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 3^rd 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 3^rd.  

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, so...you 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.

Except.

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 3^rd 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 3^rd 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”. 

(Explosive?)

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.....................

What KATY did next...........

I would hesitate to assert that I actually ‘enjoy’ a reputation of being a vociferous critic of Kate and Gerry McCann.


I have always found it most amusing and occasionally frustrating, (and still do) that, given that I consider myself a sometime serious investigative journalist of quite a few proud achievements over an 18 year period, that my moniker should only ever be associated with my musings over and a video relating to an, (as yet), unsolved and unfathomable missing child case.


When I consider the multitudinous blogs and websites that vilify and subject the McCann’s to all kinds of conjecture and curious conspiracy theories, I am forever surprised at the severity of the responses, abuse and messages that find their way into my mailbox. After all, I have NEVER specifically accused them of anything.


I have never, for instance, lambasted them for leaving their children unattended, which they DID, certainly to a much greater degree than they would have us believe, (although I always found it odd why they didn’t accept the available night-time babysitting services, especially given that their 3 children spent the majority of their holiday daytime in the day care nursery).


Nor have I ever really criticised the rather chilling and clinical formation of the ‘Look for Madeleine’ project, especially so SOON after the little girl’s disappearance; basically a slickly rolled out Limited Company designed to create money and, erm....., create money.


No. My criticisms and barbed comments have generally been reserved for their toadying supporters, the ‘Z’ list, (and occasional ‘A’ list) celebrities who managed to think they could enhance their profile by aligning themselves to the McCann’s cause celebre.


I will admit to having frequently given special mention of course, to the British PRESS, whose Editorial policy is very clearly being dictated to them by way of a combination of bullying, back-scratching and financial incentives. (Not to mention the THREATS by some of the big companies to refrain from spending any more of their advertising budget with them, as has been pointed out to me by a former Senior News Editor).

I may also have lambasted certain factions of the previous ‘Nu Labour’ administration, (including the Premier Gordon Brown) who, on occasions, apportioned more time intervening, arranging World leader meetings and Papal visits for them and making personal telephone calls to them than the time spent for some of the duties they were elected to undertake!.

It is true, also, I have to admit that I might have reserved a harsh word or two for the utterly unique, unenviable and one time ubiquitous Clarence Mitchell.

Whoever decided that Mr. Mitchell would be the best spokesperson and general representative for a couple at one time facing serious criminal charges is a mystery to me all on its own.

For here is a man whose very raison d’être is to fabricate, concoct and invent; a man whose most prolific previous appointment was to basically SPY on the British population by way of monitoring their opinions, thoughts and deeds in his role as the Head of the Central Office of Information’s ‘Media Monitoring Unit’.

His role? To basically ‘eavesdrop’ and gauge public opinion, compare it to what the Government’s desired views were/are and to control and influence that opinion towards the Government’s way of thinking.
OR, as the official description states:

“The Central Office of Information (COI) is the Government's centre of excellence for marketing and communications. Since 1946 we have worked in partnership with government departments and the public sector to drive best practice and cost effectiveness in the way citizens are informed, engaged and influenced about issues that affect their lives – from health and education to benefits, rights and welfare”.

Yes. Quite. I prefer my description.


But Clarence is not a man who lives and works by any convictions, morals, principles, general beliefs or LOYALTIES. Clarence is a man for HIRE. For ANY cause, as long as the price is right.

It is telling, is it not, that the man, who was instrumental in formulating the Nu Labour marketing and communications as head of their ‘Media Monitoring’, should subsequently work for the , erm...CONSERVATIVES during their last Election campaign as erm.......Head of Media Monitoring?!

Like a mad scientist from a James Bond movie, Clarence is basically a man who is precision skilled in snooping on what a Nation thinks, controlling the information that leads them to think that way, then MODERATING said information in order to make them think in another way!

It is a sure FACT that the huge plethora of stories that appear in virtually every British publication, relating to Madeleine McCann, have either been penned by, or certainly OK’d, by Clarence Mitchell.

Every Maddie “sighting”, persistent theory of abduction, every tale of evil paedophile rings in far off lands; every detective, private investigator, super-sleuth and other assorted odd witnesses who appear in the press with the latest theory/evidence/experience about where Madeleine was, is or could be, would have received the Clarence seal of approval.

