Tuesday, 28 March 2017
Behind closed doors - mccann foreign policy
January 2009
The collusion that existed between the Foreign Office, No 10 and the McCanns is even today quite astonishing to revisit. In the public domain we were repeatedly told "steps were being taken" to liberate the McCanns from their extended Algarve business trip. It is only now with the release of the Wikileaks cables concerning the McCanns we are at last given an indication as to what those steps that were taken by our elected government on our behalf, actually were.
The "British evidence" that was spoken of in the Wikileaks cables and which was of so much concern to the McCanns but more importantly it now seems to Browns' then government of the day, can only be the cadaverine 'scent' as it was this evidence that was detected by British trained police dogs under the control of Mark Harrison. These dogs were introduced to the case via South Yorkshire Constabulary and it is the evidence from this source which the cable suggests requires 'cooperation'. This could be cooperation to remove or cooperation to reinforce. The wording is ambiguous and may be deliberately so. To this day it has proven to the stickiest piece of evidence against the McCanns and is one which has attracted alot of attention from those who schemed and strove to ensure the McCanns liberty.
Within a year of the date of this cable Clarence Mitchell in a televised interview alluded to 'diplomatic channels' as having being used to save the McCanns from the clutches of the Portuguese police and prosecution for the death of their daughter. Mitchell in that same interview continued on to say that these channels even today were still being used as the McCanns case had provoked issues of 'national security between our two countries'.
How could Mitchell a man who was by than a freelance PR spokesman for Brian Kennedy, one of the McCanns shadowy millionaire backers, and only a private sector employee and ex government confidante have gained access or knowledge of such high level and confidential information? Mitchell can only have had knowledge of such communication if he himself was behind those closed doors, the closed doors of political power and intrigue.
The cadaver dog evidence was and remains to this day the most troublesome artefact of all to expunge from the public record. The FSS had done their job and they had done it well. In one breathe they had identified Maddies’ DNA and in the next provided just enough scientific doubt as to exclude the possibility their evidence could ever be used in a court of law to prosecute the McCanns. The cooperation the FSS demonstrated was exemplary in the extreme. Sir Jeffries the discoverer of DNA cooperated further and went on public record saying he would take the witness box to support the McCanns. Jeffries was interviewed by the BBC again weighed in again on behalf of the McCanns saying he would provide 'imaginative evidence' in the witness box in order to explain how Maddies’ DNA had been detected in the back of the parents hire car.
On the other hand the detected cadaverine was trickier as its presence had been widely reported both here and in Portugal and understanding the dogs indications required no specialist scientific understanding. This evidence was a far more dangerous proposition to tackle for those seeking to exonerate the McCanns of any wrongdoing. The blood, the bodily fluids, the hair or the DNA had by then been dealt either by cooperation or by the threat of the McCanns hiring their own forensic specialists. The cadaverine was common knowledge, and it had been well reported and it was easily understood by all. Put simply the challenge was to then undo what everyone by then already knew, and that was there either was a response from the dog or there wasn't and in turn this either indicated the presence of a dead body or it didn't.
Here is a small snippet of the multitude of reports:
The Times: "The “cadaver dog” is reported in the Portuguese press to have discovered a trace of Madeleine’s body in her bedroom, meaning that she would have been dead in the apartment for at least two hours, which does not fit with official police reports so far".
Looking back over the events of the past 4 years it is now possible to detect the direction in which the cooperation that was employed back in 2007 has shifted the balance of the evidence presented. That cooperation was plainly to remove or minimise evidence that was not helpful to the McCanns. This must be so for had it been other the McCanns would have been charged long ago. The cadaverine remains the final hurdle but it is one that will in time like all the other planks of evidence against the McCann’s ultimately succumb. It will give way to the 'persuasion' Gerry McCann spoke of in 2010 outside a Lisbon courtroom, when describing the need to 'change police officers minds at Portimao', which itself was part of the policy of 'cooperation' the Wiki cable described.
The cooperative approach is still well underway in all regards. It has been reported back in 2010 Martin Grime the dog's expert handler from Portugal had a telephone conversation and in that conversation Grime suggested there was the evidence in the public domain so far concerning the dog's evidence was 'just the press' - (see item above). The implication was the evidence published was somehow unreliable and in need of revision. Grime when openly challenged about this change in approach to the reported facts suggested it was his personal opinion that if the McCanns had kept a dead body in their apartment then they may not have broken any laws.
