Monday 14 January 2019


I am sorry I have been so mesmerized by the goings on in the craziest White House I have ever seen, that the latest Madeleine news has slipped under my radar. That’s if you call Tracey Kandhola’s reports of the ever suffering parents recent receipt of another big wadge of cash latest news.  And, I compare trawling through tabloid stories online to climbing Trump’s imaginary wall or crossing the Alps with elephants, by the time you have zapped all the ads for Fat Fifty and Funerals Are Us, you have lost the will to live.  But to get to the crunch it’s really just Tracey K reminding us the parents are still suffering and need our sympathy and cash.
Now, quite why she brings our attention to the Madeleine Fund is curious indeed. From a PR perspective, is it a good idea to juxtapose the huge pile of cash the parents are sitting on with a reminder that Operation Grange are continually asking for more funds?  And whoever heard of a Charity, even a faux one, holding onto cash for a rainy day?  Kudos for the honesty, though not sure ‘please give generously for future legal fees’ would make a great slogan.  Personally, I think their defence should go along the numbers line, as in Tapas Two, or Tapas Six, or go bigger, Tapas Lovers Worldwide (not in the Textusa sense), but you get my drift.   
Kate did of course pledge to donate all the royalties from her book to the Madeleine Fund. People don’t however see this as generosity on her part, it is after all, her daughter who is missing.  Then of course, the objectives of The Fund incorporate any needs the parents might have, effectively a piggy bank in which to dip every time they sue someone, especially newspapers, publishers and Goncalo Amaral.
Of course a good lawyer, of the Uriah Heep variety, could argue very effectively that the Company’s Articles allow the parents to use the Fund however they wish.  Former Fund Director Esther McVie stated categorically that the Fund would not be used for legal fees.  There ended her Directorship and any nonsense talk of bringing checks and balances to the use of the Fund.  
So legally, the McCanns are acting within the bounds of responsible company running.  But morally? Hmmm.  And have they paid all their legal debts in Portugal?  Having lost in the highest Court in the Land, all the legal costs - their own and those of Goncalo Amaral and two other Defendants fell in the laps of the parents. Now this is where it is hard to see the separation between the parents’ private income and The Fund. Are they clear and separate entities?  One source suggested they (parents or Fund?) may have to pay Goncalo Amaral damages, or they need the £800k+ to sue him further.  They are not pressing a further search for Madeleine once Operation Grange closes, but it is implied, almost as an afterthought.  
As to why TK continues to inform us of the movement of large sums of money in the parents’ bank accounts, I remain perplexed.  Letting the world know they are keeping nearly a million quid for a rainy day, is insulting, especially to all those parents out there who’s missing kids have not received a fraction of the assistance and publicity given to the McCanns.  The financial help they could give others in their position is immeasurable, and, err, immediate.  They could relieve the financial pressure from the police who are searching for their daughter, they could put up a half million pound reward and still have loadsamoney for a rainy day.  But as Clarence said, allegedly, 3 or 4 million may sound like a lot, but when you are running a full A list entourage, it’s just peanuts.  My fees alone could run a small hospital in a disaster zone, what doctor wouldn’t choose snake oil over emergency medical aid? 
No matter what way you look at, the parents are free to use the Madeleine Fund  for whatever they choose, legally they made sure to cover themselves on every front to ensure the company's final objective is never reached.  The handing over of the remainder of the Fund to 'other' children's charities. 
As for the comparisons between the finding of Jayme Closs and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, there aren't any.


  1. When is the McCanns Appeal to ECHR against Amaral and Portuguese State verdict due, any idea.

    1. 5th November 2018

      'But they face a huge wait for potential justice, with their pal remarking: “It could take up to eight years by which time Madeleine, if she is still out there, would be a young adult into her 20s.”

      The ECHR stated today that the case has not yet been dealt with and there is “no fixed time for examining it.”

      An ECHR spokesperson said: “The case McCann and Healy v Portugal is still under consideration and there is no fixed time for examining it. There is no date fixed date for any judgement or decision to be delivered.”'

      Truth or lies?

      Interesting: "The case McCann and Healy v Portugal".

    2. How bloody minded must you be to carry a vendetta into a second decade? The McCanns want a Court, any Court, to declare Goncalo Amaral the villain of the piece and themselves tragic victims of police corruption. Ideally, they would also like him imprisoned and all his assets (and those of his family)seized and passed to them.

      Why? Because they told their side of the story and then he went and spoiled it all by telling his. When Gerry got out his whiteboard, they believed they had cracked it, fame, glory and cash pouring in.

      Of course, suspicion of the parents began long before anyone knew the name of Goncalo Amaral. It began with their own freaky behaviour. I compare the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance to those strange few weeks in 1997 when Princess Diana died, when the entire country seemed to be under a hypnotic spell. A combination of shock and grief, too enormous to process, the only response could be compassion, it wasn't the time to be suspicious, or to think the worst. And of course the parents milked it, they were able to do literally anything, without the public or the media asking questions. Everything they did, they said, was to find Madeleine, and who could argue with that?

      But I have wandered. Does anyone even remember what the McCanns are fighting for in the ECHR? Is it their right to burn books and strip the detective who searched for their daughter, of all his financial assets? I don't see their case against Portugal having any merits whatsoever. When Isabel Duarte stockpiled Goncalo Amaral's books in a warehouse ready for the incinerator, the case should have been chucked out of Court then and there. It was an affront to Freedom of Speech not only in Portugal but worldwide, memes of Gerry and Kate Bookburners with those books they had stripped from the shelves should have flooded the internet. Should they ever go to the ECHR, I hope they face nothing but protests.

  2. The McCanns have money in their account lawfully and honestly, morals play no part.

    They state it will be used when OG finishes, to prolong the search for M. They know this will not happen as it would expose the dishonesty of too many UK policemen and politicians so their nest egg remains intact.

    The media articles keep up their profile, may shift a few extra copies, keep journos in work and may actually encourage the gullible to cough up a few coins.

    Wins all round, except for poor Madeleine, of course.

    Do people forget the McCanns were aided and abetted in their fund for a number of years, by the Leics police on the official website of the plod.

    - If you have any info don't ring us ring the McCanns (suspect/arguidos) at the time.

    - Please follow our link to the McCanns website, where a donation button is provided.

    Can anybody show another case where the investigators were assisting the suspects to raise money to use in legal costs against the investigators.

    OG is a farce, "investigating" a farce.

    You couldn't make it up but they do, again and again.

    1. Hi JJ and a belated Happy New Year to you.

      We both know that people in authority contributed to the non result of the original investigation JJ, whether the unravelling by OG goes back that far, or even that deep, remains to be seen.

      If you consider that most government policy is defined by public opinion, then the moral argument is just as important as the legal one. It was public opinion, shock, horror, outrage, compassion, that thrust Gerry and Kate into the limelight. The immediate support of the incumbent government legitimised the abduction story, they even provided the victims with a spokesman! Gerry and Kate were starting a movement and New Labour wanted to be on that bus. This couple were stirring the public up to such an extent they were offering their new borns for Blair's national DNA bank. Any child, got that, even posh ones, can be stolen from their beds by the now validated and officially stamped Bogeyman.

      Remember, this was during Blair's 'I want to be Supreme Leader' phase, where he had visions of a National Database containing the private details of every citizen. Even their DNA. Whether he owned an evil looking fluffy white cat that he stroked constantly, has not been confirmed. Nor the rumour that he wanted a special police force to keep surveillance on social media.

      I don't agree OG is a farce JJ, perhaps I have more faith in human nature than you do, or, wearing my logical head, I just don't see any way OG can fit anything other than the truth into those empty spaces on the jigsaw puzzle. It can't be done, and we have seen hundreds try!

      Ultimately, I simply cannot find a single reason why Scotland Yard and Theresa May would want to tar their legacies with a cover up that can never be Loctite. I agree, the truth would reveal a lot of names that the elite would prefer stayed hidden, but this is the Age of Information, it's impossibility. No-one is protected from their past indiscretions, think Cameron and a pig's head. Now if they couldn't hide that for a PM, why would they go to £12m worth of trouble, to cover up for two, prior to this, unknown citizens? Or indeed those VIP names who were directly responsible for the err, interruption of the Portuguese investigation.

      I think the end draws near JJ, and as GA, once said, the world will know the truth of the lie!

    2. Hi Ros Happy New Year and an alternative view.

      How can the end be near?

      If OG find the fund is a fraud it has been officially supported and promoted by the Leics and Met police.

      If the McCanns went down so would the Leics police Chief Constable Matt Baggott and the head of Leics CID Prior, to name but two.

      It will never happen.

      The McCanns if charged with offences against Madeleine. They could simply state in the unlawful meetings held in Portugal with the Leics police, they were ordered to lie and deceive and were too afraid to do anything else.

      The McCanns could also point out the unlawful actions of CEOP officers and how they came to frame RM.

      If called liars they would point out that so is DCI Redwood and demand the prosecution produce Creche Man.

      OG have confirmed JT is not a liar, simply mistaken.

      The Met's J Shord deceived the PJ in an email - why?

      There is evidence of an unprofessional relationship between the tapas 7 and Stu Prior.

      The LP admit in statements taking orders from the Macs without the knowledge of the PJ!

      The dishonesty of the UK police runs deep throughout this case, the truth was there in the first 72 hours.

      No charges will ever happen.

      Theresa May has allowed these lies she is a ditherer self serving and a complete liar.

      - Brexit tells us that.

      The legacy of the Met, just look into Mark Rowley and his connections with OG and PDL

    3. Absolutely agree. Why do people have their heads in the sand about the Uk police? It beats me.

    4. It beats me too, for goodness sake, Leicester police had a direct link to the McCanns official site, what does that show but blatant bias? And dare I say it a shameful and glaring cover-up.

      For sure Leicester Constabulary can't be trusted as far as this case is concerned. As for the Met, who knows what they are up to, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

    5. @16:24

      Wait you sure may, see you likely wan't.

    6. Oops... Mine @13:21 ...won't.

  3. The McCanns can only appeal against Portugal. The ECHR does not try cases against individuals, therefore there is no case against Gonçalo Amaral. I'm sure that if the ECHR had accepted to study their complaint the McCanns would have let us know right away.

    1. Yes they would indeed Carolina, it would be acknowledgement that they had a case, it seems they have not even got that far, or, as you say, they would have let us know.

      To be honest, I don't really know what the McCanns' claim is. I may have read it one time, but it didn't sink in. What rights have Gerry and Kate had taken away? The right not to be thought of as total twats for leaving their 3 toddlers on their own in a holiday apartment. The right to have books that do not agree with their abduction story, stripped from book shelves and Amazon.

      Maybe their right to a good reputation? Err, being suspects in the disappearance had pretty much put paid to any good reputations they may have had. How about 'invasion of privacy'. Again tricky, when you have sold 'I couldn't make love to Gerry' to the Sun newspaper. But, kudos there, I doubt anyone could.

      Had Gerry and Kate returned to normal life after Madeleine's disappearance, their reputations would have been restored by their fundraising and church going, cost: zero, and maybe a little self restraint. Unfortunately, they devoted their lives to staying in the news, see £500k payment to Lord Bell. Sadly for them all those tabloid front pages and all those TV appearances, did nothing to lift the cloud of suspicion from them. All those interviews they gave broadened their audience, but not in a good way. They brought every lie spotter and Agatha Christie wannabe flooding to social media.

      At the beginning, the general consensus was that the McCanns were being professionally coached for their TV appearances. I stopped believing that quite some time ago, Gerry scratches his nose, ear, back of head, so often, he clearly knows nothing about body language.

      Kate is marginally better, probably because she had a tougher crowd to fool from childhood, that is, mostly adults. Gerry's siblings I suspect, treated him as the golden child, he probably had a small empire by the time he was 5.

      But I digress, whatever it is the McCanns want from the ECHR, they will never get. They will have to keep their fiendish desire for revenge against Goncalo Amaral to themselves, no-one else wants the investigating detective locked up.

  4. As for the comparisons between the finding of Jayme Closs and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, there aren't any.


    Indeed. Talk about clutching on to straws. Still, I suppose there is nothing left to clutch on to.

    All the money that went into The Fund, all the taxpayer's money that has been used to fund Operation Grange and what has been achieved?

    All the money in the world will not bring Madeleine back and the parents know that in my opinion. If Madeleine could have been brought back I think the combined forces of the Portuguese and British police would have done so - no need whatsoever for a 'Fund'. I am sure the UK taxpayer would have been very happy to have paid their taxes for that outcome.

    Alas, unfortunately I am of the opinion that the media also knew there was no hope of bringing Madeleine back alive (or even dead for that matter, given what her own father stated about finding a body) so what, exactly, has been going on all this time?

  5. Madeleine's disappearance happened at a time when the incumbent government, New Labour, were pushing for a national DNA database, stricter border controls and compulsory ID cards. The angelic Madeleine became the poster child for draconian rules and regulations that were not needed and not wanted. Madeleine's face encompassed every 'think of the children' argument ever used. If you refuse to hand over your password, bank, medical details and blood to the thug at the door, you are not thinking of the children you fiend! And, goes without saying, you have something to hide.

    That the sweet, innocent, cherubic face of little Madeleine was used for such horrendous abuses of power, should outrage all of us, her parents the most. Fear tactics, combined with 'please keep giving us money' tactics are particularly abhorrent.