If you were to ask me 5 years ago whether I thought that any GROUP,( let alone an individual), would or COULD, ever be powerful or influential enough to curtail a globally popular Internet FORUM, to basically close it down, then I would have laughed.

Yet that is exactly what Clarence Mitchell did, at a stroke.

The MGM Mirror Group’s popular Forum, relating to Madeleine McCann, and subscribed to by an estimated several hundred thousand readers, disappeared without a trace and without warning, save for a brief, single line explanation about ‘abuse' issues.

At the time of its closing, I was told by a Mirror contributing journalist close to the Editor that officially the HOME Office had exerted pressure, but that it was, indeed, Mr. Mitchell who had been the successful applicant. (Mitchell has subsequently confirmed his role in closing down the Forum).

Such is the power and influence that the man exerts.

Here is a man who hangs his coat on any major news-line that comes along, enabling him to spread his own agenda. Any other poor soul unfortunate enough to suffer a missing or MURDERED child, (or missing/murdered person of ANY age), is sure to have their publicity hijacked by the “thoughts and prayers” of Kate and Gerry.

Any tale of people trafficking or child sex exploitation anywhere in the world is sure to be met with the assurance from Clarence that “Kate and Gerry are keeping an eye on developments”, intoning that such developments might lead them to Madeleine.

Not to worry if there aren’t any sufficiently reported tragedies taking place; Clarence will find another angle.

The ongoing saga of the Cell ‘phone Voice Mail ‘bugging’ escapades by the News of the World inspired our man! Despite there been absolutely no evidence to support it, and the fact that the Scotland Yard investigation has revealed nothing to validate it, Clarence is adamant that his Mobile Phone was bugged!

By whom and for what purpose he doesn’t exactly make clear, but it does give him the opportunity to spread several column inches about his clients across every journal that will listen.

And, maddeningly, they all love to listen to Clarence.

But I digress.

I have NEVER judged them, per se. Never passed comment on their general behavior, their demeanor, their curious and sometimes strange responses and reactions to questions posed to them.

I have never assumed anything untoward in their lack of genuine emotion, nor opined as to why Kate behaved the way that she did when being made an official Arguido, (not just the unanswered questions, but also certain irregularities relating to members of MI5 who were in attendance, according to Portuguese Intelligence officers).

OK, I DID make a comment about how lacking in conviction they made themselves look when they made an extensive Press Conference where the McCanns stated that they “would NOT leave Portugal without Madeleine”, 24 hours before being made official Arguidos and around 60 hours before, erm...........leaving Portugal without Madeleine.

But I have NEVER criticised or seriously questioned a specific act that either Kate or Gerry have undertaken.

Until now.


Claudia Lawrence, a 35 year old British woman, was last seen in March of 2009. The pain and trauma relating to her absence and to the uncertainty of her whereabouts must surely be immense for those who know her and to all whom Claudia means something.

Her fate is unknown.

On Sunday 27th February, a candle-lit vigil marking Claudia’s 37th Birthday was held at York Minster, presided over by the Archbishop of York.

Of course, it is true that in his local newspaper, Peter Lawrence, Claudia’s father, was reported as saying that he was “keen that other people who have had a relative or loved one go missing will attend the vigil – there is an open invitation.”

However, given that there is absolutely nothing, ostensibly, linking Madeleine McCann to Claudia Lawrence over and above the MANY thousands of other missing persons in the UK, a CYNICAL bastard might suggest that such an event merely presents a golden opportunity for Kate McCann to be photographed lighting a candle, pictured in every newspaper covering the event.

But such a vile publicity stunt would surely be way beyond the realms of what even Clarence and the McCanns would deem to be decency.

It would surely be beyond the limits of even the British Press, to allow such a poignant and sad vigil to be upstaged by using such a photo opportunity. It would never happen.

Right?

Oooer..I can hear my email INBOX bleeping already..........

My Mate Nige.....................

My mate Nige was a curious looking chap. A quintessential ‘nerd’, I decided, when I first set eyes on him, with his mop of mousy, blonde locks, dowdy clothes and unfashionable spectacles.

He painted a most unassuming picture. Together with his softly spoken Yorkshire dialect, it would be very easy to deem him a bit ‘wimpish’.

But he epitomised the reason for the adage about looks being deceptive.

