Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

Status
Not open for further replies.
Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The Sunday Times Insight team Published: 27 October 2013

Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 (Adrian Sheratt)
THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities (Adrian Sheratt) Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes.

The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 (Adrian Sheratt) The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1332689.ece

I predict that Amaral will win the libel case now!
 
He always was going to win, because no one can prove libel.

I sincerely hope these two are finally being exposed for what they are.
 
Amarals theory was that Madeleine is dead, that she died in the apartment and that the parents are responsible for hiding her corpse.

According to both active police investigations, by PJ and SYard right now.. this hasn't happened and they are not looking into this theory.

So, how can Amaral win this label case? He published a theory which has been dismissed by both PJ and SY.

Also it has been reported that both police forces work on the phone records, do you think they cannot know where GM was at 9.55pm that night?
 
What about Steven Birch's claim's ?

Not sure about his theory but if what he claims regarding scans is true it seems to back up this from Amaral's book:

" We officially request the help of the best experts in criminology and forensics but also the specialist dog team from the English police. A few days later, we welcome Mark Harrison, a specialist in murder, and the search for missing persons and victims of natural disasters. National advisor to the British police, he is well known for his exceptional professional experience. He has already participated in dozens of international criminal investigations.
(snip)
After a week of intense work, Harrison presents the results of his study to my coordinating group. Even if we were expecting it, his conclusions confirm our worst fears. The most plausible scenario is the following: there is no doubt that Madeleine is dead, and her body is hidden somewhere in the area around Praia da Luz.
He praises the quality of the work carried out by the Portuguese authorities in trying to find the little girl alive. According to him, the time has come to redirect the searches in order to find, this time, a body hidden in the surrounding area."

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.b...d-max=2009-06-08T14:18:00-07:00&max-results=1
 
“There were elements gathered that have to do with events before the disappearance of the child and others after. Relating them with those contained in the process already archived have raised a more than reasonable doubt about what happened to the child,” said a source close to the investigation to the DN, adding that a in meeting with Gerry and Kate McCann, and the lawyers of the couple, the PJ asked “absolute silence” about the investigation.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/20...utm_campaign=Feed:+JoanaMorais+(Joana+Morais)

IMO this case will only be resolved if they look into the events which occurred earlier in the holiday eg mobile phone and creche records which was not done before.
 
Amarals theory was that Madeleine is dead, that she died in the apartment and that the parents are responsible for hiding her corpse.

According to both active police investigations, by PJ and SYard right now.. this hasn't happened and they are not looking into this theory.

So, how can Amaral win this libel case? He published a theory which has been dismissed by both PJ and SY.

Also it has been reported that both police forces work on the phone records, Do you think they cannot know where GM was at 9.55pm that night?

The mobile phone and creche records are the secret to this. IMO they will reveal that Maddie died earlier in the holiday.

IMO On May 3, there was a faked abduction. What is wrong with Amaral's theory is that it is the wrong day as he was deceived by the Tapas9.

The McCanns are being told they are not suspects because they want the McCanns to trust them as the Tapas9 will need to be re-interviewed and they probably do not have all the evidence they need yet.

Amaral will win his case as the McCanns have held these E-fits of the so-called abductor secret for five years thus damaging their own case. So they cannot blame Amaral. They have not presented any medical evidence of their so-called depression, etc. However, there is no evidence of an abductor.

IMO The Smith sighting is either Gerry McCann or a faked sighting which the Smiths stated to protect Murat saying the abductor was not him.
 
He always was going to win, because no one can prove libel.

I sincerely hope these two are finally being exposed for what they are.

And I sincerely hope the deficiencies in the initial investigation, as well as the prejudices - as good a word as any - will come to light. Remind me not to move to Portugal - thank you.

I never suspected the parents, there was no reason, but there were pedophiles. One lived real close, or am I wrong?

I doubt Maddie will ever be found alive, but I would love to see justice done FOR the McCanns.

I've followed this case for years and all I ever heard was the same old mantra, "how could they leave the kids alone". Get over it, it happens, and maybe get onto what REALLY happened.