As time passes it becomes more and more apparent to any commentator on the McCann case that the 'cooperation policy' implemented behind closed doors in 2007 is finally going to succeed after all.
DAVIDiCKE.COM
The collusion that existed between the Foreign Office, No 10 and the McCanns is even today quite astonishing to revisit. In the public domain we were repeatedly told "steps were being taken" to liberate the McCanns from their extended Algarve business trip. It is only now with the release of the Wikileaks cables concerning the McCanns we are at last given an indication as to what those steps that were taken by our elected government on our behalf, actually were.
The "British evidence" that was spoken of in the Wikileaks cables and which was of so much concern to the McCanns but more importantly it now seems to Browns' then government of the day, can only be the cadaverine 'scent' as it was this evidence that was detected by British trained police dogs under the control of Mark Harrison. These dogs were introduced to the case via South Yorkshire Constabulary and it is the evidence from this source which the cable suggests requires 'cooperation'. This could be cooperation to remove or cooperation to reinforce. The wording is ambiguous and may be deliberately so. To this day it has proven to the stickiest piece of evidence against the McCanns and is one which has attracted alot of attention from those who schemed and strove to ensure the McCanns liberty.
Within a year of the date of this cable Clarence Mitchell in a televised interview alluded to 'diplomatic channels' as having being used to save the McCanns from the clutches of the Portuguese police and prosecution for the death of their daughter. Mitchell in that same interview continued on to say that these channels even today were still being used as the McCanns case had provoked issues of 'national security between our two countries'.
How could Mitchell a man who was by than a freelance PR spokesman for Brian Kennedy, one of the McCanns shadowy millionaire backers, and only a private sector employee and ex government confidante have gained access or knowledge of such high level and confidential information? Mitchell can only have had knowledge of such communication if he himself was behind those closed doors, the closed doors of political power and intrigue.
The cadaver dog evidence was and remains to this day the most troublesome artefact of all to expunge from the public record. The FSS had done their job and they had done it well. In one breathe they had identified Maddies’ DNA and in the next provided just enough scientific doubt as to exclude the possibility their evidence could ever be used in a court of law to prosecute the McCanns. The cooperation the FSS demonstrated was exemplary in the extreme. Sir Jeffries the discoverer of DNA cooperated further and went on public record saying he would take the witness box to support the McCanns. Jeffries was interviewed by the BBC again weighed in again on behalf of the McCanns saying he would provide 'imaginative evidence' in the witness box in order to explain how Maddies’ DNA had been detected in the back of the parents hire car.
On the other hand the detected cadaverine was trickier as its presence had been widely reported both here and in Portugal and understanding the dogs indications required no specialist scientific understanding. This evidence was a far more dangerous proposition to tackle for those seeking to exonerate the McCanns of any wrongdoing. The blood, the bodily fluids, the hair or the DNA had by then been dealt either by cooperation or by the threat of the McCanns hiring their own forensic specialists. The cadaverine was common knowledge, and it had been well reported and it was easily understood by all. Put simply the challenge was to then undo what everyone by then already knew, and that was there either was a response from the dog or there wasn't and in turn this either indicated the presence of a dead body or it didn't.
Here is a small snippet of the multitude of reports:
The Times: "The “cadaver dog” is reported in the Portuguese press to have discovered a trace of Madeleine’s body in her bedroom, meaning that she would have been dead in the apartment for at least two hours, which does not fit with official police reports so far".
Looking back over the events of the past 4 years it is now possible to detect the direction in which the cooperation that was employed back in 2007 has shifted the balance of the evidence presented. That cooperation was plainly to remove or minimise evidence that was not helpful to the McCanns. This must be so for had it been other the McCanns would have been charged long ago. The cadaverine remains the final hurdle but it is one that will in time like all the other planks of evidence against the McCann’s ultimately succumb. It will give way to the 'persuasion' Gerry McCann spoke of in 2010 outside a Lisbon courtroom, when describing the need to 'change police officers minds at Portimao', which itself was part of the policy of 'cooperation' the Wiki cable described.
The cooperative approach is still well underway in all regards. It has been reported back in 2010 Martin Grime the dog's expert handler from Portugal had a telephone conversation and in that conversation Grime suggested there was the evidence in the public domain so far concerning the dog's evidence was 'just the press' - (see item above). The implication was the evidence published was somehow unreliable and in need of revision. Grime when openly challenged about this change in approach to the reported facts suggested it was his personal opinion that if the McCanns had kept a dead body in their apartment then they may not have broken any laws.