    Why scare the bejesus out of young parents? Who would do that? Aren't young parents living with enough stress already? I remember the toddler years as traumatic, I don't know how I survived the little blighters. I also remember being overwhelmed with a need to protect them, 24/7, it never switched off, and in those days the bogeyman remained a myth.

    Politics are, on the whole, despicable, while the rest of us ponder the worst we could do, politicians casually reach those depths and find new ones. As history has shown us, it is not necessary to be a nice person in order to find fame. In fact I would hazard a guess there is a higher degree of psychopathy among celebrities and politicians than any other demographic.

    Sadly 12:25, Madeleine the child is long gone, but her patented image will always be with us.

    1. Your DNA database / new Labour hypothesis isn't correct. The DNA database was in the works years before New Labour and has been cranked up since. It was all about the RFID chips in the 80s.And children being traffiked was one of the popular selling tactics then.Trump and his darling Jared Kushner are planning it as we sleep ( 666 Fith Avenue ? seriously ? lol ). Border controls ? Brexit, UKIP, Mexico. Somehow you've managed to say that the McCanns are behind DNA data bases and that it made them a few bob too.It's madness on a new scale.

    2. The McCanns were not behind databases, border control or amber alert, but they were used by those responsible for them. Their tragedy suited the agenda of many, particularly those promoting missing children and those calling for policing of the internet.

      Accusing me of something I have never said does not help your argument 20:59.

    3. If you're suggesting that the tragedy of what happened to Madeleine was seized upon by the then powers that be ( Blair /Brown et al) to promote their agenda ( DNA databases and an excuse to infringe on our human right to freedom)then you have raised two highly significant points unintentionally. The first is motive, which lets the parents off the hook.The second is in your suggesting that the McCanns were 'used' by them. That would make it easier to accept and understand how the parents were afforded unprecedented assistance and expense and protection.Those who gladly provided it were putting them in a situation that would ensure their voicing of any suspicions of those providing it would be seen as the height of ingratitude. It's nice to see that you've provided a good argument for the theory that holds that an abduction with political roots was responsible for the child's disappearance rather than the tired 'the parents did it' mantra. You'e sub conscious has spoken so it holds water.Your tell- tale heart has spilled it's innermost.I hope you feel liberated by it despite it being accidental. I knew if I kept coming back I'd see something good from you eventually.

  6. “Of course a good lawyer, of the Uriah Heep variety, could argue very effectively that the Company’s Articles allow the parents to use the Fund however they wish” - actually, no, as the Articles were amended years ago, and considerable restrictions were placed on the family benefitting. I expect there was some particular reason for doing that at the time, which they may now be regretting.

  7. Hi Rosalinda and others

    The snow falls heavily over the Bothnian Sea and on my cottage in a northern cold country, urging me to raise a glass to propose a toast to you Rosalinda and to your blog. As long as there’re still social media users, bloggers and posters using their universal rights to express themselves and challenge the official “truth” about what happened to Madeleine McCann, there’s hope about the Portuguese and the British authorities listening to reason, if they haven’t done so yet.

    History teaches us over and over again that the voice of sense and wisdom is often spoken by seemingly insignificant citizens without any particular positions in society, while government officials, in particular, often prefer to stay silent, when the topic of discussion becomes too controversial, especially if their privileges are at stake. Has a social or political change to the better ever been initiated from up above?

    to Anon 15 January 2019 at 12:25 and others as well

    "As for the comparisons between the finding of Jayme Closs and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, there aren't any"

    The Official Find Madeleine Campaign Page (operated by an anonymous digital co-ordinator) representing the McCanns, which draws parallels between the murder of the parents of a thirteen-year old girl (Jayme Closs), who got kidnapped by the murderer, and the Madeleine case, is nothing but a desperate attempt by the McCanns to keep the myth about Madeleine alive. Highlighting the Madeleine case, on the basis of other equally serious crimes but of quite different kinds, adds nothing to the specific on-going investigation. Why would it? However, temporarily it may deflect attention away from the real facts in the police files and the circumstances surrounding the case.

    As for the McCanns’ fraud Fund, the sole aim of it has always been to escape justice, but unfortunately for them, “times aren’t on their side anymore” and the so called 150 “abusive messages” each day last year, according to The Sun, suggest that the McCanns know that they’ve lost the support from the public. So when the “rainy days” come, they’ll have to rely upon their paid lawyers, Clarence Mitchell and a few corrupt journalists who’re prepared to prostitute themselves for the sake of promoting the biggest lie ever in the history of criminology.

    1. And cheers to you Bjorn, I can only imagine the beauty of your surroundings, and of course the intense cold! It is around 3/4 degrees here, and that was freezing for me!

      I once told a psychiatrist that I had diagnosed myself an obsessive compulsive loon for spending so much time reading about and discussing this case with others online. I expected shock, horror and at least wtf, but he laughed gently, and explained that what I was doing was no different to chatting over the garden fence. I saw it as an addiction, he saw it as a positive as I was at least communicating with others.

      To the fiercest of the McCann supporters, and to my haters and critics, I say, note, I have at least questioned my sanity, and out loud to a medical professional. To those who used to say 'wtf is wrong with you?', the answer is apparently nothing, with regard to my use of social media that is. The OCD however is beyond mine and medical reach. I live with it. On the plus side, when manic I am twice as productive.

      The above comes under 'why do all still talk about Madeleine' in case anyone is wondering. My obsession with learning everything there is to know about this case has caught many thousands within it's grip. I compare it to my dear old dad being totally enthralled by the 1990's OJ Simpson trial that was being played out on our TVs and written about in every newspaper. And my dear old dad was far from the only one caught in it's grip. Imagine if the internet had been around, the chatrooms and blogs would have collapsed under the traffic.

      I think we all, well those of us who are still doggedly following this case, have a touch of the 'workshop of filthy creation' within us. That obsessive need to finish a task we have started. For us, there cannot be closure, until there is actual closure! I would hazard a guess there are many police detectives who feel the same way. Had they bowed to public pressure, not that there was any, or political convenience, they would have closed their files years ago. The longer it goes on, the more they have to explain.

      I still don't understand why the McCanns continue to court publicity, I guess it is pretty gutsy of them to think they can change public opinion with a constant feed of nothing burgers to Tracey Kandhola.

      It is a sad, and I'd say, pretty uncomfortable situation to be in, if you have lost public support. Thankfully, the hostile antis have now gone underground, but they had been forgotten even before that. I can't say I have grown any more, or less, fond of Gerry and Kate McCann, but I would hate to see any public anger. Ultimately, this case is very sad, and I think that is the way the media will portray it. Quite how they will deal with all the crimes committed after Madeleine disappeared, is another matter. If the country, who fought so fiercely on their behalf, is found to have been hoodwinked, not only by the parents, but by every VIP who promoted their cause, there will be anger, and quite rightly. It began with one small girl disappearing and turned into a great big, fat, global lie, signed by HM Government, Sky News and the BBC. Just think of that. A government spokesmen for a couple of tourists who lost their child while not out of the lash, but dining in a civilised manner nearby, being appointed their own government spokesman. Wtf?

    2. Ahh, the Fund. They went from 'not knowing they needed a Fund', to 'keep the millions pouring in' to we have put it in a special bank account so Goncalo Amaral can't get his mitts on it'. I can only imagine how much that idea infuriates them. They began their persecution of Goncalo Amaral with the hopes of getting millions to add to their nest egg, all the royalties he ever earns and every income he ever has. They wanted to destroy him. Instead, they have destroyed themselves. True they are still free, but what they consider freedom, the rest of us would consider a living hell.

      It irritates me intensely to see such self inflicted agony, but I am judging them by my own emotions and moral guidelines, I would be driven insane by the beating of the tell tale heart. I think a person would have to be 100% psychopath to be able to live and function with it. But of course they can, and do, and they are all around us. And to be honest, if I were a millionaire employer, I would definitely have a few psychopaths on the team, they get things done. I say it in jest, real millionaire employers actually do it.

      Many thanks Bjorn for the positive feedback on my blog. I think the success of my blog lies in the fact that it is interactive, and that I am fortunate to have such a wide variety of interesting and intelligent posters. I get much (all?) inspiration from the comments I receive Bjorn. Unlike other 'forums' debate is welcome here, without any censorship, rules, regulations, or codes of conduct (as if, lol), my blog has naturally evolved into an intelligent discussion forum where anyone can post regardless of their views. No-one has ever been banned and takeover bids have been squished where appropriate lol.

      Shame on me for blowing my own trumpet lol, but I am happy with how my blog has turned out. As much fun as it was fighting the trolls in the early days, prior to my blog, it was wearing full body armour and carrying a 20ft lance into the craziest McCann forum ever, the AOL Europe board. It was when the Madeleine case had hit the heights of insanity, both online and in reality, that the unmonitored and totally anonymous AOL board became a study in chimpanzees two steps removed. Few of us survived, lol, but those of us who did still high five each other, ha ha.

      But, I put down the twinings and picked up a glass of wine that combines peaches with mango, to raise to your good health also Bjorn. It is fascinating to see, if you do not mind me saying, how advanced your English has become, it would be hard to detect you from a Brit lol. Actually, not quite true, your English is better than most Brits! Anyway, Happy New Year my friend, I think this year, more than any other that has preceded, will be the year of revelations. Unfortunately, its' status as the 'crime of the century' will be largely relegated to the back pages, it cannot compete with Brexit and Trump.

    3. Bjorn. You can't hide or disguise your acidic soul can you ? You flaunt your hatred like a crown as though it has to be admired.And you still can't lower yourself to call upon evidence or proof to back up your nonsense.

      ''As for the McCanns’ fraud Fund, the sole aim of it has always been to escape justice''

      have you proof of fraud or evidence ? can you prove that it had a sole aim to escape justice ?

      ''The Sun, suggest that the McCanns know that they’ve lost the support from the public''

      Nobody takes that rag seriously any more.Nor should they.It's a tabloid for idiots. They've lost the support of lunatics who can rant with fingers pointed and think that their sheer number compensates for their lack of insight or proof.

      '' a few corrupt journalists who’re prepared to prostitute themselves for the sake of promoting the biggest lie ever in the history of criminology.''

      Names ? Biggest lie in criminology ? Hyperbole is a poor device to employ just because you can't do the spadework.

  8. Hi Rosalinda,
    I'm just thinking about the British side of the investigation. Although helpful to the Portuguese police, British forces alone can never launch a prosecution. It can only be done in the country of origin mainly because the criminal acts were committed in Portugal.
    More's the pity.

    Naturally this is a major issue for anybody following the case.
    Sadly I don't speak the language (too much brainwashing in French in school, useful for reading traffic signs "Tenez La Gauche" when driving up from Dover but not much else).
    Because it would be so nice to be able to see what's going on in the Portuguese press and news media. It's frustrating, and probably so for everybody following the criminal antics of the McCann tribe and not being able to understand what the "host" country really thinks.

    This is the country stuck trying to adjudicate the highly suspect activities of an English gang of criminals acting like untouchable lords who ventured into their land and discovered to their surprise it was a country of democracy. The McCanns thought this was a society they could easily ridicule until the tables were turned, and the public tumbled to the fake posturing of the duo and their friends, and read between the lines - and we are here. Where we are today.

    Which brings me to the question of the person who apparently okayed and allocated anther round of funds for the next step in this story, Metropolitan police chief Cressida Dick and if there is any real sincerity in her involvement.
    According to the stats I read she is not far away from retirement age-wise and could easily fade away at the end of the investigation under a "no comment" cloak. (in my opinion).
    I know we have to hope for the best and I am always hopeful the Tapas 9 will be exposed by Scotland Yard with lots of incriminating evidence to send on to the Portuguese Judiciary.
    Lets hope this happens and the PJ has the stomach for a prosecution.

  9. "How EU Nations Are Ramping Up Preparation for a No-Deal Brexit"

    "Portugal won’t require British citizens to have a visa even if there is a no-deal Brexit. It wants reciprocal treatment on this and other measures from the U.K. government. Tourism represents about 14 percent of Portugal’s gross domestic product, and the British rank as its biggest group of visitors. In addition, the government estimates that there are more than 22,000 Britons who are permanent residents in Portugal, and 22 percent of all passengers who arrive at Portuguese airports are British. The government will make 50 million euros available for loans to help companies adapt to a no-deal divorce. Sines and Lisbon, two of Portugal’s main ports, are already well-equipped to handle non-EU trade, so a Britain outside the bloc won’t be a problem. A study sponsored by the Business Confederation of Portugal showed that exports to the U.K. could drop as much as one-quarter in the medium to long term with Brexit, and that Portugal’s economic growth could be hit to the tune of 0.5 percent to 1 percent."

  10. " an English gang of criminals acting like untouchable lords"


  11. Why do people suggest the fighting fund may be dodgy and a possible reason why OG is taking so long.

    There is no evidence whatsoever the fund is or has ever been suspect.

    Brian Kennedy freely stated on national television, it would be used for legal expenses.

    Its architect was Ester McVey, a person of the highest integrity - ask any disabled person in the UK. This woman rose to the rank of UK Government Minister under Theresa May - a PM known for an incisive manner and judge of character.

    The fund was endorsed and sponsored by several police forces in the UK using tax payers funds.

    The Chief Constable of Leics police Baggott, and head of Leics CID Prior, would obviously have done all diligences before allowing links through the official Leics police website. It was linked for three years.

