Follow by Email

Total Pageviews

Tuesday, 15 March 2011

Madeleine McCann: Letter to the Editor (revisited)

I have actually just been emailed this, which I believe was originally submitted to the ANORAK site, although I think it was translated and published in Portugal.

Written over 2 and a half years ago, I had actually forgotten all about it! Reading it again makes me realise just how little things have changed in this case! It was, (and still IS), intended to lambast the Press and how they can inform and shape the lives of people who read their words. It also serves to illustrate that, (as I am FOREVER reiterating), it is not just about what really happened in Praia da Luz in 2007, but about the obvious and glaring contradictions in what we are TOLD happened.

Or didn't, as the case may be......  

Dear Mr. Editor………

I’m quite sure that you are very busy, organising your hacks and other staff, clearing away space on the front pages of your newspapers to make way for tomorrows joyous headlines, not to mention the inevitable ‘’pull out and keep’’ 10 page insert guide, explaining the tragic chain of events that have had to be endured by Saint Gerry & Kate of Rothley.

“Bungling/Boozy/Inept/ Sardine Munching Porto Plods finally admit defeat!!”,“The agony goes on for our Kate & Gerry” and “Vindicated at last!!”,

Just some, I am CERTAIN, of the headlines that we will all be reading about in the next couple of days. Readers will then be subjected to innumerable column inches over the coming weeks, with poignant articles from Richard Madely, Amanda Pearson, Carol Malone et al, explaining how they had all ‘been there’ for our illustrious golden couple, supporting them in their hour ofneed, joining forces to combat and admonish those ‘vile evil whisperings’ that were emanating along the corridors of certain internet forums and blogs.

No doubt, celebs’ agents are already in negotiation with tabloid editors,all lining up to prepare their clients to express their solidarity by way of ‘exclusive interviews’; “as a parent myself, I can’t imagine what hell they have had to go through………by the way, my new book, which is out this

Who knows?. Almost certainly an OBE or two will be in the pipeline, especially if the McCanns are allowed to take credit for the European ‘AMBER ALERT’.

Clarence Mitchell will almost certainly be given greater impetus, either directly or otherwise, to organise the Government’s Media Monitoring Unit, to clamp down and to CLOSE down those websites and bloggers that influence sufficient numbers of people to be potentially detrimental to New Labours diktats, (as he did the MIRROR Forum).

Tony ‘Glenda’ Parsons, will undoubtedly have accrued sufficient soundbites to keep his Mirror column going for the next 2 years.

But, Mr. Editor, just before you fall asleep at night in your bed, having finished the proof reading to your simpering, sycophantic, subservient homage to Clarence Mitchell’s release, please give a little thought to the following:-

Irrespective of what the Portuguese announce on Monday, the 20th July, there are a number of serious issues and questions which, FAR from being answered, have actually never been ASKED.

It may very well please you and whoever is dictating your editorial policy to perpetually vilify and BLAME the Portuguese authorities, their police or even their subjects for every aspect of the Madeleine McCann tragedy, but that would not explain, in any way, the following:–

The suspicions surrounding the McCanns and their possible involvement in the disappearance of their daughter arose, NOT because the Policia Judiciaria were inept and clueless, but because the McCanns made inaccurate statements, from the outset - statements about their movements, the movements of their friends, about the state and condition of how they found the apartment and the shutters, statements about what they discovered and discussed.

We ‘know’ that they made inaccurate statements because what they said directly contravened and countered what the other stated, as well as what some of their friends stated. And they can’t ALL have been correct. Inaccurate statements, Lies or omissions?

Likewise, it wasn’t the ‘bungling Porto plod’ that strongly suspected or suggested that Madeleine may have died in the apartment.

It was a couple of British dogs. Specialist canines, who have a LONG and proven history and success rate in determining and locating the precise areas of residual tissue and and materials relating to cadavers. Specialist dogs who have a proven track record across virtually every Constabulary across the UK.

Not, I am sure, that you will give much credence or space to their findings in Portugal, but HOW would you propose to explain away their behaviour in Praia da Luz, in the apartment, on Kate McCanns clothes and belongings? Having a bad day? Inconclusive? The fact that it is not wholly admissible in a Court of Law?