As time passes it becomes more and more apparent to any commentator on the McCann case that the 'cooperation policy' implemented behind closed doors in 2007 is finally going to succeed after all.
DAVIDiCKE.COM
'PURE BILE' Pals slam ‘cruel’ petition calling for Madeleine McCann’s parents to be charged with child neglect – as signatures top 130,000
The petition - started by Hollie Flynn - looks set to fail, despite gaining 130,215 signatures on change.org
EXCLUSIVE
By Tracey Kandohla
28th March 2017, 4:50 pm Updated: 28th March 2017, 5:15 pm
A PETITION calling for Madeleine McCann’s parents to be prosecuted for child neglect is today being dismissed as “pure bile” by the couple’s pals.
The attempt by Hollie Flynn to cause more anguish to Kate and Gerry looks set to fail, despite gaining 130,215 signatures on petition site change.org.
In the petition she complains Kate and Gerry “left three unattended children” in a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz “while they went off to enjoy a night out", stressing: "This is neglect."
It urges: “Please sign this petition to help bring down the McCann’s for neglect that has led to the 'disappearance' of Madeleine McCann.”
A close friend of ex GP Kate, 49, and heart doctor Gerry, 48, who face the painful tenth anniversary of their daughter’s disappearance in five weeks, told The Sun Online: “It is just another cruel and pointless rant against Madeleine’s parents and is pure bile. Social media has been chuntering on about them for weeks. It is all nonsense.”
The petition has not even been posted on the official Parliamentary website and is a carbon copy of one previously submitted to MPs for possible debate.
UK-based instigator Hollie declares she is “Petitioning Prime Minister of the UK Theresa May", but the source pointed out: “It’s not even been placed on the site where it could be considered for discussion even though it has got enough signatures. It seems people are only signing it because they think it’s the official website.”
Three-year-old Maddie vanished from her bed after being left alone with twin siblings Sean and Amelie, 27, months, while her parents dined in a nearby tapas bar with pals in 2007.
Among signatories are Colin Smith from Croydon, South London, who says: "I’m signing because I am a father to 2 boys aged 9 and 7 and I wouldn't leave them alone. To leave a 3 year old to babysit two 2 year olds is completely disgusting and has to be a criminal offence. Please make justice happen."
Julie Hill from Leicester adds: “If they were average people they would have been slated for leaving them alone."
A similar petition urging Maddie’s parents to face child neglect charges was submitted at some point during the 2010–2015 Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition Government.
A note on the official petitions website states: “This petition has been archived.”
It says the petition was rejected as this is a "police operational matter".
It adds: “Petitions cannot be used to request action on issues that are outside the responsibility of the Government."
The Sun Online recently told how Kate and Gerry would have “fought tooth and nail” if they had ever been prosecuted for abandoning the young trio.
A McCann source said: “They were well aware they could have been charged with child neglect and naturally very concerned. But in legal terms they were doing everything well within the bounds of respectable parenting.”
The source insists: “Any legal action against them would have failed. A court would have to show Kate and Gerry had wilfully neglected their daughter and her siblings, and they did not. They would have robustly defended any charges, if brought.”
The couple could have faced jail under Portuguese law if they had ever faced a charge of abandonment and been convicted.
The McCann’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell today refused to discuss the petition saying: “There is absolutely no comment.”
The Sun
EXCLUSIVE
By Tracey Kandohla
28th March 2017, 4:50 pm Updated: 28th March 2017, 5:15 pm
A PETITION calling for Madeleine McCann’s parents to be prosecuted for child neglect is today being dismissed as “pure bile” by the couple’s pals.
The attempt by Hollie Flynn to cause more anguish to Kate and Gerry looks set to fail, despite gaining 130,215 signatures on petition site change.org.
In the petition she complains Kate and Gerry “left three unattended children” in a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz “while they went off to enjoy a night out", stressing: "This is neglect."
It urges: “Please sign this petition to help bring down the McCann’s for neglect that has led to the 'disappearance' of Madeleine McCann.”
A close friend of ex GP Kate, 49, and heart doctor Gerry, 48, who face the painful tenth anniversary of their daughter’s disappearance in five weeks, told The Sun Online: “It is just another cruel and pointless rant against Madeleine’s parents and is pure bile. Social media has been chuntering on about them for weeks. It is all nonsense.”
The petition has not even been posted on the official Parliamentary website and is a carbon copy of one previously submitted to MPs for possible debate.