    Surely it is ridiculous to suggest dishonesty by UK police. We leave that to Johnny foreigner.

    CEOP carried the fighting fund link too. Does anybody seriously believe Jim Gamble could be involved in anything dodgy.

    If anyone suspected the involvement of these august representatives of the British police, they would have to be interviewed by officers of similar or superior rank.

    A DCI Redwood/Wall does not cut it. It is way beyond OG's remit and therefore cannot be a factor.

    Mrs May gave Baggott a Knighthood in 2015 which surely confirms the fund has passed all scrutiny.

    A cynic may say 150k every six months to be able to refuse FOI's is cheap for years to come.

    Ros, you watch many crime dramas. To your knowledge is there another case where the investigators were assisting the suspects, to raise money to use in legal costs, against the original investigator.

    1. Answering your last question first JJ, no I have never come across a crime where the police were assisting the suspects, in the ways they have assisted the McCanns. Putting links to their website/paypal donations is quite shocking, even the Vatican cut all links when the McCanns were made arguidos, or even before.

      Everything you point out is quite true JJ, which is why this case is so intriguing and indeed, so much more than the story of a missing child. Quite how OG are going to bring to justice all those people you and I think should be brought to justice JJ, could potentially turn this now 'small' story into a major scandal that will knock Brexit off the front pages.

      Unfortunately, I don't think there is any way of exposing the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance and the media circus that surrounded it. Some might say, Gerry and Kate were cunning enough to get as many VIPs to implicate themselves at a very early stage, to protect them for when the proverbial hit the fan. And it did. We are quick to blame the media and the politicians for being so quickly sucked in, but the very articulate and persuasive McCanns were manipulating everyone. And it cannot be overstated enough, none of this high level ministerial assistance was ever offered to Karen Matthews or the very deserving family of Ben Needham.

      There are many, if not innocent explanations, at least logical explanations for the way in which the various British police agencies approached this crime in PDL. And many of them I have discussed over the years.

      Perhaps it is because the British crime agencies who flew out there did not agree with each other, that this case cannot be finalised. There biggest fear as I see it, is the huge embarrassment that will be caused for those police chiefs who so openly supported the McCanns fund raising. Questions might arise, such as, seriously dude, you got to be chief of police yet you didn't spot the flaws in the collective abduction story? The Portuguese police spotted them straight away. And I do hope that very question is asked of all those crime experts, hopefully on TV, live.

  12. Published 5 May 2012
    From: Foreign & Commonwealth Office and Home Office

    "For more information, including the latest image progression, see the Official Website to find Madeleine McCann."

    A curious and close liaison.

  13. It's all gone very quiet lately, it's as if everyone's all McCanned out, which is not surprising since this case has almost dragged on now for nearly twelve whole years.

    Can you believe some of us have hung in there for that long, waiting for an answer? I'm sure the McCanns never expected that level of dedication, or are we all completely mad for caring about what happened all those years ago?

    It can't be that complicated, at the root of it all and subtracting everyone of the dubious witness statements it has to be a very simple case in my view, they've just made it complicated to confuse and distract attention from where they concealed the body.

    1. Hello 00:35, agree, very quiet of late, but the McCann spin doctors have much to compete with and very little to work with. Madeleine trended on twitter this evening as the barrel scrapers tried to draw comparisons to the missing footballer. The only comparison being the word 'missing'.

      I don't think it is complicated at all 00:35, unfortunately due to the clogging up of the internet with false, salacious and just plain weird conspiracy theories, it means wading through the quagmire to get to the truth.

      I'm very much a believer of 'Keep It Simple Stupid', KISS. All those who have tried to sex it up with stories of wife swapping and paedophile sex gangs dominated social media for way too long, and are truth be told, the reason why doubters of the abduction story have been treated with such contempt. Happily the creepy ones have taken their creepy tales underground, and I don't think anyone misses them.

      It is as you say 00:35, a very simple tale, an alternate title perhaps for 'The Truth of the Lie'.

    2. @Anonymous24 January 2019 at 00:35

      It went quiet in May 2007.The case did anyway.Any noise since has been created or prompted by the media and the internet.But the case was put to sleep just after the event.Whee's the evidence otherwise ? We have waited 12 years due to curiosity to see if they'll ever risk closing the case with a conclusion that doesn't sound silly.They'll have to shelve it officially.Unofficially the evidence suggests it's been shelved in all but name.Thanks to the internet, both 'sides' ( pro V anti) have self proclaimed experts and stalwarts for whom this has become personal now.They can't put it down. It's been a large bet made against each other and most of them don't merely want to know the outcome, they need to know.

      You could be right in saying it's a simple case that's been made complicated,More important is the question of who complicated it and why.The parents couldn't as they're not investigating it.And police forces wouldn't complicate it to protect the parents if they genuinely believed they'd killed or buried their own child.They're members of the public and holiday makers. That isn't VIP status is it.The world wouldn't reel in shock at two parents killing their child-remember the oft- quoted stats Ros gives us.So why would their be so much effort in trying to obscure or destroy the evidence of what happened ?What motive would anyone who did that have ? Why would killing the investigation be so urgent ?And is it usual for so many intelligence officers and politicians to fly to a foreign country as this happened ?

    3. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton24 January 2019 at 20:37

      ''I don't think it is complicated at all 00:35, unfortunately due to the clogging up of the internet with false, salacious and just plain weird conspiracy theories, it means wading through the quagmire to get to the truth. ''

      Have the combined forces of the UK and Portugal spent 12 years 'on the internet' ?Is that where they hope to find 'the truth' ? No. So what's their excuse ?

      ''It is as you say 00:35, a very simple tale, an alternate title perhaps for 'The Truth of the Lie'.''

      And those who respected Amaral and his 25 years service did nothing once he was removed from the case.Even those who endorsed his book by buying it haven't acted on it's contents.Maybe because the same '' false, salacious and just plain weird conspiracy theories'' are as counter productive to an investigation as those printed on the pages and walls of the social networks.

    4. Ah nice try at attempting to link the theory of Goncalo Amaral to the weirdos who are still attempting to persuade the public a)there was a paedophile gang and b)they were all swingers whooping it up at Warners holiday park.

      Hardly! So why hasn't Goncalo Amaral rallied a European army to his cause? Maybe because he knows, truth will always find a way, no matter how long it takes. Unfortunately, readers of 'The Truth of the Lie', do not have the collective power to alter the law and the justice system. However, some readers, those in Scotland Yard for example, do have the power to reveal the truth of the lie, and I think that is exactly what they doing.

    5. So Scotland yard are keeping the truth a secret ? That's a serious allegation.

  14. Hi Rosalinda,
    Yes; as one of you commentators noted, - it has gone quiet out there.
    Hopefully this the quiet before the storm. I mean, - before a prosecution.

    Realistically any comments won't get us (I guess you could say Joe Public) any closer to a conclusion but it's good to focus on the audacity of this family of doctors fighting to the death to keep from being prosecuted for committing a child crime (on their own child).

    Nothing in modern times comes close to the McCann's ploy of innocence played through the internet and the continued "greenwashing" through the media onto the public year after year.
    In the realms of fantasy their story is a world beater.

    From this group of criminals' point of view, one might be inclined to think; - what country's police force is ever going to prosecute a couple who have received a public blessing from the Pope, met with Tony and Cherie Blair, met with Prime Minister Gordon Brown a close neighbour of the Scottish side of the clan, living just kitty corner down the road.
    Then, the spectacle of journeying on to Washington DC and then on to an appearance in the Oprah show to proclaim their innocence, but more that anything to keep spreading the worldwide fake search for a daughter they had already disposed of.

    But perhaps the most squeamish photo-op I have come across in recent times is the one of a the McCann's meeting with British notables Theresa May, the Duchess of Gloucester(no less), and the Home Secretary, all smiles, clutching drinks and shaking hands.

    Surely this is the pinnacle. This is gold plated for them.

    You have to ask yourself: When was the last time you ever had drinks with the Prime Minister of England, the Duchess of Gloucester (whoever this poor woman might be) - plus the jolly company of the British Home secretary?

    On a scale of one to one hundred million you and I would not be in the running, we would not even make the bottom of the list.
    But for the McCanns, - no problem.

    This is a world beater for them - or so they think.
    That's what the police forces are up against. But just maybe the Portuguese police can see through the English scam.
    Have a nice day.

    1. Always a delight to see you JC :)

      I always though George Galloway, who for some reason has me blocked on twitter, summed it best JC, 'if?' it be true it would be the mother of all crimes, or words to that effect. After that, he never spoke about it again.

      For most MPs and the majority of public figures it is vital to show compassion to victims, even phoney ones, because in heart tugging cases such as Madeleine, you don't want to lose public approval.

      Hobnobbing with the upper echelons and being captured on film, video, etc, does not a 'get out of jail free card' make. Though to be fair, in English Society, it goes a long way. Kate McCann or her husband can get a door into these events on their names, for sure, but beyond photo ops, they are just part of the crowd. That is, not in Theresa May or the Duchess of Gloucester's inner circles. They might just as well have been in the crowd as they were when they went to see the Pope. Clarence et al were trying to spin private audience, but they didn't get it.

      I don't agree this is a world beater for them (McCanns?), in fact, I would say they are on the ropes. The world is beginning to see that there was not an abductor and all the spin in the world is unlikely to change that.

    2. ''I don't agree this is a world beater for them (McCanns?), in fact, I would say they are on the ropes. The world is beginning to see that there was not an abductor and all the spin in the world is unlikely to change that.''

      The world is ready to hear the truth. You can't speak for 'the world'. Nothing at all has happened since the night Madeleine disappeared.Nothing.And no evidence has emerged of any worth.You think it was the parents behind it based on stats you read somewhere and too many movies and novels that have t shock twist that sees respectable middle class pillars of society found guilty. This is real life and the case is self contained. The subsequent acceptance of the McCanns into the circles you and your strange disciple are discussing don't point to the guilt they share; it seems more likely that it points to the guilt that's shared by those who seem to be all too ready and happy to placate the parents and bend over backwards for them.Keep them sweet.But, in your 12 year old fantasy, they are constantly 'on the ropes' and things are always 'about to be revealed' about them.And what always happens ? Exactly....


    "Rebekah must be terrified from time to time too. There are some lovely pictures on the internet of her child, you can search them out. I can't say it was cynical but they must have touched the hearts of the jury. Maybe the jury in that '£100million hacking trial of the century' knew she was as guilty as sin but let her walk. I mean what did she do really? Annoy a few deeply annoying celebs who are queuing up for a hand out. And fundamentally she cared, Rebekah really cared and sometimes I wonder how many lives she and me, on the ground, might have saved as a result of all that determination and effort.

    This is why I refused to go to court to give evidence against her even though she dropped us all in it and ran away scot-free."

    1. I'm not sure what that was all about 13:21, but I'm not among those condemning Rebekah. The feminist within me admires her tenacity and ambition, she is a great female role model!

    2. A feminist role model indeed. Hop from bed to bed, cheat on whichever husband you're with at the time, lie and blackmail your way up the ladder. Wonderful character. She makes Thatcher look like Mary Poppins.

  16. Ros says:

    "I don't think it is complicated at all 00:35, unfortunately due to the clogging up of the internet with false, salacious and just plain weird conspiracy theories, it means wading through the quagmire to get to the truth."

    So why do you allow and publish such posts on here and rarely (if not never) challenge them?

    1. I allow and publish such posts because this is not a one theory, one sided, blog 23:00. Are you seriously suggesting I should censor everything?

      You are free to challenge any post you see on here 23:00, and I suggest you do if you think a post is misleading or purporting a theory you do not agree with. If you win the argument, then that theory will fade away naturally. It's happened many many times on here, which is why my blog is not filled with batshit crazy theories and psychotic control freaks.

      I am always wary of those who demand censorship, what is it you are afraid of?

    2. @ Ros 27 January 2019 at 10:20

      "my blog is not filled with batshit crazy theories and psychotic control freaks."

      Do you actually read the comments before you publish them?

  17. Hi Rosalinda,
    This is going to sound a little strange, but I believe I've figured out where they've put the body, in fact, if the real evidence is followed it can't be anywhere else. The only trouble is, knowing what I believe I know now makes me feel sorry for the McCanns as they must have been desperate and felt they had no choice.

    This makes me feel extremely guilty as I don't know what to do, but I'm positive the body has been hidden in plain sight, and not in Portugal, that was a wild goose chase.

    Sorry if this offends anyone, including the McCanns, but I just had to get this off my chest. It's been bothering me for quite some time now.

    Thanks for your understanding!

    1. Apologies for the delay in getting back to you 23:57.

      I don't really know what to say about your personal lightbulb moment. I can only compare it to my own moment of realisation in this case, many years ago, it felt as though I had been hit by a giant wrecking ball filled with truth and sorrow. It wasn't pleasant, it felt as though everything I had believed up until that time was false. I once compared it with the movie Pleasantille, in a blog somewhere, we were all living in a black and white world, unaware that colour was available.

      I imagine Operation Grange and the PJ know exactly what happened in PDL 23:57, but for some reason are not yet ready to release that information.

    2. @ Anonymous25 January 2019 at 23:57

      What did the Police say to you when you went to them with your information about where "the body" is?

