IN A NUTSHELL

Why thank you for your interesting, informative yet still a tad pompous, reply 13:59 I look forward to tackling every point you raise.  

 

Yes, that old human propensity to herd eh?  Or to join tribes.  How about gangs?  How about secret societies with dodgy handshakes, or internet forums with secret rooms?  Yeh, I was clearly talking about those who seek enlightenment, not those like yourself who blend in with the crowd.  The movers and shakers, the music makers and the dreamers of dreams. Man (and woman) will always strive to conquer every mountain and solve every puzzle.  You see herds, I see free spirits, you are glass half empty, I am glass half full, with room for a gin fizz and a micky finn.

 

Ooh you are looking down your long snooty nose 13:59, no matter how you try to dress it up.  You believe you are superior because you haven't reached a conclusion on the Madeleine case, and won't until the investigation is over.  Well good for you, do let the Pope or whoever know, it will give you extra points for The Good Place.  Oh dear on the snake reference, and we were getting on so well.

 

Knock my reference to a 'New Age of Enlightenment', or a 'New Age of Information' as much as you like, but if you if knew anything about history, you would know that the internet is as significant to the evolution of mankind as the printing press and the industrial revolution.  You are a moron if you don't.

 

Your faux pretence at finding my blogs both refreshing and alarming (how so?) is pathetic.  I have never made any claims that I know what happened to Madeleine, like your sanctimonious self, I leave that to the police.  Unlike others, this blog is devoid of outlandish theories, salacious allegations and libel.  It is more a discussion group for those who wait patiently for a conclusion by Scotland Yard and the PJ, hopefully both. Those gripped by the initial sales pitches and still hanging in there for a result 12 years later.  Kudos to the sales team. 

 

Up until your 'interest in the human psyche', I thought you were someone other than Ziggy, a new and improved model, the writing has come on considerably, but now you are going back to your alleged psychology degree, your study of human behaviour.  Ok Zig, (mark ?), your interest is in the 'trolling of the McCann', not the freaky behaviour of two parents who claimed to have had a child stolen.  OK, you chose the boring side of the coin, but heck, someone has to. 

 

Your interest is in isolating and tracking down certain behaviours that would constitute online harassment?  Am I close?  Your interest is in proving that social media can corrupt and obstruct justice, that any jury would have already been influenced by the huge amount of gossip online? Warm? Warmer? 

 

As for finding sanctuary online, I have already spoken to a real psychiatrist about this very issue!  He had no problem whatsoever that I had found people online to share a common interest with.  He saw it as positive!  The 21st century equivalent of speaking over the garden fence.  On this issue, I am not weird, lol.  This is not some dark, underground, plotting, scheming, blog, I am just like those who read here, hooked on this journey of discovery that must lead somewhere!  This is no tribe 13:59, and those who read here and contribute are not sheep. 

 

If you are a long time reader, you will see that I have no aspirations for leadership of any sort, and never have!  I like to think I create leaders, I seem to have had the midas touch where my exes etc are concerned, so I'm quite good at it.  For myself, I seek only enlightenment.  Crazy, because I will take all my cramming to the grave.  I don't think anything enriches your life as much as knowledge, so much to learn, so little time.

 

Tragically, I chose as my specialist subject on Mastermind, the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  Figurately speaking, I was never on Mastermind, but I did choose the world's most unpopular subject to specialise in.  Had I been pro Gerry and Kate, I would have been made over as Kellyanne Conway and telling you a row of begonias is no different to a concrete wall.  

For all those journalists who look in, and I know you do, criticising the McCanns and their quest to harvest the nation's DNA and beat up transients at the borders, was a no go area.  The Saintly, McCanns were assisting the government in putting the fear of God into it's citizens.  If the cherubic Madeleine could be stolen from responsible (NHS) professionals, every child was at risk!  It was a story the media liked. It sold newspapers, it persuaded the gullible that we needed more government intervention in our lives.  I remember arguing with some dumb woman, Sally, lol, who insisted 'only those with something fear, would resist a government database'.  Where do you begin with that level of ignorance?  I remember once being asked a similarly dim-witted question in an 'A2' class.  Differed slightly in that a religious student asked why we studied such immoral, debased writers such as Shelley and Byron. I threw the question out to the class, and my (yes, my, love 'em) students, answered as I would have, and then some!    It made for interesting discussion among the English lecturers under the smoking shelter.

No 13:59, I do not believe I am psychic.  Actually, I have spent an inordinate amount of time on researching the whole 'psychic' thing and have concluded it is all nonsense.  I pity those who cling onto it, and I despise those who use it to take advantage of the vulnerable.  I don't see how I could make myself any clearer.  
 