My opinion only
 
And I sincerely hope the deficiencies in the initial investigation, as well as the prejudices - as good a word as any - will come to light. Remind me not to move to Portugal - thank you.

I never suspected the parents, there was no reason, but there were pedophiles. One lived real close, or am I wrong?

I doubt Maddie will ever be found alive, but I would love to see justice done FOR the McCanns.

I've followed this case for years and all I ever heard was the same old mantra, "how could they leave the kids alone". Get over it, it happens, and maybe get onto what REALLY happened.

My opinion only

I guess you'll stay holed up in your home. Good grief. It irks me when
people say Ill never go to Portugal or Italy (Amanda Knox case) because of people's perception that they're bad people and their justice system is corrupt.


Millions of people travel to these beautiful countries and nothing ever happens.

Anyway just had to get that off my chest.


This case mirrors the Ramsey case in so many ways. I believe in the truth and one day it will be revealed.
 
What about Steven Birch's claim's ?

Not sure about his theory but if what he claims regarding scans is true it seems to back up this from Amaral's book:

" We officially request the help of the best experts in criminology and forensics but also the specialist dog team from the English police. A few days later, we welcome Mark Harrison, a specialist in murder, and the search for missing persons and victims of natural disasters. National advisor to the British police, he is well known for his exceptional professional experience. He has already participated in dozens of international criminal investigations.
(snip)
After a week of intense work, Harrison presents the results of his study to my coordinating group. Even if we were expecting it, his conclusions confirm our worst fears. The most plausible scenario is the following: there is no doubt that Madeleine is dead, and her body is hidden somewhere in the area around Praia da Luz.
He praises the quality of the work carried out by the Portuguese authorities in trying to find the little girl alive. According to him, the time has come to redirect the searches in order to find, this time, a body hidden in the surrounding area."

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.b...d-max=2009-06-08T14:18:00-07:00&max-results=1

More on birch
http://www.sovereignindependentuk.c...case-as-robert-murat-agrees-to-madeleine-dig/
 
This aspect hasn't really been mentioned.
It's very interesting if Murat has agreed to allow dig & timing of all this.

I'm not sure when that article was written. Does anybody remember if Murat finally allowed him to dig up the land? What's interesting and puzzling is Kate questioning this man. As the article states if your child was missing wouldn't you agree to anything to help find her dead or alive? (Paraphrasing)


Sadly if Madeleine is dead I don't think she was buried.
 
This is a weird case. It's either an abduction at one extreme end (at least that's what the most hard data points seems to suggest) or it is a pretty complicated collusion between the Tapas 9 to collectively cover up a crime. And I actually can't be really convinced by any of these extremes. The abduction just has a too low probability and no precedences in that area and the second one is just too complex to concoct successfully for such a long period of time.

The truth must be somewhere in the middle and the scenario also must be as simple as possible. A scenario like:

* Maddie woke up and left the apartment to search for her parents and got lost or met a stranger etc. But then why were the window and shutter suddenly open. Doesn't make sense.

* Either GM or MO accidentally killed Maddie or found her dead (like a via an overdose or MO picking her up and dropping her) and enacted an abduction. But then where is the body and how could they have ever disposed of her in the very limited time they had? Simply doesn't add up.

* There was a burglar or more burglars accessing the apartment via the window (note: two previous burglaries took place also around dinner time in April in the same block that Madeleine disappeared from. In both the April burglaries entry was gained via a window. That is quite a remarkable precedent !). Maddie caught them in the act and started to scream so they had to silence her but accidentally killed her. But then why not just leave the body behind and get out of the apartment asap? Why take the child with you, did they leave traceable DNA or her and is that the reason she had to disappear? Were they maybe caught in the act by MO as well when he did his inspection. Did she bite in one of their hands when they were holding her to prevent her from screaming? Were they afraid she would raise alarm to soon when they'd led her go and hence they decided to take her to a saver distance and leave her there?

In some way I like this simple burglary scenario since it clearly happened recently before, they also did it at dinner time, it was block 5 as well and they gained access via the window. It also happened 14 days after the previous event, hence for burglars a good interval for the dust to get settled and strike again. Also. if anyone of the 3 children would have woken up from this burglary, it must have been Maddie, so it also answers the question why Maddie and not one of the twins was taken. But then I still need a good reason for a burglar who is only trying to snatch some quick money/jewelry ending up with the need to take a child with him.