UK-based instigator Hollie declares she is “Petitioning Prime Minister of the UK Theresa May", but the source pointed out: “It’s not even been placed on the site where it could be considered for discussion even though it has got enough signatures. It seems people are only signing it because they think it’s the official website.”
Three-year-old Maddie vanished from her bed after being left alone with twin siblings Sean and Amelie, 27, months, while her parents dined in a nearby tapas bar with pals in 2007.
Among signatories are Colin Smith from Croydon, South London, who says: "I’m signing because I am a father to 2 boys aged 9 and 7 and I wouldn't leave them alone. To leave a 3 year old to babysit two 2 year olds is completely disgusting and has to be a criminal offence. Please make justice happen."
Julie Hill from Leicester adds: “If they were average people they would have been slated for leaving them alone."
A similar petition urging Maddie’s parents to face child neglect charges was submitted at some point during the 2010–2015 Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition Government.
A note on the official petitions website states: “This petition has been archived.”
It says the petition was rejected as this is a "police operational matter".
It adds: “Petitions cannot be used to request action on issues that are outside the responsibility of the Government."
The Sun Online recently told how Kate and Gerry would have “fought tooth and nail” if they had ever been prosecuted for abandoning the young trio.
A McCann source said: “They were well aware they could have been charged with child neglect and naturally very concerned. But in legal terms they were doing everything well within the bounds of respectable parenting.”
The source insists: “Any legal action against them would have failed. A court would have to show Kate and Gerry had wilfully neglected their daughter and her siblings, and they did not. They would have robustly defended any charges, if brought.”
The couple could have faced jail under Portuguese law if they had ever faced a charge of abandonment and been convicted.
The McCann’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell today refused to discuss the petition saying: “There is absolutely no comment.”
The Sun
Photographs in Perspective
Monday, 1 August 2016
Millions of words have been written about photoshopped imaged of Madeleine McCann, but here we leave photoshopping aside. This post will be about simple questions arising from the photographs released. The description given to the police is of interest here for purposes of comparing appearances against information given to the Police. 1)
The ‘First’ photo:
Questions:
How could a photo of a child around 2 to 2.5 years old help find the girl represented in the tennis photo or the iconic ‘Red dress’ photo? They appear to be two totally different children, neither of them recent when there should have been dozens of photos just from the holiday.
This photo was allegedly on the Canon A620 camera the evening of the 3rd of May 2007. However, this camera was not released until October 2005, the first review of the new camera appeared in November 2005 and most reviews were in early 2006. By October 2005 Madeleine was very nearly 2.5 years old. Therefore – if the first photo was ever taken with the Canon A620, it should have been pretty well the first one on it, many other snaps, including the ‘tennis’ photo would have come first when going through the memory card.
Parents tend to carry favourite photos of their children in their wallets (and indeed Gerry McCann was most upset at losing some special photographs of Madeleine when his wallet was ‘stolen’). Saving favourite photos on phones is even more common now, but leaving one on the memory card of one’s camera is not helpful if you want to have a look at the image from time to time.
Notes: Madeleine aged at most two years and six months. Hair colour: light brown.
The ‘tennis photo’ :
Pat Perkins, a friend of Kate McCann’s mother, was responsible for instigating the first chain e-mail that asked for help to find Madeleine. The e-mail, which clearly stated that Madeleine had been abducted, was first sent out on Monday 07 May 2007.
For some reason the photograph was released after it was ‘flipped’. That is: the description given to the police mentions ‘a small brown mark on Left Leg Calf’. When Madeleine faces towards the left, the mark is on the left leg.
However, this ‘important’ photo was taken on the 1st of May according to Kate McCann, Rachael Mampilly states it was taken on the 3rd of May and not by Kate but by Jane Tanner. This is from the book ‘madeleine’by Kate McCann:
‘She looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera. ‘ [..] I went to meet Gerry, whose lesson had started at ten-fifteen ‘ [.] ‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session [..] One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. ‘
Questions:
The Lobster schedule of events for that morning was: Happy handprint stars (none of the artwork produced in the crèche was ever exhibited by the McCanns), Pool, Salt dough rockets. Mini tennis was between 10 – 11 on Monday the 30th of April.
The tennis court booking sheet for Tuesday the 1st gives us some information but Gerry McCann does not appear on the list until 3.30 to 4.30 for Court 2. So as for Gerry’s tennis lesson starting at ten, or indeed once again that very precise time: 10.15, there is no corroboration.