For Nigel was a REAL tough cookie; an Investigations Producer at the BBC, with a sharp mind and an even sharper wit.

A great journalist, he had worked as Associate Producer to John Pilger in a BAFTA winning documentary and had other award nominations for his BBC work.

I had known him for a few years but I didn’t get to know him well until earlier this year when I worked with him. He needed someone big, brash and ugly to work undercover in South London and he charmingly thought me perfect for the task.

Not that he couldn’t have done the job himself. Nige had trodden the deserts and dusty roads of IRAQ for a BBC documentary at great risk to his personal safety. There was certainly nothing and no-one by way of London’s’ unsavoury characters that fazed him too much, as many of the ‘victims’ of his stings and exposés had discovered, to their cost.

In fact, it was always a matter of some consternation on MY part that he would insist on being dropped off in the less than salubrious areas of London, often at night time, whilst I went on to attend to the investigation at hand. I would then often have to drive around in darkness, looking for him when it came to collecting him, losing him on MORE than one occasion.

His wife, Marie, was a beautiful Mauritian, and I joked to him that his children, two girls, had clearly inherited their Mother’s good looks.

But the truth was that, Nige was a man of great warmth, character, charm, humour and honesty, and it was impossible for anyone who knew him not to love him.

His unimposing frame and appearance also belied another factor; he was a good athlete and an accomplished MARATHON runner.

In April of this year, he ran the London Marathon in an impressive time, collecting funds for his favourite charity, “War Child”. His experiences in Iraq had shown him the lost and blighted lives of the youngest victims of war.

Ironically, it was shortly after this Marathon that Nigel began to feel unwell.

He thought he might have had a bit of a stomach ulcer and went for a check up.

He was diagnosed with Stomach cancer. A large tumour.

I learned of his illness through a close mutual friend and colleague and I was quick to offer whatever help or support I could.

I found him in resilient mood, as I expected. The doctor’s were optimistic, he said. They had caught the cancer reasonably early and tests suggested that it hadn’t spread.

He was prescribed bouts of Chemotherapy in order to shrink the tumour, to be followed up by surgery in late 2010 to remove his stomach.

We kept in fairly regular contact, via email and telephone. There were a couple of brief periods where I didn’t hear from him, but I expected this and knew that this was when the worst periods of his treatment were taking place and he was either too ill to speak or write, or he simply wanted to be left alone with his wife and children.

Whenever he DID communicate, he was always optimistic, 'though realistic. He wrote:-

“I have so many fences to jump. Some days every fence seems like Beecher's Brook on others not so high”.

I know that his worst moments were when he “drifted off” as he called it, and he thought about his girls “too much”.

Finally, ‘though, I was delighted to receive a ‘phone call from him. He reported that the tumour had shrunk “dramatically”, that his appetite had increased greatly and that he was starting to eat more and more.

His surgery had now been postponed until the New Year. He still knew that the removal of his stomach was no small task, and that he would have to dramatically change how often and how much he ate afterwards, but that was a surmountable problem in his eyes.

He was starting his third bout of Chemotherapy and he was now genuinely hopeful for the future. The author, explorer and ex-SAS soldier, Mike Asher, with whom Nige had worked with in Iraq, had booked him in for a 14 day camel trek in the Sudan/Khartoum in 2011, and he was more than confident that he would fulfil it.

His relief was tangible and he sounded almost elated. We made plans to catch up, within the following couple of weeks, for a drink or perhaps lunch.

The last words I said to him was that it was going to be a truly great Christmas in his family home.

I didn’t hear from him over the subsequent few weeks. I DID have a couple of ‘Missed Calls’ from him, on my mobile. HIS ‘phone, likewise, rang before going through to voicemail when I tried to return them. I wasn't unduly concerned for this was pretty much how our telephone conversations had always transpired, each missing each others' calls and leaving messages for the other.

By the time I heard from the same mutual close friend that he had deteriorated, he was already in a Hospice.

The cancer had spread to his liver, and had assumed its most aggressive form.

I hurriedly made arrangements to visit him on the following Friday.

He died on the Wednesday.

It would be wrong and presumptuous of me to assert that Nigel was a really “close” friend. Our paths never crossed in sufficient enough numbers, nor for a long enough period of time, for that.