    3. Anonymous25 January 2019 at 23:57

      ''This is going to sound a little strange, but I believe I've figured out where they've put the body''

      Correct- it sounds more than strange. What body, by the way ? Who said there was a body ?

      ''The only trouble is, knowing what I believe I know ''

      Let's get this clear.Are we listening to what you believe or what you know ? You know what you believe or believe you know ?

      ''makes me feel sorry for the McCanns as they must have been desperate and felt they had no choice.''

      What ?

      ''This makes me feel extremely guilty as I don't know what to do, but I'm positive the body has been hidden in plain sight,''

      Yes, you know a buzz phrase / meme. Well done. What you can do is wake up or stop drinking.Just some advice there.You can hide a lot of things in plain sight.But not a corpse.There would be a smell and flies.

      ''Sorry if this offends anyone, including the McCanns, but I just had to get this off my chest. It's been bothering me for quite some time now...Thanks for your understanding!''

      We're her to help.

      * shakes head*

  18. Anonymous 23.57, because you say 'hidden in plain sight and not in Portugal' I have a feeling that I know where you mean. Have you actually see the place, on TV for example? If you have then we both are probably thinking the same thing. Will any of us say it out loud I wonder?

    1. Yes, I've seen the place on TV and also on Google Earth, as for identifying it out loud on here, I fear it will embarrass the McCanns and it will all kick off again, a bit like it did with the Brenda Leyland episode.

      However, if you want to say it feel free, I'm not a friend of the McCanns or anything, just feel sorry for the mess they've got themselves into, but I'm positive of where the body has been kept though.

      It's a shame and it was a terrible tragedy, I must admit Gerry McCann puts people right off with his childish arrogance though.

    2. Please tell us - I can't wait to hear this one ..... or, of course, you could just go to the police and watch their faces as you reveal all.

    3. My partner knows what I know, and he told me to leave well alone and let the McCanns get on with their lives in peace. I on the other hand, feel incredibly guilty.

    4. Anonymous29 January 2019 at 16:51

      ''My partner knows what I know, and he told me to leave well alone ''

      Did you have hold of a bottle of Whiskey at the time ?

    5. Jane28 January 2019 at 16:26

      ''I have a feeling that I know where you mean. Have you actually see the place, on TV for example? If you have then we both are probably thinking the same thing. Will any of us say it out loud I wonder?''

      No, don't say it out loud. You'll end up solving a mystery that's evaded solution for 12 years.Then you'd be famous and be paid a substantial amount of reward money then do the rounds on chat shows for large fees before selling the secret of your success to a newspaper or publisher. Just type it on line. You wont have to actually face ridicule or laughter then.Just a few 'lol' and 'roflmao' type responses.

  19. Hi Anonymous@23:57 & Jane, I am very intrigued by your comments. When you say in plain sight & not in Portugal are you saying Madeleine was never in Portugal. Also the comment about the Mccanns had no choice, could you please expand on that. A problem aired is a problem shared.

    1. They panicked and covered it up prior to their Portuguese adventure and pre-planned campaign. In regard to the McCanns having no choice, it was too late to tell the truth after they made their initial decision to not fess up about the death.

      I believe elements of Leicester Constabulary know the truth, as they've been shamefully involved since the real outset. The McCanns had lots of help, as I believe just about everyone of the establishment figures felt sorry for them as they believed it was nothing more than a tragic accident, or in some gullible cases, an abduction.

    2. Well how do you explain videos of Maddie tripping up as she got on the plane then? Plus the tapas 7 would have had to be complicit even before the holiday, mother in law included. Doesn't wash with me.

    3. That was the back of a rather larger girl dressed in pink, plus this is a massive cover-up, lot's of people were involved and that was no holiday. Don't be fooled by the deliberate manipulated imagery, it's all been released for a purpose.

      And that is to make the public believe she was there when she wasn't, the child was already sadly dead and buried I'm afraid. I can't say any more than that, apart from the child we know as Madeleine never went to Portugal. Seriously, do you honestly think they looked like they'd just lost a child? No, as John McCann said "they'd already had a year to grieve," remember that gaffe?

      This is all such an expensive mess, yet I still feel sorry for Kate and Gerry, from what I believe to have been nothing more than a tragic accident, now they've spent so much time obsessing about May 3rd and abduction that they're perhaps in too deep for the truth to come out, after all, it's not just concealment any more but the fund is obviously fraudulent as well.

    4. What if they all felt deeply sorry for them? That would spark them into action, also the McCanns were at a terrible impasse, by the time the others got involved it was already too late as the McCanns covered it up prior to the contrived holiday, in my opinion.

    5. I'm afraid with these last few incoming posts, we are seeing the opposite of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).

      I think what we were watching, in real time, was a runaway train, there was nothing pre-planned about it. Happily for the McCanns, a child stolen in the night presented opportunities for all those in the business of child protection and collecting data.

      The idea that the McCanns and their group of friends staged a holiday to cover up a child's death is absurd, especially as they made such an appalling job of it. From the inconsistent statements of the group, to the open window that hadn't been broken to, to the ridiculous sighting of Jane Tanner. All way toooo stupid to have been pre-planned.

      I tend to go along with Goncalo Amaral, in that it was an accident but given Kate's tendency towards hysteria, the accident may have been preceded with a fight. I say this because Kate claimed the bruises she had on her arms and wrists were a result of bashing walls and iron rails.

      No-one could have known that Madeleine's disappearance would have such a huge impact on the news, or that it would remain the top story for weeks and months. Even the McCanns were surprised. Gerry even stated they didn't think they needed money, until the cash started rolling in, when he of course realised they needed it very much and collection boxes began appearing everywhere.

      I agree, there can be some element of sympathy for the parents at finding themselves in such a predicament, but it wears thin when you look at their very much premeditated fund raising and malicious vendetta against the detective who searched for their daughter.

      That is where the sympathy should end, because if they covered up their daughter's death, everything thereafter was fraudulent. They have robbed hundreds, thousands of well meaning people of cash they had intended for good causes. There is nothing altruistic or philanthropic about Gerry and Kate, none of the donations they received have been used to assist any other child. No hospital wing, no third world school, no scholarship, not even a park bench or a swing in Madeleine's name. They blew the lot (£4m? £5m) on trying to wreck the life of Goncalo Amaral, and err, anyone else who criticized them.

      An accident may have been forgiveable, 12 years ago, but I suspect they will be judged on what they have done since, quite rightly.

  20. Anonymous29 January 2019 at 11:08 No, I can't go to the police because in reality I have no idea.
    And John10028 January 2019 at 21:56 Yes she was in Portugal. I saw this in a video of the McCanns' house and I wondered and others have wondered too ... in the living room on the mantlepiece ... an urn ....

    1. Not in the urn on the fireplace, that would require cremation, something the McCanns could never and would never contemplate or be able to pull off. No, I believe the body is in one piece and in the same place its always been.

    2. Really? What are you on about?

    3. Is that the urn that appears on Google Earth?

    4. I think many people have cited the urn over the years. Who knows, I suspect when the details come out we will all be surprised, even those of us who have reached the state where we think we know everything!

      Gerry has always been very cocky about Madeleine being found, it brings out the duping delight in him. It shows he is confident in his hiding place, a one over, he has on the police. I suspect it's that very smugness that gives OG that driving force to press on.

  21. It seems that Gonçalo Amaral got it all wrong then!

    1. Quite bizarre 22:47 that so many have gone to so much trouble to disprove the theory of Goncalo Amaral, yet here we are 12 years on, and nothing. No story that fits the pieces into the jigsaw puzzle in the same perfect way as Goncalo's theory.

    2. How many police investigators have used Amaral's 'theory' to close the case ? How many haven't ? When an officer, past or present, has a theory, it's for him or her to prove it, not for someone to disprove it.If it was the other way around he cold say he thinks a pixie shot her with a catapult and hid her in space. The credibility of any theory is announced once it has been tested.In this case tested in a court of law.

  22. I will admit in the early days I suspected Madeleine never set foot in Portugal. For that to work half the country would have to be in on it. Take out family & friends, you have airline staff, CCTV at airports, other passengers on board, Portuguese Customs, hotel staff & other holiday makers the list goes on. Whatever happened, happened in Portugal.

  23. The words 'in plain sight and not in Portugal' made me think of the urn. Is there another place that fits that description?

    1. Las Vegas ? New Zealand ? Basildon ?

  24. The only issue I have with the urn is how did they manage to cremate the body. Looking at various crimes committed by hardened gangland bosses, even they with all their money & connections can't get rid of a body through cremation. The paperwork, bureaucracy & bringing other people into the conspiracy would be too great as someone would talk. I know they are both doctors & theoretically could sign the death certificate but the law changed after Dr Harold Shipman re: Death Certification Practices, getting another doctor to sign risks disclosure & getting caught. Also if for arguments sake Madeleine was accidentally killed & cremated in the UK, who's identity did she have. Creating a false ID brings in a criminal element into the fold & risks disclosure. I still believe whatever happened, happened in Portugal.

    1. How do you get accidentally killed and cremated ? Fall into an oven ?

      The working theory ( one of many) of Amaral was that they secreted her corpse into the coffin of an old lady due to be cremated the next day.He seems to have come up with that little doozy so he could incorporate the borrowed chapel keys into his story.He possibly forgot that there would be a good chance that relatives and friends might wish to see her at rest before she was cremated.As did the McCanns.

      Who were he 'connections' in Portugal ?If your priority is to get rid of a body, why would you want to immediately expand the number of people who would know about it if you were going to great lengths to do it in secret.And if the connections are the MPs from home, how would they possibly know that so many from so high would gladly drop everything to make it a political firecracker that put them all at risk rather than just say no ans it as a police matter ?

  25. There's no way the McCanns could have pulled off a cremation, nor would they want to, I strongly suspect.

    1. Amaral suggested they did ....

    2. Anonymous 30 January 2019 at 21:17

      I agree with you.

    3. Goncalo Amaral suggested lots of things, including that MI5 were involved.

    4. Anonymous31 January 2019 at 14:05

      ''Amaral suggested they did ....''

      Then Amaral was moved to a new desk where he could write his memoirs instead. He singles out the parents as liars or worse.He hints at high level interference ensuring that they remain beyond reproach .When Amaral names names instead of blaming British Intelligence and particular politicians then we can take him and his theories seriously. Not now.

  26. John100 30 January 2019 at 17:03

    Good evening, John. It’s so good of you to visit. You are right.

    I hope you are coping with the difficulties of life.

    Take care.

    Good wishes.

  27. Anonymous30 January 2019 at 21:17 - Do you think she was buried with dignity and solemnity - since you don't think a cremation would be fitting?

    1. Yes, I believe there was a respectful burial and she is in a peaceful place, just well hidden. To some it may seem macabre but to me it was all done out of panic and desperation.

    2. Nobody knows that Madeleine is dead.Internet detectives do because they want to see the parents suffer more. The 'accidental death' scenario wouldn't cause either parent to panic and destroy the body or hide it.An accident in this scenario is a tragedy not a murder.The murder by a parent or friend of a parent is just macabre.It's the stuff of films and books.hat's why finding the evidence to support it in reality has failed for 12 years.The world of fiction and the world of reality are not the same thing.They're just relatives.

    3. Fiction writers would not take as many liberties with the plotline as the pro McCann writers of the alleged facts. We have an understanding of what is and what isn't believable. In their defence the writers of this narrative are working on the hop, like a reality TV show.

      Very few, if any, want to see the parents suffer more, it was never about that. It was about a story that simply wasn't believable, told by a couple who had taken the appalling decision to leave their toddlers alone in a holiday apartment. A couple who have spent the last 12 years demanding financial retribution from the detective who searched for their daughter.

      It isn't personal 14:41, it never was, for a me, a writer who is fascinated by human behaviour and what it is that creates evil, it is has been an overflowing mine of information and resources. I like to muse over subjects that intrigue me, and I am in the happy position of being able to reach out to others who think along the same lines.

      You have to accept 14:41, that if what we suspect is true, this will be the crime of the century, you can't blame people for keeping tuned in. It was the parents themselves who turned their story into a global blockbuster. They literally paid to stay on the front pages of the tabloids.

      The world of reality is far more macabre than fiction 14:41 and the reality is most children are killed by their parents, most victims by someone who knows them. It is not unreasonable to think these parents are involved 14:41, not just because of the stats, but because of the dog alerts and the parents strange behaviour. We cannot unsee or unhear everything that gone before 14:41, that's why this case remains so compelling.

    4. ''Fiction writers would not take as many liberties with the plotline as the pro McCann writers of the alleged facts. We have an understanding of what is and what isn't believable. ''

      Everyone at some point in their life and often more than once has believed something that wasn't true.They've disbelieved things that actually were.It's human nature.Before something can be labelled as true it has to be proven to be so.What's that saying the nazis liked ..the bigger the lie the more people will believe it.I believe the antis are guilty of upholding that little truism...

      The McCanns and friends never once denied that the children had been left alone.If they were all in cahoots later to construct an airtight story they would have said otherwise.They are guilty of carelessness.That's not murder or manslaughter or hiding a body.Too big a leap.

      There's nothing wrong with your personal quest to understand evil and investigate the darker recesses of the human psyche. I've done it for years myself.It both fascinates and shocks me at the same time.But you should know; if you are going to examine and study or observe at depth you can only make it a worthwhile exercise if you are detached and objective.If you second-guess without evidence it's a mistake more often than not.Reaching out to others who have made the same mistake doesn't counter that problem.