The girl in the tennis photo is most definitely not a mere 90 cm in height. Allowing for the angle and taking into account that the diameter of a tennis ball is about 6.35 cm, her height can be calculated as the tennis balls are in the same plane as her body. She would then be a normal height for a 4 year old, 110 cm to 114 cm.
As for the detailed description of her clothes, these are hardly of the quality and ‘newness’ of the ‘last photo’ outfit and the sandals certainly don’t look new, apart from being entirely the wrong shoes for tennis. One would expect her to have worn trainers such as can be seen in the photograph below.
Another guest, Bridget O’Donnell wrote: It was Thursday, May 3.Earlier that day there had been tennis lessons for the children, with some of the parents watching proudly as their girls ran across the court chasing tennis balls. They took photos. Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others. They all looked the same - all blonde, all pink and pretty. 2)
Notes: Madeleine’s uneven teeth are clear to see, the photo has been flipped, was used in chain mail letter and date and time of taking the photo is unclear. Hair is longer than in either the first photo and the red dress photo, colour light brown.
The playground photo:
If any photograph should have been favourite, I would have expected it to be the happy and relaxed little girl in the playground. This is one of the photos from the CD compiled by Gerry McCann and David Payne and handed to the PJ on the 9th of May 2007.
Here she is wearing an outfit similar to that seen in the video taken in the airport bus. She is also wearing very nice little trainers, which were described by the cleaner who thinks she saw the twins and Madeleine on Sunday morning. All were wearing trainers with little lights on the side. In the many photographs of the twins in the early days, no such trainers can be seen, indeed, have never been seen. Sean does wear trainers in some photos, but not the ones described by the clear. Neither is Madeleine wearing them on the tennis court.
Notes: This girl is approximately 100 cm in length and could be anything from 3 to 4 years old, although on the short side for 4 years. Her height was estimated by the known height of the plastic playhouse door in other photos taken at the time.
Her teeth do not appear to have any gaps and her hair deserves some attention as she is clearly growing out last summer’s lightened hair, but the last five/six month’s growth is darker, which makes it about right for the time of year. No doubt this would lighten in the sun during the coming summer.
But the description as given to the PJ at the time of disappearance states: ‘Blond hair with chestnut tips touching the shoulders.’
The football shirt photos:
These are very strange. One of these girls is definitely Madeleine, the other girl has quite a different smile, a broader face and her hair is very blond. It is almost inevitable that one is reminded of the iconic and tragic last photo of the two Soham girls of 2002. Just five years before Madeleine disappeared. Was it the intention to have one photograph of two girls in Everton shirts together? Could it possibly be the case that it was thought too obvious? It could explain why both photos were released, it makes no sense however to release both and may well have been an accident.
The blonde girl seems very confident and relaxed, Madeleine doesn’t look at all confident. An unnatural smile not showing her teeth. ( Compare to pool photo, tennis photo). The adult gesture of touching her hair, mainly seen in women aware of their appearance, but not a natural gesture for a child. Both faces could be pasted on bodies of teenagers and it would not make them look strange. Neither of the two look like four year olds in my opinion, but this is due to the impression of make-up on one child - the blonde girl looks like she's wearing eye make-up and lipstick and the one (in my opinion definitely photo-shopped, blurring on left cheek, head positioned slightly too far to the left) image of Maddie has the adult gesture and somewhat sad smile.
Notes: It may not be relevant, but Clarence Mitchell had reported on the Soham murders and told the press at one stage that he’d thought at the start that the Madeleine case would be much the same as the Soham tragedy. It would be relevant if the Everton photos emerged after Mitchell became their spokesman.
Photo’s taken in a playground: 3)
These were released by the family and are somewhat of a puzzle. I seems to me:
a) That Madeleine is about three years old there.
b) That she is or has been ill.
Notes: There is something wrong with her hair, both photographs can only be explained if she was wearing a wig at the time. These are my observations only, but I wanted to add my opinion here. In the close up, tufts of hair and a bald area can clearly be seen. In the black and white photo a badly fitting wig would explain the strange shape of the head.
The following clips illustrate the difference of the teeth:
Following on from the Everton/Soham photo 'link', it is of interest to note that the first website was called: ‘bringmadeleinehome.com’. Very reminiscent of the well-known song from ‘Les Miserables’ of which the lyrics ran:
He is young
He's afraid
Let him rest
Heaven blessed.
Bring him home
Bring him home.