But it is a testament to the degree of respect, admiration and love that I obviously had for the man that his passing has hit me harder than I could ever have imagined.

Frustratingly, (and painfully), I also find myself wondering if those missed calls were his way of saying the goodbye's I, myself, was too late in making.

I DO derive some comfort from the fact that I know our friendship, together with my words of support and encouragement, DID mean a lot to him. I shall forever retain the emails where he states so.

Nige was just 44 years old. His little girls aged perhaps 5 and 7.

I truly hope that the immense pride that they will surely feel for their father will eventually override the pain and sense of loss that they will undoubtedly have, each and every Christmas that they spend on this earth.

For me, I shall forever feel honoured and immensely grateful for the all too short period of time that he was in my life.

It isn’t true that only the good die young. But Nige was way too young and way too good to go so soon.

Goodnight, Godbless, Nige wherever you may be.

Madeleine McCann ------- The Scriptures According to the McCanns

After having successfully BANNED the sale and further publication of Goncalo Amaral’s book about the investigation into their missing daughter, (although that ban was subsequently overturned by the Lisbon Appeals Court, Kate & Gerry are STILL badgering away at the Portuguese judicial system to enforce the original ruling); The McCanns have announced that they are writing a book of their OWN, highlighting what is described as the “charting of Kate and Gerry McCann's desperate search for their daughter who disappeared”.

Kate McCann is quoted as saying "My reason for writing is simple -- to give an account of the truth."

However, given that the book was the subject of a “fierce bidding war”, (trade-speak for ridiculous sums of money offered, together with a big advance), I would suggest the REAL reason for the book is rather self-evident.


It was written with a “very heavy heart”, says Kate, but adds that "Every penny we raise through its sales will be spent on our search for Madeleine. Nothing is more important to us than finding our little girl."


On a PERSONAL level, I welcome the publication of this book most avidly.


One of the reasons why the McCanns have escaped so much criticism from some quarters of the Press and Media, (barring the direct interference from high placed ‘friends’ who have thus far managed to dictate the Editorial policy of MANY publications, programmes, and documentaries), is because they have been so RETICENT in explaining much of their own actions, observations and involvement in the judicial procedures surrounding the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance.




Indeed, what little they HAVE stated, on camera, (and by way of Gerry’s infamous, now defunct ‘blog’), has been rather obscure and ambiguous at best; bizarre, contrived and lacking credibility at worst. Perhaps their account of the investigation into their missing daughter will cast new light on what is a rather inexplicable case?

However, I fear that they have been rather ill-advised to state that the book will “Chart Kate and Gerry McCann's desperate search for their daughter”.

For, as I have stated on MORE than one occasion, it is a complete LACK of any evidence supporting their search for their daughter which has created much unease in my personal assimilation of the whole affair.

They created a MULTI-Million pound business/fund/website/engine/charity/, entitled “Looking for Madeleine”, yet LOOKING is the very thing I have never known them do.

Never. Ever.


Not even on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, do any documents, statements or witnesses refer to any ‘searching’ or ‘looking’.


Lots of contradictory statements exist amongst the McCanns and their Tapas friends, regarding their movements, actions and observations leading up to, during and AFTER Madeleine’s disappearance, but nothing that seems to suggest any actual LOOKING. At ANY time.


With the inexorable complicity of Clarence Mitchell, (not to mention Government Ministers, including Gordon Brown), the McCanns were afforded audiences with the POPE, together with Political leaders from around the world.

They even were instrumental in being consulted in the formulation of possible new LAWS, designed to improve the processes of finding missing children. But of any actual LOOKING for Madeleine, there was none.

Whistle-stop tours took in Europe and the US, including the WHITE HOUSE, no less, for publicity and fund-raising stunts. But no actual searching.

The Internet is awash with a whole plethora of conspiracy theories surrounding the case of Madeleine McCann. From the ridiculous to the preposterous, they are all there. Some, perhaps, more than others having an element or modicum of truth.


I have often been asked, what the most important factor is in my unease over the case of Madeleine McCann.

What is it, I am pressed, that makes me so uncomfortable about their demeanour, their behaviour and their actions? Why, in the absence of any conclusive or irrefutable evidence, should I so be critical of them?



It is this one, single solitary factor..........