And what about that car boot sample? The Birmingham FSS, the acknowledged, finest Forensic science laboratory in the world? Martin Brunt is STILL on the Sky News website video, reporting a “100% DNA Match to Madeleine McCann”. Was he misinformed? Contaminated sample? Mistaken Process? Total fabrication? We may never know, especially given that the British authorities are fighting to ensure that particular aspect of this case remains secret. (Have you ever asked
yourself why that is?, Mr. Editor, or are you simply not permitted to question Mr. Mitchells rhetoric?)

Are you also, Mr.Editor, going to lambast those bungling, inept, incapable LEICESTERSHIRE police, who were also widely reported as concurring, and in some cases even SUGGESTING, that Madeleine died in the apartment on that first night in May?

“ Licentious, lacklustre, Leicester Police loonies!” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it, does it Mr.Editor?

Friends in high places? Curious RICH associates and backers, underhand Government assistance? Prime Ministerial blessings, chats and advice?. Papal divine intervention, European and world leaders hob-nobs?. It’s all there Mr. Editor. Enough material to sell a billion Sunday journals. So why no interest?

You see, Mr. Editor; I don’t really know what happened in Praia da Luz in May of last year. I don’t know why, how or when. I wasn’t there. Neither were you. We can only listen to those that are either close to, or aligned to, the proceedings in question.

It boils down to who and what you want to believe.

I am reminded of Herman Goering. He once stated, “It’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy” How right he was.

I realised just how right he was when George Bush convinced the majority of his people that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11, just before he embarked on the massacre of an estimated 600,000 Iraqi men, women and children, just so that Halliburtons could procure the rich oil fields; (FAT lot of good THAT did with the current oil price, but I digress.)

What I particularly hate about THAT atrocity, is that the British went ahead and held his hand while he did it. Only at least Blair gave the British people SOME credit. He knew we wouldn’t buy the 9/11 angle, so he made up the WMD’s story, inventing documents, dossiers and ‘intelligence’ as he went along.

“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy”

Charles de Mendez? We would know for sure, exactly what happened to him, poor chap, were we to examine the countless surveillance video of the event. Except, for some reason, we can’t. Because the tape is apparently damaged or lost, or the cameras malfunctioned or were facing the wrong way or were broken or vandalised. Or all of the above.

And of course, when Neil Mackay sensationally reported in 2003 that “senior members” of the Labour Government were being investigated for “pedophilia and the “enjoyment” of child-sex pornography”, as part of the infamous ’Operation Ore’, Tony Blair very quickly and effectively served a D.A NOTICE on the press and media, banning details of these matters being reported. A ban that still
stands today. A sublime example of how a Government and its press can lie, mislead and fool its people.

“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy”

So, you see, Mr. Editor. You will have to forgive me if I choose not to believe a single word that your paper publishes on the Madeleine Mccann case.

You will have to excuse me if I do not join in the rejoicing and celebrations when the illustrious couple are exonerated , nor contribute to their inevitable NEW fund to help them “find their daughter”.

Because, although it may be ultimately true that there is insufficient evidence to prove the culpability of the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, there is most definitely AMPLE and OVERWHELMING evidence that the authorities of this country do not wish for the truth to ever come out.

BUT; if there IS a god, and the leaders who presided over this debacle and cover up ever have to stand and atone before him, then rest assured that their minions:- the paltry, gutless, servile cowards who spread their lies and diktats in their respective newspapers, will have to atone also.

That’s YOU, Mr. Editor.

Perhaps you’d care to dwell on that point before you fall asleep tonight.

That and the image of a precious, angelic and innocent little girl for whom, with your able assistance, Justice was denied

Godbless, Madeleine. Wherever you may be.

Monday, 14 March 2011

Kate's Book Madeleine: No.1 in Bestseller FICTION list

Perhaps above all other cases, that of the missing girl, Madeleine McCann is enshrouded in the greatest tragedy and MYSTERY.

Irrespective of what actually happened to the little girl, the facts surrounding her disappearance and current whereabouts are not only unknown, but in the absence of any illuminating evidence or dramatic discovery, quite possibly will remain so for ever more.