      I can see what you mean Re crime of the century.I don't think it is.Not if it's an abduction, murder or accidental death.It only becomes crime of the century if the full extent of political interest is ever revealed.I have many crimes in mind that are more important to the formation of the police and to methods of crime detection.From the 19th century up until now.What has elevated the status of this crime is the optical illusion provided by media saturation and the coincidence of social networks being born.

      I know how evil and macabre people and the world are. I have plenty of experience as well as plenty of study behind me.But every event is fresh.They may share common factors and resemble others but that can't be taken as any proof of a genuine connection to them.They can be referred to by all means but that's all.Most children who are murdered are murdered by their parents, yes.But thousands aren't. Besides, we still don't know the child is even dead.We suspect it if we link it to unrelated cases that share common factors.That's why I say not to.It clouds judgement.I would argue that normal behaviour is rarely sustained in circumstances as traumatic as losing your child in a foreign country.There would be total all engulfing fear and sheer panic and anger as the clock ticked.As for the dogs.There is a scientific community that isn't allowing the findings to be used as evidence against anyone or anything.The parents didn't have the power or influence to pull that off.

    5. oh Jane, please stick to your Mills and Boon re buried with dignity. MBMs body was disposed of. Her parents went to great efforts to sterilise the apartment 5a and try and stage a fake abduction. it's not easy you know, the staging of a forced entry by 'jemmying' open the bedroom shutters, agreeing on a story and sticking to it when traumatised. [PS that shutter jemmying thing didn't happen. Gerry forgot to do it. It was a Kate lie].
      Unfortunately, perfidious British CSI dogs scented both blood and cadaver odour in their apartment and the Portugese PJ lifted the floor tiles, to find Mccann family blood residue, in said apartment and also in the back of their Renault Megane hire car. Doh!
      luckily the Brit forensic science service obfuscated the report, confusing those pesky sardine munching 'gesers and our heroic parents escaped to fight (well lie and sue any one who questions them) another day.
      Queue heroic 007 music.
      So take solace Jane, in the old Brit Intelligence adage 'Q: where do you hide a body? A: with all the other bodies, in a cemetery'. it may well be true.

      forget your UK mantelpiece.

      tioch fad ar la.

    6. ''. Her parents went to great efforts to sterilise the apartment 5a and try and stage a fake abduction.''

      Great lengths to sterilise how exactly ? How come the detectives didn't detect the evidence of that ? Did the parents just happen to have a few bottles of odourless bleach next to the sun block ?

      Can you provide the actual reports submitted by the forensics explaining that they found Madeleine's blood and cadaver rather than your interpretation of events ?

      ''luckily the Brit forensic science service obfuscated the report''

      How did they do that ? And why would they do it if the findings were clear ?

      '''Q: where do you hide a body? A: with all the other bodies, in a cemetery'.''

      I think I saw that movie too. But, back to reality.Nobody knows if Madeleine is dead or alive.Even in your hackneyed short story, there's weakness.Why would so many friends volunteer to potentially incriminate themselves when they had nothing to do with the child's fate ? If it was a tragic accident, why would there be blood that had seeped between floor tiles ? Why wold they throw her body away like garbage if they hadn't committed a crime ?

    7. the apartment was probably cleansed with biological washing powder. bleach leaves an odour, as you well know. Both nicely degrade DNA. see the empty washing powder collection tubs labelled search for 'Maddie'
      the actual DNA and blood report, as you know is in the evidential PJ files Lowe consistently refers to 3 people. These are father Gerry, mother Kate and their biological offspring Maddie MCANN. This corroborates the findings of the blood CSI dog, with the diluted blood found under a floor tile as indicated by the CSI cadaver dog. "ask the dogs Sandra"
      Who mentioned friends who had nothing to do with the child's fate? Who mentioned a tragic accident?
      You did. leakage? Also you deliberately forgot to query the jemmying of the shutters. That was a big Kate lie. Silly Gerry.

    8. So nobody could smell a freshly scrubbed floor.Nowhere was still wet or damp.Do we need dogs for that now ? Don't humans have a sense of smell or eyesight now ?You're suggesting a biological washing powder ( did any detectives find any ?) will destroy biological evidence( DNA) ? That was fantastic improvising on the part of the parents, not to mention convenient.They must have known that every policeman that was about to turn up would ignore all traces of a clean up and wouldn't search for the cleaning agent( or was that cremated?).

      The cadaver dog wasn't there to detect blood.It wouldn't be called a cadaver dog otherwise.

      To suggest that this elaborate and intricate effort at concealing all evidence of a death or crime on the night all friends made their statements implies they had to know what had happened and willingly assisted in the illusion. Nobody mentioned that the parents were absent from their view for a time lengthy enough to have covered it all up.Plus they would have had to consider the twins being there too during the haste. As for the jemmying, It's clear that the parents were guessing how an abductor must have gained entry.The actual method and term ' jemmying' is all but archaic now. They may have been trying to make sense of the horror.They wouldn't know or didn't think that an abductor could have been tracking their movements for days before entering through the front door and exiting the same way, a few feet to a waiting vehicle.

      Your scenario prioritises framing the parents as guilty. For it to have any credence it needs to provide a good and realistic theory of how the police were so incompetent. They didn't examine the scene for obvious signs of a clean up. they couldn't detect an odour or wetness or dampness late at night.They accepted a theory of how entry was gained without examining how probable it was.

    9. The first two police officers at the scene thought the abduction was staged and the behaviour of the parents downright weird 13:47.

      Despite the constant plugging by Jim Gamble et al, child abduction is extremely rare. In most cases when a child goes missing, they quickly reappear. Most police stations are not geared towards treating every missing child call as if it were an abduction and there's good reason for that, statistically, winning the lottery would be more likely than losing a child through abduction.

      So how did you expect the police to act 13:47, get down on the ground and start sniffing like cartoon detectives? Certainly, the parents were claiming an abduction, but they would wouldn't they?

      Though they were claiming abduction, they were doing nothing to preserve what they had declared a crime scene, ie the children's bedroom. Professor Gerry immediately went to the open window and tampered with it, possibly destroying the fingerprints of the abductor he alleged, stole his daughter.

      Let me clarify the dog situation. There were two dogs, one that specialised in detecting human blood, and one that specialised in detecting the odour of cadaver. Two dogs, got it? And both alerted to the same spot behind the sofa.

      Regarding the elaborate and intricate efforts, the entire tapas group were alibis for each other! Of course no-one mentioned any long suspicious absences from the table. The collective decision may be the reason the friends were willing to assist in the illusion. All could have faced charges of neglect and endangering a child. What effect would that have had on their medical careers?

      As for an abductor tracking their movements for days, err who has ever heard of a 4 year old being stalked for days? It simply doesn't happen. One 4 year old is much like another 4 year old, unless they happen to Mozart or sole heir to a huge fortune. That theory is so wacko it should never have got off the ground. As for your abductor going in and out of the front door (with a key presumably) straight into a waiting vehicle, why did he open the window? Why did he choose Madeleine and not either of the two babies?

      You will dismiss any scenario that 'priorities framing the parents as guilty', because you stuck your fingers in your ears 12 years ago and you haven't heard anything else since.

      No abductor. No sign of an Abductor, no search for an abductor. No [more] pretence by the police that Madeleine may be alive. This really is one of those walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, situations 13:47, what does it mean if there was no abductor?

    10. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 01:10

      ''The first two police officers at the scene thought the abduction was staged and the behaviour of the parents downright weird 13:47.''

      Any copper who turns up at such a dramatic, chaotic scene who has a suspicion should then go about testing it.'Weird' is a subjective interpretation.It's speculation and opinion even on the part of the policemen.How do people act when they're miles from home and their toddler has disappeared ? Normal ? What's 'normal' ?

      When a child goes missing the police are geared to asking as many questions on the spot to assist in their search.They don't pull out a book of statistics.If they did that, all kids who weren't killed or hurt by their parents wouldn't be searched for.

      How i expect the police to act is standard. A child has gone missing.If they think a parent is hiding something( acting weird?) they should examine every inch of the scene for evidence of a clean up.Trained eyes would detect a clean up of a crime scene.

      Once the police were present it was a priority to preserve the crime scene.They were as guilty as anyone else in failing to do so.But the parents were thinking as parents; the police weren't thinking like policemen. If a good, careful clean up had taken place, Gerry wouldn't have needed to tamper with anything.

      Yes. i get the '2 dogs' thing.I worked it out all by myself.I was clarifying in my reply that the cadaver dog wasn't there to identify blood, as the original poster stated.

      You're implying that the Tapas group willingly conspired to conceal a crime they had noting to do with, thus risking having their own families wrecked, careers ruined and jail terms.I suggest they had every reason not to. It makes no sense.Why would they ?

      Who has ever heard of a 4 yr old being stalked ? Go and interview some paedophiles behind bars, or those convicted of procuring or trafficking children.If 4 yr old blonde caucasian girls are your 'thing' then she fitted the bill.That, unfortunately, is how that works.

      My fingers are never in my ears and my eyes are never closed.I'm always prepared to read or listen to anything then examine it's validity.This case hasn't been asleep for 12 years just because my ears are full of finger.It's because there is no evidence to convict the parents and any that was there to convict anyone lse won't ever see the light.Too high up...

      ''No abductor. No sign of an Abductor, no search for an abductor. No [more] pretence by the police that Madeleine may be alive''

      No evidence against the parents.No forensics . No signs of a body dead or alive.The pretence is that the police are still investigating this garbage.The funding by the government in these times of austerity is evidence that they think it's important to appear to keep at it.When Madeleine vanished she was due to begin Infants school.In three months she would be eligible to apply for a driving license, join the armed forces, get married or apply for a place in University.In all that time the evidence hasn't changed in the forensics lab and no statements have emerged.No confessions and no informants.Tell me about pretence.If there was no abductor then paedophile have to be on the list of suspects.So do murderers.If there ever is a time they say they have strong enough evidence of a body being there they then have to have equally strong evidence that somebody killed the child and who that was.Cadaver dogs identify death, not murderers.

    11. Ros, you really should raise this topic! 13.47 can't provide a cogent and evidenced based argument. Then states that 'jemmying of shutters is all but archaic' when we know it as an irrefutable lie, which was picked up by the press and triggered disbelief with the police and now and at last, the British public.
      13.17 also tries to throw in a bit of 'the police were incompetent' in failing to seal a crime scene; when according to the parents it was an abduction(a really big, unproven and without any evidence lie), so the PJ should be searching the streets and sealing borders see the fictional book Madeline by Kate Healy.... THERE WAS NO ABDUCTION.
      The Brit CSI dogs found Mcann family blood traces under a tile, with 15 out of 19 markers identifying Maddie, when assessed using the LCN DNA analysis. Enough to support a prosecution in the UK, but not in Portugal.

    12. You seem to be edging towards acceptance that Madeleine is dead 02:03, though still maintaining the McCanns are totally innocent.

      Death in the apartment is going to be a hard one for the McCanns and their supporters to spin. No evidence of a murder at the designated crime scene, Apartment 5A, suggests they cleaned up and why on earth would they do that if they were not involved? However, they clearly did not clean up enough to fool the specialist blood and cadaver dogs who both alerted to a spot behind the sofa.

      You suggest someone 'too high up' is responsible for what happened to Madeleine. If the parents truly believed this, then why are they not screaming it from rooftops? This notion of being 'too high up' to be prosecuted is absurd. No-one is above the law. Kings, Princes, Presidents, Evil Doctors, all can and have been investigated and prosecuted throughout the world and throughout history. And in this new age of information, there is no free pass for anyone. As the McCanns have discovered to the tune of about £5m, no-one can buy good press or silence the bad stuff.

      No evidence against the parents. Errm, there is masses of evidence against the parents, see the police files and Goncalo Amaral's book, which is why they were made arguidos. 'No signs of a body, dead or alive?', seriously? You are pretending the dog alerts didn't happen, attempting to write them out of the narrative, why would you do that?

      Why do you think Operation Grange is a 'pretence' at an investigation? Are you not happy that Scotland Yard are continuing to search for Madeleine? Aren't your hopes, and the hopes of the police, the same?

      As for the tapas friends who accompanied the McCanns on this holiday, I believe they firmly in the thick of it. They are each others' alibis! And they don't ever want to do a reconstruction, because all their alibis would be blown apart.

      Potentially, the Tapas Six, the doctors were in extreme legal jeopardy. Criminal charges of child endangerment, or child abandonment does not sit well on the record of an ambitious 30 something medical professional. As Gerry has said, many times, they came to a collective decision and via Dr. Payne, a pact of silence.

    13. Anonymous4 February 2019 at 10:48

      All my arguments are cogent.And jemmying and the phrase are all but archaic.This case aside how often do you hear it. you say :

      '' it as an irrefutable lie....picked up by the press ''

      Irrefutable means impossible to oppose.You are accusing the police of detectives of two countries liars- correct ? The press are reporting on the case by the way, not investigating it. If the British public choose to go by the press rather than the police, then there's a reason it should be quiet until it knows what day it is.

      I didn't 'throe in' any 'the police were incompetent'.I was asking who i was replying to if that what he was suggesting without directly stating it.But, having said that, it is incompetent to fail to secure a crime scene.Fact.Even if it was an abduction.They would need to look for forensic evidence, foot prints, finger prints etc.