In early August, 2007, a Child Therapist saw a young girl of whom she stated that she was “100% sure”, was Madeleine McCann, in a restaurant in the town of Tongerin near the Dutch border.

Of course, there had been many “sightings” of Madeleine since her disappearance. It is not unusual to receive such witness sightings in a missing person case, and it would be ridiculous, counter-productive and, indeed, inadvisable to pursue every apparent sighting.

But this was different.

This was a RELIABLE, sound, lucid witness of a high professional standing, giving a detailed, credible and accurate witness testimony.

It was considered important enough by the authorities to seal off the entire area, create several APB's and road-blocks for Madeleine and her apparent 'captors', and to dispatch a specialist Forensics team to the location. There, they procured a GLASS, believed to have been used and drunk out of by ‘Madeleine’, in order to undertake in-depth DNA and fingerprint analysis.

I have spoken to many people, mainly parents, about their opinions on this particular instance.

ALL were unanimous in their conclusions.

That had THEY received such credible, likely and STRONG evidence that their missing daughter had been seen, then nothing, but NOTHING would have stopped them from IMMEDIATELY going to that location, no matter HOW remote.

In actual fact, it was a mere couple of hours flight away from Praia de Luz.

The McCanns, instead, chose to drive to HUELVA, in Spain, to “hand out leaflets”, even though it was a BANK Holiday and barely no-one was around..............................

For me, the only possible explanation as to why they DIDN’T rush to that little Belgium town, where the eyes of the whole WORLD were concentrated, awaiting some news that the little girl might be safe and sound................................was because they KNEW it couldn’t be Madeleine.

So I shall be READING the McCann book with great interest, as I am sure, will a LOT of other people. I have a LOT of questions that I need answering. A lot of obfuscation that perhaps their book can make clear.

Of course, the McCanns and their supporters might argue that given the enormous amount of heartbreak, pressure and pain that they have suffered, not to mention the length of time that has elapsed since Madeleine’s disappearance; it won’t be easy recalling everything that has passed.

For me, I prefer to concur with an old adage once penned by Mark Twain:-

That if you tell the TRUTH, you don’t have to remember...............

The McCanns Chief SUSPECT: Now let's FIND him!

Kate and Gerry McCann are said to be “delighted” at the huge support for their petition calling for a review of the case into their “missing” daughter.

Additionally, the Portuguese Authorities are said to be considering re-opening their investigations.

HOWEVER, given the predilection of the McCann’s, their PR ‘persona-non-grata’ Clarence Mitchell, together with their friends, lackeys and supporters for INSISTING that any investigation is to concentrate SOLELY on the factors that THEY want concentrating on; PLUS of course, the PJ’s inability to be anything other than the “bungling Porto plod”; I thought it important that the investigators should be reminded and refreshed regarding the CHIEF SUSPECT whom they should be seeking.

By way of guidance to this suspect, I feel it only fair and appropriate to “concentrate”, solely on the ONLY witness whom Team McCann and the British Media elect to believe and trust.

Jane Tanner.

So then, attention all bulletins:-

We are seeking a
MALE
Height:5' 10" (25 May 2007)/5' 8" or 5' 9" (05 June 2007)/5' 7" to 5' 11" (09 June 2007)/5' 8" to 5' 10" (26 October 2007)/5' 9" (28 October 2007)/5' 6" (16 November 2007)/“Probably 5ft 8in tall, he was taller than me but not 6ft and so between those two” (19 November 2007)

Age:
35-40

Hair:
Hair that was short on top (25 May 2007)/Dark hair, parted to one side, slightly longer at the back (05 June 2007)/Dark hair (26 October 2007)/Black hair (28 October 2007)/
“ the one thing that I remember a lot is the hair. He did seem to have quite a lot of dark, reasonably-long-to-the-neck hair' (19 November 2007)

Skin:
White (25 May 2007)/Caucasian (09 June 2007)/Caucasian with southernEuropean/Mediterranean appearance (26 October 2007)/
“More local or Mediterranean looking'/'swarthy skin” (19 November 2007)

Top clothes:
Dark jacket (25 May 2007)/Dark jacket, slightly longer than a suit jacket (05 June 2007)/Wearing a maroon shirt (28 October 2007)/Heavy dark coat (19 November 2007)