I can imagine Maddie getting out of bed and catching him in the act e.g. going through her parents stuff in their bedroom. And I could even conceive of this happening at the same time when MO came in through the patio and the burglar was in the parents bed room (i.e. he was trapped), hence he grabbed Maddie and silenced her (maybe to harsh because she still made a sound or by holding her hand across her face to tight). So, he was extremely lucky that MO only spotted the children's bedroom door being wider open that GM left it and that he didn't spot Maddie not being in her bed or the window being open. But then again why take her with you? This only makes sense when he accidentally killed her this way and had to enact an abduction and needed to remove all traces from this simple burglary that totally got out of hand.

Thoughts?
 
I guess you'll stay holed up in your home. Good grief. It irks me when
people say Ill never go to Portugal or Italy (Amanda Knox case) because of people's perception that they're bad people and their justice system is corrupt.


Millions of people travel to these beautiful countries and nothing ever happens.

Anyway just had to get that off my chest.


This case mirrors the Ramsey case in so many ways. I believe in the truth and one day it will be revealed.

I've been to Italy, a couple of times since the Knox case. Never did I say I'd never GO there.

Portugal may be another matter, although I never said I would not go there either. I said, I would not move there, and I am looking about, seriously, for another place to live.

Reading comprehension and honesty in quoting is important in these cases. there is nothing to be gained by twisting words. I believe we all want the truth, at least I hope so.
 
The mobile phone and creche records are the secret to this. IMO they will reveal that Maddie died earlier in the holiday.

Earlier? You mean when? She was in the creche 3rd of May, seen by nannies.

IMO The Smith sighting is either Gerry McCann or a faked sighting which the Smiths stated to protect Murat saying the abductor was not him.

Why the Smiths would protect Murat, actually? And we do not know if the person seen by Smiths was the abductor. Might be as well another dad, coming back from the creche.
 
And I sincerely hope the deficiencies in the initial investigation, as well as the prejudices - as good a word as any - will come to light. Remind me not to move to Portugal - thank you.

I never suspected the parents, there was no reason, but there were pedophiles. One lived real close, or am I wrong?

I doubt Maddie will ever be found alive, but I would love to see justice done FOR the McCanns.

I've followed this case for years and all I ever heard was the same old mantra, "how could they leave the kids alone". Get over it, it happens, and maybe get onto what REALLY happened.

My opinion only

Funny that the only PREJUDICES I saw was written by posters defending the McCanns, even to the point of calling the PJ fat cigar swilling pork chops...not very nice either.

Also there were NO deficiencies in the initial investigation please link me where there were any?

I have a close friend who lives in Portugal she has for years, and never once had a burglary or come to that any other problem whilst living there.

Apparently we are never much farther then 6 feet away from rats, so I expect the same can be said of pedophiles, you just never know who is living next door to you or even how many professionals you might see in your life have a penchant for children sadly.

Well what did REALLY HAPPEN. I have never once seen any posts regarding a an abduction. I have written one, but I have never seen anyone come forward and suggest what ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Oh and as to mantra they left the children alone, well hello, if they hadnt the child would still be with the parents and her siblings.

What makes me cross is right behind them in the Tapas is where the night creche was located. They could have easily left the children there, had their meal and drinks, and then took the kids home.

I will NEVER FORGIVE THEM ever, never for leaving her, and even more so after they LEFT HER the next night after crying for her parents as CONFIRMED by the mouth of the mother.

No never....so sue me.
 
My family stayed in the same resort in Portgual twice circa 97 / 99 and they have said baby sitting facilities were readily available. A lot of the kids club workers would do baby sitting in the evening to earn a bit of extra money and theu babysat for me and my siblings. We were aged around 3 / 5 / 10 at the time.

I dont understand why if baby sitting and a creche was so available that a responsible parent would choose to leave children alone?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
682
Total visitors
776

Forum statistics

Threads
625,980
Messages
18,517,927
Members
240,920
Latest member
LynnKC84
Back
Top