      Your claims about DNA / Blood don't count.The claims of the forensics teams who examined them does. There is no evidence of a staged abduction.Even if there was there would have to be evidence that the Mccanns were responsible for that staging when it could be argued anyone who had broke in and killed the child on purpose or by accident is equally capable.

      I don't think you can change the investigation by typing that there was no abduction in capital letters by the way.But good effort..

    14. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 13:31

      I believed Madeleine was dead about 2 days after she disappeared. I thought there was no way she would have walked off alone and not have been rescued.had it happened in Britain, I would- I confess- have suspected parental or family involvement for the usual reasons- ie, we've seen that so often.But I didn't suspect it as they were in company and abroad.They could only have ended her life by accident indirectly or otherwise and that wouldn't have seen a serious sentence.

      Which force has gone on record and committed to file that there was definite evidence of a clean up ? If they had found that to be the case then that points to guilt right away.That points to guilt more than the findings of dogs. And which officer/s went on record or on file to state he didn't believe the interpretation of the dogs findings as published ? Just Amaral ?

      I believe someone or people high up are behind it yes or involved at least.It's unthinkable but we live and learn do we not.We're still finding out that a few of the pillars of our society were far from it.Why would the parents believe that those who threw security around them and then money would have anything to do with it ? Nice work by those upstairs.It seems to have done the trick. We don't know the inner workings of the parents minds.As I've said, if they were to shout it from a rooftop they'd be publicly slaughtered for biting the hands that fed them.

      If there is /was a mass of evidence against the parents- please tell me why you think Scotland yard haven't admitted it.Why haven't they acted on it ?If there isn't involvement higher up, why would they want this case to continue as a play full of smoke and mirrors and nothing more ? Amaral's book is a book of what he thought and suspected-not of evidence.His book was allowed to be printed as long as we remembered it was literary and not factual.

      I think the whole game is a pretence.As you say- a lot of people knew early that Madeleine wasn't returning dead or alive.They had to be pretty confident to do what they did after that.

      Regarding the Tapas group. I'll ask you and the faithful again- why would they risk incriminating themselves if they hadn't done anything wrong ? They had careers and children themselves. A jail sentence would have wrecked the lot. Had they been found guilty of child neglect they wouldn't have lost their children or careers.They'd have received a slapped wrist and a fine and probably help from the British consulate any way . Pact of silence ? Probably due to the forensic scrutiny of the slavering wolves eager to pounce on so much as an incorrectly placed comma as reported by a biased press.say noting and nothing can be twisted.besides, if the police had the goods on them they couldn't use their private pact in a court of law...

    15. Ah 20:21, when I began reading your long post, I hoped it was from someone other than Ziggy, or even a female Ziggy with whom I might connect. But, alas no, tis yourself again lol.

      You didn't suspect the parents, because they were in company and abroad. LOL, how very 'Mrs Bucket'. Being 'in company' doesn't add respectability, lol. Company could mean anything, from a lonely dosser to a saggy faced former famous person. If you are 'po white trash' being photographed next to Theresa May won't raise your social status. I remember as a kid the parents of my friends not inviting me in because 'they had company', I thought it pretentious and mean then and I still do now. I would not be in the least surprised if it came straight from Kate's mother.

      Second para, now you want to pin me down to providing links etc which is a game I will not play. Let's just say, blood found beneath a floor tile, suggests it's source from the upper level was cleaned up. The sofa was moved? Why? I don't know why you are pushing for a forensics argument, it really doesn't help your cause.

      Finally, I think 'slathering wolves' is a tad harsh. What an odd way to describe those who do not believe the McCanns' abduction tale. It is not necessary to be slathering or a wolf to find the abduction story unbelievable. You would have to be a complete moron to think they have been telling the truth.

    16. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 23:12

      ''I hoped it was from someone other than Ziggy, or even a female Ziggy with whom I might connect. But, alas no, tis yourself again lol.''

      You could connect with a male ziggy if you allowed your eyes to open.But, you have your stubborn reasons...

      ''You didn't suspect the parents, because they were in company and abroad. LOL, how very 'Mrs Bucket'. Being 'in company' doesn't add respectability,''

      True.But it dramatically increases your chances of being caught for committing a crime.At home, you're behind closed doors.On holiday you're surrounded by eyes and you don't know the area.And if you go there in a group that makes it even more likely you won't get away with anything unless you're all involved.

      ''Second para, now you want to pin me down to providing links etc which is a game I will not play.''

      I wouldn't ask for links.I know you don't provide them and I know you'd struggle to find any. Most of what you say is just your own suspicion rather than factual.I'd settle for you just saying who it was that went on record saying that there was evidence of a clean up.There have been enough detectives on the case, somebody must have if you're so certain.I was prepared to find the link myself once you had told me.

      '' Let's just say, blood found beneath a floor tile, suggests it's source from the upper level was cleaned up''

      Suggests to who ? People miles away at a computer or detectives at the crime scene ?

      ''I don't know why you are pushing for a forensics argument, it really doesn't help your cause.''

      Somebody has to. Forensics close cases.They're important.It's the cause of the detectives that it helps, not mine.What has anyone made of them ?

      ''Finally, I think 'slathering wolves' is a tad harsh. What an odd way to describe those who do not believe the McCanns' abduction tale.''

      True.But it was a generalisation.laziness on my part.It's generally true that those who don't believe it don't stop at that. They exchange online ideas about how the parents did it, how cold they are, how cruel and twisted, how they set up a fraudulent fund and laundered money. How they controlled police, politicians and the media.You know the type of nonsense....

      ''You would have to be a complete moron to think they have been telling the truth.''

      So how many 'complete morons' have been on a salary for 12 years here and in Portugal ?

  28. This case is marked by the absence of any concrete evidence or reliable testimony in 12 years.It's marked also by media saturation who know too well that the appetite of wolves is never truly sated. Unfortunately, it's all happened during the internet age.The internet, where the appetite of the bored is equally difficult to sate. However, reading here, or 99% of blogs that have walked the same path, we find not only the solution to the mystery but the culprits behind it who are remaining silent in their conspiracy, what their motives were, what they were thinking during and shortly after the death( which has yet to be officially acknowledged by a police force after all this time), and how they decided to dispose of the body and where to dump it ( or its ashes).

    It's true that an idle mind is the Devil's playground.So is the internet.It seems that the absence of details such as forensic evidence, confessions, or genuine leads that have ever taken the investigation anywhere consistently fails to deter the bored from playing' let's pretend'.In this instance, 'let's pretend we're detectives'.It's fun to find that fellow hobbyists are willing to gather at the same place regularly and pat each other on the back.It doesn't seem to occur to them that those looking on from a distance who prefer the real nuts and bolts to turn up before theorizing have long since stopped shaking their heads in incredulity of them all and now observe them partly with sympathy and partly amusement.But, it's good to have a hobby I suppose.As long as it doesn't frighten the horses...

    1. An idle mind is the devil's playground eh? So what does a non idle mind think about? Astro physics? self flagellation for the glory of God, or EastEnders? Let's cut the guessing, and let me ask you my sanctimonious friend, what it is you think about? Is it trying to balance precariously on that pedestal you have put yourself up on?

      It is our innate human nature and natural curiosity that turns us into pretend detectives 00:33, as a species, we are problem solvers, that's what separates us from the apes. You I'm afraid, are among the subservient masses who must be told what to believe and who aren't bold enough to ask questions.

      The internet that you refer to so scornfully, is a window into information we have never had before, and it's a good thing. You may be unhappy that people are free to look up exactly what they want, other than topics designated by your Masters, but suck it up we have entered a new age of enlightenment.

      There is plenty of information and evidence to support the original investigation's findings and conclusions. Pretending it doesn't exist only works for people like yourself with blinkers on.

      Your hobby of observing websites such as mine with sympathy and amusement doesn't raise you to higher plane. Your mind is too idle to find an interest of your own. Given your ghastly personality I think it unlikely you would frighten the horses, the quote refers to sex - involving two.

    2. 00:33: "Unfortunately, it's all happened during the internet age."

      Gerry McCann: "It is just as likely that a child will spot Madeleine and alert a responsible adult. The whole world really has changed and is a lot smaller in this computer age. If Madeleine is in Morocco we have no doubt that she will be found."

    3. If you can't back up what you're alleging with facts and proof, I'm afraid you're just another theorist.

    4. I appreciate your human-nature-in-a-nutshell lecture.What a shame nutshells aren't bigger.You overlooked the human propensity to herd and to obey it's gregarious nature which all to often leads it into narrow minded tribes. Tribes they daren't upset for fear of being ostracised. My observation of this doesn't mean I'm sanctimonious.Nor does it suggest( to a balanced mind ) that I have set myself upon a pedestal.It's merely an observation and, I might add, one that many make.Your reaction is reminiscent of a snake that's had it's tail trampled on.

      I resisted laughing too long at your 'age of enlightenment' claim.I struggled in similar fashion at the idea of me having 'Masters'.I lost that struggle and allowed myself a proper laugh.You talk about the internet as some kind of second coming.The new age of enlightenment we were promised in the comic book of revelations.A stained glass window into the world.Yet we talk often of the armies of shills and barrage of 'fake news' and lies and surveillance that are first mocked as conspiracy theories and then met with an embarrassed silence once exposed.But, I'm mocking again aren't I.I'm being 'scornful'.

      It's both refreshing and alarming to find out through yourself and other 'enlightened' internet sleuths that there's plenty of information and evidence to support the original investigation.Why have you never informed the powers that be so that they can stop throwing money at it.You would be doing your country a service as well as solving a 12 year old 'mystery'.

      My hobbies don't include observing websites such as this or it's ilk.I'm interested in the human psyche and how it can sometimes lose its way in the real world and find sanctuary online and be blissfully unaware of how naive it is to call it enlightenment merely because they meet with validation from others who have the same problem.In keeping with your evangelical tone, 'in the Kingdom of the blind...' . You are all missing the one-eyed man...

      I'm not too sure what you mean about my 'ghastly personality'. Are you pretending to be psychic too ?I see what you mean about this wondrous world .It's an online orgy for role players. And that sexual innuendo you signed off with ? Are you trying to seduce me ? Not a bad idea.You have a more realistic chance of that.Just be a little more pleasant if that's your intention.

    5. @00.33

      I think you've misunderstood the context-ie: an enlightened age. The smallness of the world now and the combined suspicions of the ever growing online world have failed individually and jointly to solve anything or develop the case.Fact.

      @anon 13:22

      The fact is, that this case is no further on than it was a week after the event happened.The proof is that it's still open and still having money knowingly wasted on it.

  29. I think there is evidence of some pre-planning but things went wrong at the last minute. I don't think Madeleine was seen out and about after the cleaner saw the whole family leaving their apartment to go to the Payne's for lunch. The cleaner gives a very good description and if the girl who she assumed was Madeleine wasn't her, then who was it? I think something went wrong early on in the week and the hoax was sabotaged or botched. I think it was supposed to be a good story to cover bad news. I'm curious about the early posters that were released of (allegedly!) Madeleine showing a girl looking much younger than nearly four and with a distinct coloboma. Why were these posters produced? Why the coloboma which the McCanns later denied Madeleine had? Why not a more up-to-date photo? These aspects of the case don't make sense unless we look at a bigger more complicated scenario than an accident that was covered up. If it really was just a straightforward accident then why such high levels of support and why so little scrutiny of the McCanns and their friends?

    1. 'I think there is evidence of some pre-planning but things went wrong at the last minute'

      What is this evidence? Why was it missed and why is it still being missed by detectives ? How did it go wrong ? Where's the evidence of that ? You are stating a suspicion.A guess.

      You 'don't think' Madeleine was seen out and about after a certain date.That's suspicion.Guessing.

      Your whole post is a series of guesses based on nothing more than suspicion and presented in a chronological order to give it weight.But, underneath it all, it's a fictional account of events you have composed but are trying to suggest is more as it has 'evidence'.Where is it ?

      You raise the question of the high level of support at the end of your post.That's far more important and it isn't suspicion ; it's fact.You're right to question it and so is anybody else-especially in the UK as it's our money funding the illusion now.How did those who flew in from high places immediately know the McCanns were not responsible ? How did they know so soon it was bigger than a mere police investigation and that MI had to jump in ? They are about military intel and threats to UK security or someone placed highly who is being compromised.These are where the facts are.The question of why so many detectives have made no progress at all is the most pertinent one.The answer would seem to be implied by the political interference.Politicians and MI out rank all levels of rank in the police force.I suspected 18 months ago that this case would close or explode round about the time Brexit is resolved one way or another.I could be wrong.I might not be.Leverage is a powerful tool in the dark corridors of power.

    2. The mark in her eye, the alleged coloboma, has always looked like photoshop, same goes for other photographs in this case. None of them look genuine, they all look tampered with and Madeleine appears like she's at different ages when she's supposed to be three years old.

      For instance, in the pool photo (the last photo) Madeleine looks a lot younger than she does in the tennis ball photo. Some kind of a game has been played out with all the images of Madeleine to throw people of the scent I believe.

      Such a strange case, yet so straightforward when all the witness statements are ignored, including that of the alleged cleaner.

      Seriously, why would everybody lie and then the leadership of the hoax allow one person to tell the truth? I don't believe Madeleine was seen at all, I believe it was all an illusion, just like the photo of Kate posing with the word ILLUSION written in the foreground.