Trousers:
Beige or golden long trousers (25 May 2007)/Light coloured trousers which may have been beige or mustard coloured (05 June 2007)/Camel-coloured trousers (28 October 2007)/
“He was wearing quite a lot of clothes and that's one thing in hindsight again I think was quite odd because tourists when they're abroad, Brits abroad would always have cropped trousers or shorts or something, and he had a sort of a big heavy jacket and trousers on” (19 November 2007)/

“He was dressed in that sort of smart casual way European people dress” (19 November 2007)

Build:
Medium (25 May 2007)/Slim (26 October 2007)

Shoes:
Dark shoes (25 May 2007)/Black or brown shoes (28 October 2007)

Original Description:
“The man was carrying a bundle, possibly blankets or clothes”

Child's description:
“I could tell it was a child, and I could see the feet and the bottom of the pyjamas, and I just thought that child's not got any shoes on because you could see the feet.” (19 November 2007)

Child's clothes:
“the pyjamas had a pinky aspect to them so you presume a girl.”



Got that? All Clear?

Now let's FIND him.

And leave no stone unturned......................

EXPRESS Newspapers Versus the McCanns. Richard Desmond's Halloween Prank

Can it be that Richard, "Dirty" Desmond, (Proprietor of the Express Newspapers), is playing a bit of a late Halloween prank on Kate and Gerry McCann?

How else to explain this morning's Sunday Express story, "Madeleine McCann: Did the Camera Hold Vital Clue?"

(http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/210032/Madeleine-McCann-Did-the-camera-hold-vital-clue- )

Of course, ostensibly, to the uninitiated, it rather reads like the "Disgraced Porto Plod", (Goncalo Amaral), is apologising for his department apparently having WIPED a CCTV tape which may have shown Madeleine's "abductor".

Of course, this would be quite normal fayre for the British Media, given their predilections when reporting on this case; to sympathise with the poor parents and to remind everyone just how useless the Portuguese are.

Except.

A name.

Martin Smith.

For Martin Smith, apparently, witnessed someone carrying a child on the night of Madeleine's disappearance. The most interesting aspect of his STATEMENT, made to the Portuguese Authorities however, came some time after the sighting.

"Reported that he passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th of May and returned to the U.K. Is saying that after seeing McCANNS on the news on 9th of September when they returned to the U.K. He has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 pm news on BBC and saw the McCANNS getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the other male seen the night Maddy went missing. He also watched ITV news and SKY news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children"

Now, Mr. Amaral made direct reference to this in his Book, " Maddie - A Verdade da Mentira" - 'The Truth of the Lie" a book which the McCanns were originally successful in BANNING, until recently where the Lisbon Appeal Court overturned that ruling.

What we have to consider is whether or not Goncalo would have omitted to share Mr. Smith's assertions with the JOURNALIST, James Murray, in the EXPRESS story.

EXTREMELY unlikely, unless Mr. Amaral now wishes to detract that part from his book.

More SALIENTLY, I am sure that the Journo is MORE than conversant with Goncalo's book, and almost CERTAINLY aware of who Martin Smith is and what he purports to have seen.

So what is going on???

I have already BLOGGED about how Richard Desmond, perhaps the most vociferous and aggressive man in the Media world, meekly apologised and ended up forking out well over a MILLION to the McCanns and their Tapas friends in an "out of Court" Libel settlement, for doing no more than what every other periodical and newspaper had done already, which was to reprint the stories appearing in the Portuguese Media.

I have also alluded to the fact that I considered such payments to be made by way of "favours", due to certain Government friends of Richard's.

HOWEVER, this new twist is CATEGORICALLY guaranteed to set the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons!! Sure to replicate the excrement hitting the fan and open up that infamous can or worms!!

FORGET that a few seconds checking with the name Martin Smith/Madeleine McCann on GOOGLE will result in stories certain to turn Clarence Mitchell several shades of grey, but I can not possibly SEE how ANY of the mainstream media can allude to this story, and the name of Martin Smith, without reference to his apparent belief:

That the man he saw carrying Madeleine McCann was ...........

GERALD McCann.

As the EXPRESS points out, Mr Amaral concludes that any new investigation should fully consider the statement of Mr Smith.:

“I hope this is seriously examined because it is an important aspect of the case,” he said.

Richard. You naughty boy.


Trick or Treat, anyone?