 

MONEY FOR A RAINY DAY

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.

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR - REVELATIONS IN SIGHT

Happy New Year to one and all, my wish is that we all achieve our dreams and desires, or at the very least, move a few steps closer to them.  2019 I believe, will be the year of Justice, firstly for humanity with the trial and incrimination of the Trump Crime Family, secondly the total annihilation of the treacherous Theresa May who panders to the deplorables just as much as Trump (my reference to deplorables btw includes billionaire tory donors). Then thirdly, Justice for little Madeleine McCann, the child with the face that launched a thousand posters and a thousand Crisis Management Agencies.

 

 How does Operation Grange end, hypothetically?  Does it implicate all those, who we who have studied this case way too intently, believe were/are involved (and who's names we dare not say out loud)?  It is hard to see how they can be ruled out.  If Madeleine wasn't abducted, then everything the McCanns and their supporters did that night and thereafter was fraudulent.  That's pretty mindblowing, and would explain why it has taken 7 years to investigate.

 

The only thing to apply when reading or studying this case is logic and reasoning.   As nice a person as you might be, you really need to read beyond the headlines of causes you support.  You need to ensure that the money you are so generously donating, is helping real, genuine causes. 

 

The McCanns have no intention of handing their remaining £750k or any other funds they may raise, to childrens charities.  The Madeleine Fund remains a non charitable company for the benefit of one child only.  Or more accurately, for the benefit of the one child's family.  Not even a magician or a founder of a crisis management agency can make that sound good. 

 

I was trying to reply to a post on my last blog, but as he/she pointed out, the comments are overflowing and becoming impossible to track.  Oops, poor housekeeping on my part, but in my defence, it was the holidays!  Also, I should point out that I do believe this year will see a conclusion to the Madeleine case, and, under the rules of war, my conscience told me to ‘give them a break’.  I also try to respond to McCann press releases, my blog is the anti spin version of what’s going on and nothing has transpired since the McCanns annual Christmas message.

 

Gerry and Kate McCann have truly had the wind knocked out of their sails, according to their Christmas message, brought to us by superfan Tracey Kandhola.  Their ‘brief, but poignant festive message’, thanks their supporters for their kind and continuing good wishes and laments that Christmas will never be the same. They miss Madeleine dearly, but they make no appeals to her or for her.  It is quite sad, because it would appear from their message that they know nothing about the Operation Grange investigation.  Or.  They know enough not to keep on about abductors, age progression pictures of Madeleine and leaving no stone unturned.

 

It would be too cruel to imagine Operation Grange were telling the parents nothing, and I struggle to believe that is the case.  The brevity of the McCanns Christmas message suggests they dare not talk about continuing their search when the unsolved files are shelved as they were a year or so ago. Cressida Dick has now confirmed publicly that won’t happen.

 

Gerry and Kate still have hope, but not much it would appear. They still don’t accept that Madeleine is dead, not publicly at least, because accepting Madeleine as dead would somehow incriminate them. As long as the world believes Madeleine is alive, they are innocent.  It would also bring in a long forgotten clause in the Madeleine Fund objectives.  That is the handing over of anything remaining in the Fund to [other] childrens’ charities. Strictly speaking Madeleine must be found and her abductor brought to justice, but what happens in the event there was no abductor? Legal eagles could have a ball with those wordings.

 

Police chiefs have to be very, very, careful with what they say, they are accountable to we the public. It would be absurd for Cressida Dick to say there will be a conclusion to Operation Grange, if the conclusion were not in sight. I suspect her statement will have sent those involved in Madeleine’s disappearance into a tailspin.  They still had hope that they had out- manoeuvered Scotland Yard’s finest, and the case would once again be filed.    

 

After 12 years, 7 years for Operation Grange, talk of new leads is absurd and everyone, bar Tracey Kandhola, knows that. Who believes OG is so haphazard that they have just been sitting there waiting for new leads to come in?  It begs the question, what the hell have they been doing this past 7 years if they need new leads to keep the investigation funded.

 

For those who take me literally, please don’t.  I believe those detectives working on the Madeleine case are doing their jobs. Those attacking them are showing their own ignorance, especially those who are accusing the detectives of treating the investigation like a jamboree.  They are contemptible and projecting what they would do if they had the same job.