      I don't believe the child was seen at all during that assumed holiday, and I believe everybody lied because they felt desperately sorry for them. Such a sad case regardless of all the PR manipulation that's gone on.

    3. 17.14 Absolute balderdash. people are not all the same. Some may have felt 'desperately' sorry for the Mccann's plight, but there are always the deviant or weak few. No way would such a large involvement be able to carry this out for 12 years.

    4. A coloboma will always look photo shopped.But so will freckles and moles. I think if the eye you're discussing had been photo shopped then all of the child's teachers in her nursery and her neighbours would have spotted it at some point on the TV news. The rest of the photographs look exactly like Madeleine at the age she was( almost 4 ).Imagination can highlight minor anomalies with light and shadow if the intention is to build a case for skulduggery.

      If all statements are ignored, it isn't a strange case, it's a strange investigation.

      You ask why everyone would lie. That's a good question.It's highly unlikely that so many would risk their freedom if they hadn't done anything wrong.The conclusion has to be that they told the truth as best as they could remember it.

      Not believing the child was seen on the holiday contradicts the statements of the staff at the resort( nannies etc).Or do we have to add them to the ever growing list of co- conspirators who willingly risked their own liberty for nothing at all.

    5. Anonymous 1 February 2019 at 17:14

      “The mark in her eye, the alleged coloboma, has always looked like photoshop, same goes for other photographs in this case.”

      All (five?) photographs in this case look genuine to me. Where do we go from here?

      One possibility to settle our differences is that you explain what makes you think of Photoshop. I don’t believe you can. So far no one has.


    6. Anonymous 1 February 2019 at 14:36

      Heartfelt greetings, The Rising Sun

      Thank you for giving me another opportunity to read your noble prose.

      “What is this evidence? Why was it missed and why is it still being missed by detectives ? How did it go wrong ? Where's the evidence of that ?”

      To borrow your phrase, comrade, “The answer would seem to be implied by the political interference”.

      “You raise the question of the high level of support…” “That's far more important and it isn't suspicion ; it's fact.”

      Yes. Without that support, most of us wouldn’t have known about the McCanns.

      Happy New Year.



    7. HNY Comrade

      I hope you are well.Good to see your calming spirit articulated here...

      Until there is a sufficient and acceptable explanation as to why the political interference occurred, why MI5 or 6 were told that a kidnapping was more than just a police matter, prompting them to drop everything, and why a well paid high profile politician resigned from a privileged position to take up an offer to become press controller for the McCanns rather from whichever party he was serving,then a cold reading of this case suggests there was an abduction and that Madeleine became a pawn.No other victim/s of a crime have ever been afforded anything like it.Not before the McCann case and not since.What was there anxiety ? Why does it read like panic if it was just two Brits abroad who had lost or buried their child ? What could their arrests and potential sentences cost the Government or the country ? Why give them a blanket of secure protection and a guarantee of never being charged as well as throwing ( we're told) funding at the case year after year ?

      Namaste, Major.

    8. If you don't mind my interjecting Major.....

      Why did Clarence give up his privileged, though lowly, position in Labour's press office to work as spokesman for the McCann's. Let me ask you to stop for one moment and reintroduce yourself to Mr. Mitchell. Hmm. Little fish in big pool .v. big fish in little pool? The world's cameras were on Gerry, Kate and Clarence, the Madeleine Fund paypal button was kerjinging at record rates, 50m and rising. Gerry was talking about an annual Madeleine Day - for the whole world. He was smarmed and seduced, but I think it was a two way street.

      Finally, I believe the McCans were given a safe blanket, but that safe blanket is now a distant memory. It was whipped away as soon as there was talk of them being suspects. OK, it wasn't a clean break, but it was enough for them to make a dash back to the UK.

      I don't think they have a guarantee of never being charged. No-one is above the law. If they were to be left to 'get away with it', the investigation would have closed years ago, with enough some sort of explanation that would see them cleared and the case forgotten. The opposite has happened.

    9. If i may reply to your interjection, Bella( my new name for you)...

      I think you have mistakenly challenged my dear comrade, major T for claims that I have made. as you know, I'm a certain Starman ;-)

      Why would Clarence leave a well paid privileged position ? Because his boss asked him to and explained why.You see, Clarence is many things, but stupid isn't one of them. With that in mind, a far more important question would ask why he left a highly paid important position to be a spokesman for the parents of a missing child if that child ( according to all known statistics) was likely to be found within days, possibly weeks either dead or alive and being hidden.He would have thought of that.So what was it that made him realise so early that the child wouldn't be showing up any time soon.Who knew this ?He must have been given a guarantee if he resigned so quickly.

      Mitchell was -and is- like all politicians, 100% loyal to whoever signs his salary cheques.He used to play for Labour then he was sold to the Conservatives.He was equally passionate for these opposing forces.He was also a BBC media man until he was caught live on camera snoring.Then he joined Murdochs army and was 'the face' of other big headline high profile crimes like Soham and Dando. So, he was a familiar face; a face we were able to allegedly trust.A good signing.But he was a politician on the inside of the McCann camp as well as those two parties.

      Another face we could trust was that of Clement Freud.A long career in politics was then ended to take up a long career as a celebrity. he was possibly the first big celebrity politician with his deadpan face, monotone voice, dry humour and his surprising double life as a bon viveur, race horse owning, champagne swilling cordon bleu chef.He was a popular 'loveable' figure in the public eye.He was also very close to the Murdochs socially and was related through marriage.Now his name is associated with sexual perversion and the secrets he, Cyril Smith and Jeremy Thorpe shared and took to the grave.He ingratiated himself into the McCann family with offers of a sympathetic ear and good food.Why would they refuse ? Significantly, it's on record how he would begin conversations with the McCanns by cracking ironic jokes about the media, thus opening the door for discussions of it's reporting and reporters.His daughter was married to a Murdoch.
      Through the Governments man and through Murdochs man, the secret thoughts and suspicions of the McCanns were given in confidence and no doubt taken back to said Government and Sky / Mail.

      The evidence of the case is the bone of contention.Many are saying it's enough to get a conviction, others don't as those who decide such have said it isn't.But-it could be made to fit couldn't it ? Those with the power to move the pieces could do it any time they chose.And that could lead to a conviction of one or both parents.They'd know that.So they don't say too much and they go with the official line.Hence the 12 year stale mate.

      So, the parents are clear.That's been stated by both forces.Nobody else is in the frame.The culprit is home and dry.If that culprit or those culprits are named or the fingers of suspicion accuse them and name them, then the brown stuff would hit the fan at speed and there would be a fall out. That's a dangerous game.It's about time the police closed it now.They could put it on the cold shelf for the sake of those who would be enraged by it being forgotten.It's a tricky decision.May isn't up to it.Nor will Corbyn be. And without a political decision ( in this police matter), it won't happen.

    10. Apologies Ziggy, and apologies to my dear friend the Major. I quite like the name Bella, and on the old AOL boards I was known affectionately as 'Bell', unaffectionately as 'Bellend', which happily I did not know the meaning of, lol.

      Clarence Mitchell is not a politician and never will be. He is where he is because of his 'street smarts', not his academic ability or his understanding of complex government policy. He is too one dimensional to be a politician, he cannot see beyond the barrow in Petticoat Lane. He connects with no-one. Who is his base? A thin stream of Daily Mail readers who are as blasé with their political opinions as he is.

      Clarence Mitchell is an opportunist, he is motivated by fame and money, perhaps even in that order, he loves the camera. Being spokesman for the most famous victims of crime in the world, was an opportunity he was not going to miss.

      Remember how happy they all were in that summer of 2007, enjoying an extended holiday with their family, friends and fellow plotters. They were going to take over the world with their massive (not a)charity Madeleine Fund and 'Keeping Up with The McCanns' home videos. They were hobnobbing with the Pope and Gerry was flying out to meet the press in Edinburgh (why are you are, asked the interviewer)and Washington. Imagine a small group of narcissistic 'alphas' and wannabe TV stars who enjoyed playing tennis, gathered together in a picturesque holiday resort watching the cash literally pouring in by the million?

      Clarence was not the only one to give up his secure, high paying job, so too did John McCann and all those caring relatives and friends who flew out to PDL. It seems the only thing they weren't preparing for among their many meetings, was the possibly of Madeleine turning up, either dead or alive. How could they all be so certain Madeleine would not be found that they were making plans for the future? Gerry's wider agenda, his annual Madeleine Day for the whole world?

    11. Yeh, I'm not buying all that Clement Freud and the Murdochs and all that murky stuff. The McCanns dinner with Mr. Freud, was weird. His invitation and their acceptance at such a traumatic time. When I lost my dear old dad, I couldn't bear company of any sort, I certainly couldn't have attended a dinner with a celebrity, even had it been Brad Pitt. Wtf are Gerry and Kate made of? Their tiny child was missing! It was inappropriate on so many levels. Didn't they also have dinner with the creepy Ray Wyre, the architect of so much horrific child abuse in the 1980's?

      You end your diatribe with 'so the parents are clear' as if you have made your case. Except you haven't, the parents are well and truly in the frame in the minds of most of those who take interest in this case, and in the minds of the police. The only way the parents can be cleared is if they face a trial and are found not guilty. Until then every option is open.

      You say naming the culprits, the 'brown stuff' (yuck) will hit the fan at speed and there be fall out'. What brown stuff? What fall out? The culprits presumably are not the McCanns, so who are they? Why is the notion of this, a dangerous game?

      Bizarre you think the investigation should be closed now. Placed on a cold shelf to appease those who feel justice has not been served. You have me confused Ziggy, you profess to being on the side of the parents, so why are you not demanding answers? Were you not on the campaign when the McCanns were petitioning for a Review? Surely the police closing the file now would be the last thing the parents would want?

      It won't be a political decision. If crimes have been committed, and clearly OG believe they have, hence this is still a live investigation, then those guilty of the crimes will be prosecuted. Politicians cannot interfere with the Justice system, they can't overrule the Crown Prosecution Services and Judges. There are checks and balances in place that prevent individuals from interfering with the Law specifically to prevent cover ups and corruption.

      Don't be lulled into a false sense of security by the 12 long years Ziggy. As you know, I am a fan of real crime documentaries, and it is unbelievable how many years can pass between a murder and a conviction. Some murderers can get that knock on the door even decades later. These cases do of course have dogged, tenacious investigators who refuse to give up. But so too has Madeleine's case, there are still detectives here in the UK and in Portugal who are determined to see this case through to the end. As Cressida Dick recently confirmed, this case will reach a conclusion.

    12. Thanks for your diatribe in reply to my wonderful post x

      Because you aren't buying the 'murky' stuff involving Murdoch , Freud and Co doesn't mean it isn't important or worthy of closer examination. God knows there's a shortage of genuine dots to join after 12 years. We know how low and underhand all things Murdoch/Sky/Mail are, and we now all know that Freud was no angel.How many staff of Sky had a home or holiday home in PDL ? it wasn't only Freud. The McCanns probably accepted the invitation out of politeness as the invitation was worded so sensitively.If they were going to be in PDL why not ? But you'll give all that a 'wtf'...

      My 'parents are clear' should have been worded more accurately now I think of it. Obviously they don't need to be cleared of anything if they haven't been charged with anything- ever. I should have said ' in the clear'. That's not my case- it's the official position of the investigative teams both here and in Portugal.They said it and announced it to the world via TV.OK it wasn't Twitter or Facebook- but they still said it. All i was doing was reminding you.But you won't have it and state that they are 'in the frame' ( as opposed to your old 'on the hook').I repeat- the parents have nothing to be cleared of. Only the public suspicion that lives and breeds on line have charged them.And that doesn't matter ( period).

      If I knew who the culprit was or who they are I'd say it.Al I've ever said is there is no conceivable reason for the police not to arrest the parents if they think they're guilty.A jury could well have been persuaded to buy into the dogs findings area of the investigation.They would have to know-not merely suspect- that the parents were innocent before they decided that the child was returning soon( enter recently - resigned Clarence) and agree to throw no end of money and politicians into it.

      I said it would only be right to close it now.This case has no moving parts and never did. It was over soon as it happened.They are no nearer now than back then in solving it.In the interest of their own integrity and public spending they should hurl the towel in.But, that would anger so many people.Mainly bloggers to be fair.So they should shelve it to go cold.That way hope would remain.I wasn't thinking of the parents when i suggested it.

      You say 'if crimes have been committed'. Madeleine ? When cover ups are high up the checks and measures disappear. Savile evaded investigation for decades. As did many politicians like Freud and Smith ( Cyril).All had leverage.
      I too enjoy true crime.And most documentaries if they're big on fact and small on hysterical delivery.My passion is still the Wallace case as it was a few yards from where i grew up.That won't be solved now, it happened in 1931.The instances you refer to are mainly crimes that were committed decades ago pre- DNA and other advances in forensics. I'd like to think it was down to dogged and determined detectives.But that's hero worship.All any half bright detective would need to do is read an old case, note the dates and findings ( or lack of) that the forensic report has on it and try again with modern technology. Madeleine went missing in 2007. We had all that then and still do.

    13. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 14:50

      Bella ( belle of the ball ?)...