The movements, behaviour and comments of her parents, Kate and Gerry McCann on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, together with those of their friends, have been the subject of much conjecture and speculation since May 2007.

Newspapers, both here and in Portugal, have previously suggested that the course of events as explained and propagated by what has come to be, disaffectionately, known as ‘TEAM McCANN’, did not stand up to scrutiny.

Contradictions galore, non-corroboration of ‘Tapas members’ statements and bizarre, inexplicable behaviour led some to suggest that the McCanns and their Holidaying compatriots were hiding something.

The PORTUGUESE Police, the previously World respected and renowned Polícia Judiciária, were rather less circumspect. Their report of September 2007 by Tavares de Almeida, then Chief Inspector, concluded, (amongst other things), that:

Madeleine McCann died in the Holiday apartment on 3rd May 2007.

A staged HOAX abduction took place.

The McCanns were involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter.

Of course, we now know this statement must be wrong. We know this because the then Police Inspector in charge of the investigation, Goncalo Amaral, was SACKED, after complaining about BRITISH Government “interference” in the case, enabling the British newspapers to clarify the whole matter and explain to us that he is, in fact, a “Boozy Porto Plod” and is forever to be referred to as that “Disgraced Maddie Cop”.

We also know that this Report must be untrue because that nice man Richard Desmond, (proprietor EXPRESS newspapers, amongst others) who decided to reprint some of the Portuguese Press’s reporting’s on the case, based on this PJ report, then went on to GIFT the McCann’s and their friends almost a MILLION POUNDS STERLING between them, ALL of which ended up in the Kate & Gerry fund... (SORRY...I mean the ‘Looking for Madeleine’ fund).  

Desmond, a man who enjoys a reputation as a rather FEARLESS and FEARSOME individual had his newspapers explain that there was in fact “no evidence whatsoever” to support the theory that the McCanns were involved in Madeleine’s death or her disappearance, specifying that they were “completely innocent of any involvement”

Along with the cash settlements, (for an Action that never even reached the jurisdiction of the Courts), the newspapers also included endless front page apologies, an act described as “unprecedented”, by Media commentator Roy Greenslade.

(Curiously, despite the fact that MANY OTHER journals and publications printed identical, and in some cases, FAR MORE inflammatory comments, they escaped both censure and litigation.)

And of course, we also know that Tavares de Almeida’s statements must be wrong because after Mr. Amaral was sacked and replaced, the ENTIRE PORTUGUESE POLICE AUTHORITIES were sacked by ‘Team McCann’, and replaced by those world renowned sterling crime fighters, Metodo 3, led by Senior Detective Clarence Mitchell.  

Mitchell’s frequent Press Conferences pleaded for information about a whole plethora of bizarre, contrived characters, plagiarised from that week’s tabloid paedophile story or courtesy of some never previously reported witness who had suddenly remembered some crucial bogey man or malevolent looking individual(s). 

 This, remarkably, in turn then coerced Jane Tanner into a moment of clarity; enabling Clarence to report that she believed these new ‘suspects’ to resemble the person Jane had witnessed carrying, what she believed to be Madeleine, away from the apartment on the night of May 3rd.  

Of course, Ms. Tanner’s testimony itself has long been the subject of scrutiny and discussion, not least because when she first spoke to the police about the ‘abductor ‘ she alleges to have seen,  she stated that she was unsure as to whether he was carrying anything or not. Some Month’s later however, she recalled that not only was he carrying something, but someONE, and that it was a little GIRL. 

Wearing PYJAMAS identical to the one’s Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing!

Of course, in any other circumstances, this ‘testimony’ (to which the Portuguese Authorities never afforded any significance or reliability), would be of only minor relevance, an incongruous anomly, were it not for the FACT that Tanner’s sighting forms the ONLY EVIDENCE that an abduction took place at all.