 

For all the knocks and blows life has given me (for which I blame myself), I still believe in the goodness of human nature. One of my favourite movie quotes ‘I have always depended on the kindness of strangers’, is never far from my thoughts. Those random acts of kindness restore your faith when you least expect it.  A couple of summers ago I wandered, hot and flustered into McDonalds.  Now I hasten to add, I am not the usual McDonalds customer, I had been captivated by those lush adverts for smoothies and I had to try one. In my change the girl behind the counter gave me a very special 50p pence, a rare collectible, and as she placed it in my hand, she said this is for you. Why? possibly because I asked her how her day had been and what flavour [smoothie] did she recommend, her kindly gesture was a timely reminder of ‘the kindness of strangers’, and of the Laws of Attraction, you get back what you put out.

 

But I have wandered.  Forgive me, I am drinking the remains of the prosceco, amazingly still sparkly after two days sitting open on the side! Hic. My interpretation of Cressida Dick’s statement is, that something will happen soon.  Previous chiefs of police haven’t gone that far, that is they have left any conclusion open ended, they have at times sounded as if they didn’t really want answers.  It has been quite bizarre, I put it down to the McCanns having Carter Ruck on a retainer.  

 

But the walls of Jericho are crumbling (bin playing a lot of Trivial Pursuit over Christmas, :)).  No one, not even the parents or Sky News are pushing the abduction story anymore. All those agencies that were founded on stirring up a shitstorm when a child goes missing, have found themselves twiddling their thumbs.  All those fatalistic stories of middle class children of responsible parents being stolen from their beds, proved to be nothing but an urban myth started by the McCanns and promoted by Jim Gamble and Missing People.  Nothing tugs at the purse strings like danger to children.  Two parents who knowingly and willingly, left three tiny children on their own in a holiday apartment for 6 nights in a row, got to preach to the rest of us about child safety. It’s like Karen Matthews lecturing us on how to store children under the divan.

 

Karma works in mysterious ways, that’s for sure.  But wishing evil on others and using your cruelest daggers, almost always come back to bite you on the arse.  In a nutshell you reap what you sow.  And the McCanns’ reaping stage was over the top prolific.  They planted seeds here, there and everywhere.  Their ‘crime’ could have been headlines for one, two weeks tops, but they chose to make it global, and they chose to blame other people.  They started a war they could never win, particularly in this age of social media.  For every critic they knocked down, a hundred more took their place.  But kudos to them, it takes some kind of megalomaniac ego, to believe you could take control of public opinion ad infinitum, especially on the internet. Our antiquated libel laws allow the McCanns to stop the flow of information through our mainstream media, but the internet is lawless and the more they try to hide the truth, the more they are put under the spotlight.   Especially by those of us online who can see straight through 'all of this'.

 

Ultimately truth will prevail.  Nothing else will fit in those blank places on the jigsaw puzzle.  Too much evidence exists to even attempt trying to squeeze a burglar into the timelines and lack of evidence of a break in. The parents' claim that the predator had been watching them, fits the no break in evidence, but in every other sense, is ludicrous.  This is when the 'Madeleine is special' stories began to circulate.  And it was this specialness that led to her abduction.  Firstly, yuck, every 3 year old girl is special and adorable, and charmingly, each is unique.  Happily I have no idea what goes on the head of a paedophile, wtf for example, makes a 3 year old special?  It is nonsense, and creepy nonsense at that.  Unfortunately it is the kind of creepy nonsense that appeals to freaks and weirdos who get off on the idea that Madeleine was some sort of Lolita. 

 

But, darn, I have moved on from the 'not in the slightest bit stale' prosecutto onto a feisty little pink pinot gregio (stored properly) that I have drowned with ice cubes and am drinking from one of my beautiful 'ball' glasses.   A present from a dear friend and a boon for clumsy drunks like moi, who see glasses with stems as an unnecessary obstacle to drunkenness and debauchery.  Ok, I'll take that back.  There is a certain elegance to staying sober enough throughout the evening to serve the correct alcoholic beverage in the correctly shaped glass! 

 

Again I have digressed.  There is a good chance the ending of this case will see a (temporary) revival of the McCanns and Madeleine in our newspapers.  If the revelations go as far as they should, the case should again dominate the newspapers, but we have to remember it is up against Trump and Brexit, a good time to bury bad news.  How does Operation Grange end, hypothetically?  Does it implicate all those who we who have studied this case way too intently, believe were/are involved?  My answer would be, how can it not?  As amazing as the Mccanns search for Madeleine was, it had British government and police backing, how tf did that happen?  I believe this case will end, not just with multiple prosecutions, but perhaps also a public inquiry.  How do British Citizens abroad get so much governmental assistance that it fucks up the home country's investigation?  No wonder David Cameron gave the Portuguese a full Scotland Yard Inquiry. 

WHY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS STEER CLEAR

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

NO TO LEVESON TWO

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

SOURCES FOR THE GOOSE AND GANDER

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

TWO NEW LEADS - SERIOUSLY TRACEY?

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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