  on the night of Madeleine's disappearance triggered a complex web of lies that spawned, who knows how many, crimes, who knows how many suspects?  Which begs the question, how did OG and the PJ split the case up?  I am guessing the PJ will cover Madeleine's disappearance and those directly involved.  The original crime.  OG I presume will handle the British end.  Those crimes that might relate to fraud etc.  Is it mere coincidence for example, that the McCanns hired not one, but two firms of private investigators who were criminally corrupt?
I actually feel so closely involved in this case now, that I am finding it quite frightening to think of the reality of a prosecution or several prosecutions taking place.  I don't even like Kate, but can see that she is very fragile and emotionally over  wrought. I don't think she could handle any form of questioning, especially not in the witness box as a defendant. As for being sent to a Portuguese prison?  Kate's fragility, the real and the fake, has I am sure endeared her to many.  It is hard, if not impossible, to see the cunning and the conniving underneath.
Gerry however, gets what he deserves.  He has a real struggle to hide the 'smug'.  He has Trump's 'still winning' air as he taunts the police with noooooo evidence.  One image of Gerry that chills me to the core, is the press conference the parents gave with an aged progressed image of their daughter behind them.  For some reason Gerry got the giggles, and was struggling to contain them.  To see a picture of your child as she would look if she were alive can't be anything but traumatizing for a parent.  I broke down whilst watching the same on an episode of Quincey!  But to laugh, may God forgive him.  On my last blog I received a post from some  students who had spotted Gerry lying 37 times, just on the parts of the case they studied.  He's a bad liar.  He has no control over his micro expressions (duping delight) or his body language.  On occasion he looks as though he is  suffering a flea infestation. 
My own personal favourite is the parents interview with Sandra Felgueiras, where Gerry shows all the finesse of a trembling adolescent in the presence of the attractive gym mistress.  I'm not knocking him, I too became a blabbering heap when I met the Cadbury's Milk Tray man.  He was even more handsome in the flesh than he was dressed in black and sneaking into ladies' bedrooms.  I offered him tea, coffee, anything - quite literally anything.  But back to Gerry's performance in that interview.  In his defence he was equally smitten with Jeremy Paxman.
But this was confident Gerry, talking to a woman (easy peasy), he had the air of man that said, we just had a drink out back together, they were on first name terms.  Gerry went straight into flirt mode, despite the fact that Kate's claws were digging into his thigh or the palm of his hand.  I think he was sending her telepathic messages, 'don't worry, I've got this'.  Kate is weirdly possessive of Gerry, but that's too big  a subject for here and now. 
Because this case has gone on so long, most people don't really care one way or another what happens to those who made the child disappear.  Happily there are no angry mobs, or seekers of vengeance.  Even Goncalo Amaral who has suffered more than most at the hands of Gerry and Kate, seems content to let fate run it's course.  He has back, that which was taken from him, his freedom of speech.

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!