Fortunately for all concerned, not LEAST for the investigation, Jane was afforded the opportunity to clarify all these seeming inconsistencies and glaring contradictions in her ever-changing evidence, when she was interviewed by Leicestershire Police in April 2008. When asked to describe the man she saw in detail, she stated, (verbatim):

“You see, this is where, now, I'm really... I don't even know whether it's worth doing this, because there's been so much since then. I've had the... when they took me round for the surveillance to look at... and I'm guessing now it's MURAT they wanted me to look at and, you know.........all the other bits and bobs, I really don't know, but I think I'd prefer just to stick with what I said in my original statement, in terms of the... because, even... I mean, this is coming back to the sketch, even when I did the sketch, by that stage, you know, things were... were murky..... I needed to do that sketch that first night, I mean, they took me in to do the sketch, but they only had, errm... front facing software, know... and at that point I said, you know, is there?... can I do?... because the clothes and everything was the thing... was the thing that was the most in my mind then and I can remember saying to the chap I met on the stairs earlier......”

All clear? Good.

But of course, the MAIN reason why we know that Tavares de Almeida’s report is wrong is because in June 2008, the Portuguese produced another, FINAL report, as presented to the Attorney General, (although, remarkably, this didn’t mention that it invalidated the first, ‘interim’ report and in fact used much of its original content, without the specific conclusions of Almeida, of course).

This is THE report, according to ‘Team McCann’and the British Newspapers and Media ,that “Clears” the McCanns of any involvement in the disappearance of their daughter. We know this because Clarence perpetually refers to this report whenever he wishes to reinforce his client’s innocence. 

Tabloid AND Broadsheet headlines such as “Madeleine McCann police clear Kate & Gerry as they shelve case” (The Telegraph); “Kate and Gerry McCann cleared over Madeleine disappearance” (Sunday Times); “Kate and Gerry in clear” (The People) and  “Portugals TOP COP set to clear Kate and Gerry” (The SUN), are pretty unequivocal in their message: that the Portuguese finally admit what the British Press, the McCanns themselves and their supporters have been saying all along, which is that Kate and Gerry had no involvement in the disappearance of their daughter and that the Portuguese Authorities were very clearly the inept, “bungling Porto plod” that they were frequently described as.


That’s not quite the truth. It IS true that this report, (which lifted the arguido status of the McCanns, along with Robert Murat), concludes: “despite all that has been done and in spite of all our efforts and lines of enquiry, it has not been possible to obtain a solid and objective conclusion about what really happened that night, nor about the present location of Madeleine”. 

(It also clearly illustrates and DEMONSTRATES the HUGE and hardworking efforts made by the Authorities and the Portuguese people to try and find Madeleine, including securing the apartment, roadblocks, house to house searches and an account of ALL the intelligence and sightings that passed through their offices, unquestionably refuting the claims by ‘Team McCann’, their friends and the British Press that the Police were useless and ‘bungling’).

It is only recently that I have actually paid any real attention to this publically available report. My nefarious mind had previously concluded that it wouldn’t be worth reading as it was likely to have been written, at least in consultation with, and possibly agreed by, Senior Detective Clarence Mitchell.

However, it is abundantly clear, after having studied the document to any appreciable degree, that one must question exactly WHICH passages the British Media are referring to when they assert that the report “Clears” the McCann’s and their friends of any wrongdoing. 

In fact, one might question whether they have actually read the report at all, or have in fact read a DIFFERENT report. 

For I can think of no other explanation for them NOT addressing the following facts:

The report makes VERY clear that there were “inconsistencies” surrounding the evidence and testimonies of the McCanns and their friends, and that these inconsistencies could have been easily highlighted and addressed were it not for the “un-cooperation from several, relevant witnesses”.
It goes on to say that the Portuguese strove for a re-construction or “reconstitution” of KEY events, but that they could not as “some of the key members of the McCann holiday group” were unwilling to return to do so.

The report goes on to specify that there were CLEAR inconsistencies and irregularities with some of the statements provided by the McCanns and their friends, thus the need for a reconstruction, particularly in relation to Jane Tanners’ statements relating to her alleged sighting of a “supposed abductor”, specifically noting that at the precise same time, Gerry McCann and TV Producer Jeremy Wilkins were in the very same “narrow confines of space”, yet neither man saw either Tanner OR the alleged abductor.

The report ALSO suggests that a reconstruction was necessary to pinpoint HOW and WHEN an abductor could possibly have struck, given the regularity and frequency of the checks being made on the children, as asserted by the McCann’s and their friends. The report CLEARLY doubts not only this testimony, but also the ability of ANY abductor to enter and exit the apartment as proposed by the McCanns, through the small window of the apartment in the manner being suggested, whilst carrying a child.