      You have asked the same question that I've been asking you and the faithful for a long time : how was it known so early that Madeleine wasn't going to turn up soon ? Or, if we want to be more direct- how did they know the game was already over ? The resignation of Mitchell to take a job that history suggested would only last a few weeks needs to be addressed by OG. But they wouldn't.

      Don't underestimate how a non-academic egotistical well connected halfwit can climb high.Boris Johnson is worse and he's almost a Tory leader.I recall seeing Cameron on Letterman. That's right- our PM. Letterman asked him a simple question. He asked what the magna carta was. Possibly the most significant piece of British history.Cameron got the jitters and said things like ' i should know said there wouldn't be awkward questions'. Total moron.A total moron who was born a millionaire and had his passage paid for( so to speak) in all the UKs finest seats of learning.He inheritedthe McCann game shortly after Blair and Brown and ran to the highlands.But they all had their little meet-ups. They all ( the political 'enemies' of the Conservatives and Labour) found a handy little middle ground to sip pims and nibble on strawberries and Rebekah Brooks. The home of the lovely Matt Freud and a Murdoch; the infamous Chipping Norton set. R soles to a man ( and woman).

      Unfortunately we are living in the age of bells and whistles.As the masses continue to allow themselves to be dumbed down they settle for form over content every time.They want to be passive and let the big names and celebrities in flash places entertain and 'inform' them.Beckham ? Ok he's better looking than Posh. But he couldn't tie his own boot laces before he played a game.But now he's famous he's a 'spokesman' for everything.He's like Bono's stunt man.News only happens now via twitter and the people employed to tweet on behalf of celebrities who cant speak let alone spell.None of the McCann show /circus impressed me.I'm more interested in the unseen. A dancing puppet isn't clever. The man with the strings is.

    14. How can you claim the police are no nearer to solving the case than they were in 2007? Why are they still being funded if they aren't doing anything? I think that is a fantasy you have going on there Ziggy, but few share it. We may not know what Operation Grange are up to, but we know it is something tangible that will reach a conclusion.

      As for checks and measures disappearing when you go higher up, again, you are wrong. Politicians cannot treat government departments as their minions, they cannot override the Law to make unpalatable facts disappear. Again, you are in the realms of fantasy.

      No, I'm not just talking about crimes that occurred prior to DNA. True in many cases new technology can give accurate results, but there are multiple ways to solve cold cases. The McCanns are vulnerable on many fronts.

    15. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 20:35

      ''How can you claim the police are no nearer to solving the case than they were in 2007?''

      Madeleine vanished just prior to her 4th birthday. Three months from now will mark the date of her 16th birthday.No arrests.Nothing.

      ''Why are they still being funded if they aren't doing anything? ''

      To make it appear as though it's a mystery to them and they don't have a clue where she vanished to .

      ''I think that is a fantasy you have going on there Ziggy, but few share it. ''

      It's been 12 years. Fantasy ?

      '' We may not know what Operation Grange are up to, but we know it is something tangible that will reach a conclusion. ''

      If we don't know what they're doing we don't know if it's tangible. Where's the evidence ? Where's the arrests ? Where's the new evidence ? This has gone on longer than WW1 and WW2 combined.

      '' Politicians cannot treat government departments as their minions, ''

      They can and do.Often.

      ''there are multiple ways to solve cold cases. The McCanns are vulnerable on many fronts.''

      The many fronts being the forensic evidence from 12 years ago which has remained there until this day.The eye witness testimony of nobody at all . The online detective agencie's photoshop investigation results. The contradictory testimonies of the Tapas group.The blood.The DNA. All that vulnerability plus a jury of about 50,000 finding them guilty with or without evidence because they've seen and heard of parents in other cases being guilty. Yes, very vulnerable.On top of all of this, both forces have gone on public record to state that the parents were not and definitely aren't suspects.Very vulnerable..

    16. Well done on keeping up the bravado Ziggy, but your arguments that the police know nothing are as hollow as your claim that no arrests in 12 years means the parents are innocent and the police are clueless. All wishful thinking on your part Ziggy.

      Still at least you are no longer claiming the police are looking for an abductor. Even you can see that they are not. Does that mean you accept there was no abductor? That's quite a break through.

      You state again that the police have declared the parents were not and definitely aren't suspects. I'm amazed in you have confidence in those statements given the number of times non suspects quickly become suspects. It's like Trump trying to reassure himself he is not under investigation.

    17. I believe there was an abductor. I believe Madeleine was a hostage for a short time and then disposed of.What kind of ransom I don't know.But MI were over there fast.So, I still believe the parents are innocent.They would have been arrested otherwise.maybe if they were arrested, the real culprits would go public to expose the real truth and the McCanns would be freed.

      I have to believe that the police forces of two countries wouldn't dare make such a categorical statement if they didn't mean it.Why can't you believe it ?

    18. the evidence is in place, especially the forensics. Even we the taxpaying British public can see the PJ files now. A revelation!
      The mcanns were made arguidos, Kate lied about jemmied shutters, deleted her texts and refused to answer any police questions. British CSI dogs detected blood residues and cadaver odour in the apartment, their hire car and on Kate's clothing. the Portugese prosecutor archived the case, but the Portugese high court clearly stated that the Mcanns were not deemed Innocent.
      We can speculate that without a body (prima facie evidence) the Mcanns media campaign and being off shore, and the reliance on a large body of circumstantial evidence that they decided to let it lie. It can be re activated at any time.
      Our time will come, one day, to see justice for a poor 4 year old girl. RIP Madeliene

    19. Anonymous5 February 2019 at 08:20

      Given all the certainty and all your indisputable facts i have 2 questions for you :

      1 : Why haven't the PJ made an arrest ?

      2: Why haven't the met made an arrest ? After all, OG have been looking at what you've just seen for years.

  30. Remember Kate's dramatic account of the the children's bedroom door slamming, the curtains going whoosh and the window being open? If you care to read the Tapas 9's statements made to the police the following day, none of that is mentioned. You'd think it would be the highlight of the friends' statements, but no, not a mention. Why hadn't Kate told them all that story? Could it be that it hadn't been conceived of when she first raised the alarm?

    1. And what did all those Portuguese and UK detectives make of all of that ? And how many internet sleuths have joined forces to ask the detectives of both countries why it was ignored. Let's remember, they want the publics help.So what's the reason for the online public being so reticent when away from their computer ?

    2. Hi Jane, yes the whooshing curtains story didn't appear until the McCanns started their media rounds. And didn't Kate only give one statement to the police? Her second interview was her infamous refusal to answer any of the 48 police questions.

      The whooshing curtains adds drama to scene, an opportunity for Kate to wave her arms around and a good memory tool. She is almost word and movement perfect, every time she repeats it. Like a toddler with head, shoulders, knees and toes, she knows exactly what to do and say next.

      It isn't natural to remember an incident so specifically, without extending on it or embellishing it with every retelling. Not to mention the fact that the incident is something you will torture yourself with for the remainder of your life.

      I know a lot of people went to a lot of trouble to prove the curtains couldn't have whooshed. But it was not necessary, Kate, like her husband, doesn't know when to shut up. She volunteers more information than necessary, it's what liars do when they sense they need to add substance to their lie. They are picking up that their lies are not being believed, so they over compensate. Hence, the bedroom door being ajar, the proud father moment, the whooshing curtains, there are countless examples, Gerry's blog and Kate's book are full of them.

    3. Yes, we all need an opportunity to wave our arms around now and then...

      A guilty person doesn't volunteer extra information for fear of being caught out. If she was playing a mind game, how do you explain the sudden reluctance to offer anything at all during the famous 48 questions debacle ?She had the opportunity to 'add substance' to her lies then- why didn't she take it ? Well trained detectives- and even Amaral- have heard it all before.They've been coached in the techniques criminals use to misdirect detectives . They know about 'scene painting' and know how to then misdirect the suspect and then bring him back to it later against the run of play.

      So, Bella....

      You think there's clear evidence of the abduction being staged by the parents. You think that a lab holds clear evidence that the child died and bled just prior to it.You think statements contradict themselves . You think the police are only looking for a corpse. despite them saying that is only another possibility they have to entertain.You think Amaral's many accusations are based on facts that would bring a conviction. So, please tell me the following. Why have the police ignored all of that and chosen instead to waste vast sums of money over such a wide span of time ? Why have they chosen not to call upon the findings of the dogs ? Why did the UK want Amaral removed before he had time to delve deeper ? Why are they so determined to protect two people they suspect killed their child and actually fund the efforts to keep an investigation open ?What damage would be done-and to whom- if they were found guilty ?

    4. Wasn't it the solicitor who told Kate not to answer the police questions? And as dense as she is sometimes, even Kate knew that any answers she gave would be compared line by line to Gerry's and the game would be up.

      It is only you Ziggy, who is claiming that the police are ignoring all the evidence presently available, the inconsistent statements, the dogs, the freaky behaviour etc. No-one else believes that Ziggy, the statements and the evidence collected in 2007 will never go away, it is all integral to the solving of this case, none of it has been discarded. You are again in fantasy land if you believe it has.

      You seem to think there is an individual, or a small group of individuals high up in the government or in society, who has determined this case will never be solved and the two doctors never charged. Until you can put some substance on these shadowy figures, your claims are meaningless. Your scenario only works if the culprit(s) have something they are using to cajole and blackmail people in high places to do their bidding.

      Why are 'they' (the culprits?) so determined to protect two people they suspect killed their child. Why are the two people suspected of killing their child not screaming blue murder? Not at 'being protected' whatever that means, but at those covering up their daughter's death?

      And I don't believe they are being protected by the way, I believe they were protected in the early summer of 2007 but the protection came to an end when they were forced to leave Warners complex and move into a private villa.

      I don't think anyone would say that the families of Sabrina Aisenberg, Isabel Celis and Lisa Irwin are being protected. The parents of each of these missing children remain free even though they are all suspected of killing their children. It is not protection that keeps them out of jail, it is the lack of evidence to convict them. The same applies with the McCanns, except of course, their daughter's disappearance is still the subject of two live police investigations.

      'What damage would be done-and-to-whom if they were found guilty?' Other than a sea of red faces? Quite a bit I would imagine, and to quite a few people. Imagine for example being a TV criminologist and having got this case so badly wrong? Will anyone ever believe you again? Actually, would anyone even ask your opinion again?

      But that's merely the top layer, who knows what OG have found underneath. Those of us who have followed this case for years have a good idea of what OG have uncovered, and how far this web of lies goes, it has all the makings of a Public Inquiry, but in these fast moving news times, it will be lost in the quagmire.

      If I were that way inclined I would draw a spider graph with links to all those who were involved and what charges they could face. How many, for example, perverted the course of justice? How many could be charged with second degree murder, simply by being part of a group? Going by the murder documentaries I have seen, those just going along for the ride face the same charges as the one with the smoking gun. The list of defendants facing serious criminal charges must run to dozens, and must include whoever gave the instruction 'to go easy on the McCanns'. I have no doubt it is the magnitude of crimes that has kept this investigation open for so long. Perhaps it is a bit like the Mueller investigation, all those on the sidelines will be picked off first.

    5. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 21:36

      ''It is only you Ziggy, who is claiming that the police are ignoring all the evidence presently available''

      Is it ? So what have the police done about it if they haven't ignored it.It's been 12 years.

      '' No-one else believes that Ziggy, the statements and the evidence collected in 2007 will never go away,''

      The police must.The only place where they haven't gone away is the internet.

      '' You are again in fantasy land if you believe it has.''

      Fantasy Land 2019.

      My claims of the involvement of important figures is based on the speed in which action was taken by a PM, a chancellor (?), home secretary and Military Intelligence shortly before the lead detective was removed and evidence apparently discarded as not valid.If of course you can cite other crime that have prompted politicians and prime ministers to get involved so fast and overrule the police then i'll take it back.

      '' Your scenario only works if the culprit(s) have something they are using to cajole and blackmail people in high places to do their bidding. ''

      Yes- I repeat - leverage.Politicians( in particular chief whips - see house of cards..or youtube Tim Fortescue) value leverage. Cash for questions, cash for arms cash for this or for silence.If we knew who had who by the short ones at any given time it would defeat the object of their exercise.

      I've dealt with your question Re why the protection and the apparent silence of the parents elsewhere.

      The protection is there and always has been.Why did they need it in the beginning if the world thought their daughter had been snatched.Why was it important for two intelligent and articulate people to stay quiet and let the Government press controller do the talking for them ( or for someone else ?).
      There would be a lot of red faces if they were arrested now, I agree.It's been 12 years after all.I was talking about back in 2007.With all the supposed evidence it was a slam dunk according to those dedicating blogs to it all.Why didn't they arrest them ?

      It doesn't matter how long those who have dedicated themselves to this case have done so.The same things are being discussed and ideas promoted now as back in 2007 . The rest has been efforts to say why people think this or that( guesses based on nothing but old movies, books and documentaries).OG haven't uncovered anything.If they have why did they ask for more funding ?

      ''If I were that way inclined I would draw a spider graph with links to all those who were involved and what charges they could face.''

      You'd have to know how many were involved and how first.

      ''Going by the murder documentaries I have seen, ...''

      See- there it is again.If any detective told his boss he was watching old documentaries to use in the investigation he'd be sacked.No other crimes have anything to do with this one. If the police believe the parents have done something to their little girl that's resulted in the hiding of her body they would never say go easy at any point other than to lull them into a false sense of security, lower their guard and then they'd go for the throat.That's real life.