More importantly, it suggests that the events as suggested by the McCanns and their friends contained  inconsistencies and irregularities relating to the WHOLE period spanning from around 5.30pm on the evening in question,(“the last time at which Madeleine and her siblings were seen by anyone other than her parents”), up until around 10pm when Madeleine was reported missing.

The Police’s dissatisfaction over the account of the events on May 3rd was, probably, partially because of, as is included in the documents, a “typed report produced by the McCann holiday group after a detailed joint meeting between them all. This report of theirs deals with their recollections about the events of the evening of 3rd May”

(The inference being that the McCanns and their friends submitted, as testimony to the investigation, their accounts of the night Madeleine was reported missing, AFTER they had all got together to discuss it and formulate it beforehand!)

But for ME, the biggest mystery of all relating to the ignoring by the media of this report lies in the inarguable evidence as unearthed by the specialist Enhanced Victim Recovery Dogs.

Although the report makes clear that these “canine markings”, made by Eddie and Keela, the famous specialist ‘Cadaver’dogs, were NOT corroborated by the FINAL FSS Laboratory results, :(“the material collected was not identified to pertaining to anyone specific”); it is OBVIOUS that the Portuguese WERE initially advised of a match to Madeleine McCann by the FSS, (SKY’s Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt was advised of a 100% Match to Madeleine, and reported as much on television, as did most other journals and media outlets with varying degrees of percentile match).

BUT the mere fact that these dogs ACCURATELY and UNQUESTIONABLY scented sources of cadaverine and other biologic materials in the McCanns apartment, their hire car and on the McCanns personal belongings, and ONLY IN AND ON THOSE PLACES and in NO OTHER APARTMENTS, CARS OR OBJECTS, is surely deserving of the attention of even the most obtuse journalist.

But NOW, it seems, there IS hope.

After years of “scurrilous allegations” *, “unhelpful and hurtful comments” * and “ludicrous speculation” *, (*©Copyright C. Mitchell), we are, it seems finally going to get THE, definitive, factually accurate and honest account of what really took place in Praia da Luz during that fateful summer of 2007.
In what is being billed as an “account of the truth” by KATE McCANN, the Daily Mail reports that “THE true story of Madeleine McCann's disappearance is set to be revealed in an explosive new book billed as the publishing sensation of the year”. 


I’m pretty sure that Richard Desmond must be trying to exact a little tongue-in-cheek revenge for his own, previously referred to, expensive publishing’s on the McCann case, for according to the Daily Express, Kate’s reasons for writing the book were “simple. To give an account of the truth.” However, the paper includes this statement directly adjacent to its note that Kate was signing, a “Multi-million pound publishing deal”.

So what can possibly be so “explosive” in this account? What secrets are set to be “sensational”? What is Kate set to REVEAL, in the book described in another tabloid as the book that is “set to reveal all”?

At the risk of ruining the plot for those set to form suitable and orderly queues outside their book stores, or those placing orders with their Newsagents to reserve their copies of the newspapers who are paying HUGE sums for the serialisation rights, I’m going to hazard an educated guess and propose a synopsis :-

1. The Portuguese Police are useless.

2. Madeleine was kidnapped, probably by a paedophile(s), or by someone on behalf of a paedophile(s).

3. The Portuguese police tried to frame Kate and Gerry.

4. Madeleine is alive, and will one day be reunited with her family, (as long as kind people and celebrities continue to send donations, items for auction and other forms of financial backing or pecuniary advantage).

5. The Portuguese Police are useless.

6. Erm...that’s it.

What the book probably will NOT contain, are any explanations or answers regarding the innumerable questions that many followers of this case might care to ask. 

Questions, perhaps, relating to shutters.
Broken or jemmied? Open or closed?
Windows open or closed?
Open or closed balcony doors?
Open or closed FRONT doors?
Doors closed and locked or doors closed and UNLOCKED?

All were testified to during those first interviews, (the breaking of the shutters aspect being widely broadcast and published during interviews with the McCanns’ relatives) but given that Kate made the discovery that her daughter was missing, SHE and only she knows for certain.

Nor, no doubt, will Kate probably explain WHY, when confronted with the IRREFUTABLE “canine markings” of the specialist dogs that detected the scent of BOTH cadaverine and biological fluids, signalling a DEAD human body, did the McCanns contact the lawyers of a man charged with murder who “successfully challenged sniffer dog evidence”, for advice.

Rather than break down uncontrollably at the revelation suggesting that their daughter had died in the apartment?

Perhaps Kate will also enlighten us as to why, in the dead of night, she clearly thought that the best person to find Madeleine would be a Roman Catholic priest?

And given that the McCanns have acquired something of a predilection for writing regularly to a whole host of celebrities and other individuals for DONATIONS, their latest fundraiser involving BAGS being donated by famous owners for a recently held auction to raise monies for their cause, (to which Kylie Minogue was a donor); perhaps Kate will touch on that famous BLUE tennis BAG of their own, a holdall that the Portuguese were so anxious to trace after it went missing.

The one that Martin Brunt’s documentary insisted “could hold the key to Madeleine’s disappearance”.
The one whose whereabouts BRITISH police tried to ascertain in subsequent Rogatory questioning of ‘Tapas’ members.

The one that that appeared in the photograph of the McCann apartment, as presented to Kate by the Portuguese Police, on the occasion she elected NOT to answer any one of the infamous “48 questions”.

The one that Clarence Mitchell insists NEVER EXISTED. “Gerry has never owned such a bag. As far as Kate and Gerry are concerned, there is no missing tennis bag. They came back from holiday with everything except of course, tragically, Madeleine”, he explains.

I have absolutely no doubts that Kate is going to regale us with horrendous stories about how she was pressured by the Portuguese Police, about that famous plea bargain deal, (as explained by Philomena McCann), that would see her serving a lighter sentence if she confessed to having been involved in Madeleine’s death.

But I equally have absolutely no doubt that she categorically WON’T explain the one thing that resulted in her being made an Arguida in the first place. The one that EVERY single Media outlet either completely missed, or elected NOT to probe or question. 

The one FACT that is there, in black and white, in the FINAL report. The report that Clarence swears by and the one that ‘Team McCann’ adhere to when explaining their complete innocence.

The one that appears under the Policia Judiciaria’s reasons for making the McCanns suspects:

“Kate Healy was not immediately made an arguida, but merely interviewed voluntarily as a witness. Only after her interview was she made an arguida, that is, after she was confronted with concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination”

“...concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination” ???
Do tell, Kate. What were these “concrete facts” that you were confronted with?

No doubt Kate will include in her writings the countless sleepless nights she experiences on a regular basis. 

The lying awake, thinking. 

Doubts, fears? Remorse. Guilt? Perhaps.

Perhaps also a touch of worry and concern? Worry at not knowing exactly what is in those other thousands of documents that the Portuguese still cling to? Or perhaps, given your seemingly endless number of friends in very high places, concern because you DO know what is in those documents?

As has always been, and perhaps always WILL be in this case; the questions keep on mounting, but the answers come not.

So, to conclude, I’m going to answer one of the questions that Kate will almost CERTAINLY answer herself, in her book. The question as to WHY she has persistently refused, (along with her husband and friends), to partake in a reconstruction?

Kate is going to say tell us she doesn’t trust the bungling, useless Portuguese Police; a force that, not only tried to “frame” her and her husband,  but failed to properly look for the person(s), who kidnapped her daughter. 

She is, no doubt, going to cite all the ‘evidence’ as obtained by Metodo 3, along with all the other dubious ‘detective agencies’, ex-special policemen and ‘Team McCann’ Media consultants POSING as ex- special policemen; evidence and suspects as printed in every paper in the UK ranging from Third World paedophile rings who “snatch to order”, to known dead convicted sex offenders who had a secret that they never quite confessed to.

The answer she ISN’T going to give is this one:

You can’t reconstruct a lie. You can’t reconstitute an illusion. Like all magic tricks, you can only ever show it to your audience once, or they will quickly work out how you did it.

Godbless Madeleine McCann, wherever you may be.....................