Leaving no stone unturned: from mccannfiles.com 3)
11th May 2007: Extract from Diario de Noticias:
Gerry McCann reads a short prepared statement to the waiting press [..] He specifically emphasises that they will 'leave no stone unturned' in the seaarch for Madeleine. [..] It would appear from this statement that the name of the company had already been decided and that this was a form of public preparation for the launch of Madeleine's Fund.
The lawyers who arrived on the 11th of May issued the following media release:
13th May 2007 : Last week, Gerry and Kate McCann instructed The International Family Law Group, London specialist lawyers in child abduction and international family law, together with Michael Nicholls QC of 1 Hare Court, to help them in the search for Madeleine. They have been visiting the family in Portugal.
Gerry and Kate are very grateful for all the support and generous offers of help that they are receiving. Details of how contributions can be made to help get Madeleine back to the safety of her own family will be made available in the next couple of days. unquote
For further information on IFLG: see 5)
Soon after this announcement, the Fund was launched, four websites (two for Cuddlecat)
The Madeleine Fund - Leaving no stone unturned - www. findmadeleine.com
New website enables donations to be made online
The newly named website is officially announced, when visitors to the site are met by the following message:
'From this morning, Thursday 17 May 2007:
Members of the public will be able to make donations to 'Madeleine's Fund : Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited' over the counter in any branch of NatWest and The Royal Bank of Scotland'.
McCann family friend, Michael Wright, reads a prepared statement outside the couple's apartment on the 18th of May 2007: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyZMF7RFScs
So we have:
First photo of a toddler which will not help identification at all.
Tennis photo taken on the 1st or the 3rd,- published wrong way round.
In the playhouse photo taken on the 29th April, the girl is wearing the trainers which Maddie should have been wearing on the 1st or the 3rd to play tennis.
The description of her hair as blond having chestnut tips down to the shoulder is more of less the case with the red dress photo, but not the tennis photo or the pool photo (which I have studiously avoided in this post..) .However, hair tends to colour naturally the other way round, Bleached in summer, darker in winter, this rarely results in chestnut tips.
The point is that this description was given on the night to the GNR officer and none of the photos, the tennis, pool or playground photo show anything like this hair colouring.
What is also strange that only the small mark on her leg is mentioned as an individual marking.
The colour of the eyes and the brown spot (there is indeed a tiny brown spot in the iris, as can been seen in photographs published here in 'The logic gates') but no mention of a veritable thunderbolt in her eye which was THE identifiable feature of her face.
What's more, her different colour eyes are all but undetectable.
It would have been helpful to find exactly what the description in the passport is, but this is not at all clear from the files. As the GNR had Maddie's passport however, any description given by the parents would have to be close to that given in the passport. Therefore we have the small spot in the eye, the different coloured eyes and the mark on the leg. But to give her height on the night s as 90 cm, is off the chart for a four-year old and she is clearly much taller in the tennis photo. Obviously the 90cm cannot have come from the passport as that was issued a mere three months after Maddie was born.
As Bridget O'Donnell wrote: Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others, they looked all the same....'.
Eumenides
Millions of words have been written about photoshopped imaged of Madeleine McCann, but here we leave photoshopping aside. This post will be about simple questions arising from the photographs released. The description given to the police is of interest here for purposes of comparing appearances against information given to the Police. 1)
The ‘First’ photo:
Questions:
How could a photo of a child around 2 to 2.5 years old help find the girl represented in the tennis photo or the iconic ‘Red dress’ photo? They appear to be two totally different children, neither of them recent when there should have been dozens of photos just from the holiday.
This photo was allegedly on the Canon A620 camera the evening of the 3rd of May 2007. However, this camera was not released until October 2005, the first review of the new camera appeared in November 2005 and most reviews were in early 2006. By October 2005 Madeleine was very nearly 2.5 years old. Therefore – if the first photo was ever taken with the Canon A620, it should have been pretty well the first one on it, many other snaps, including the ‘tennis’ photo would have come first when going through the memory card.
Parents tend to carry favourite photos of their children in their wallets (and indeed Gerry McCann was most upset at losing some special photographs of Madeleine when his wallet was ‘stolen’). Saving favourite photos on phones is even more common now, but leaving one on the memory card of one’s camera is not helpful if you want to have a look at the image from time to time.
Notes: Madeleine aged at most two years and six months. Hair colour: light brown.
The ‘tennis photo’ :
Pat Perkins, a friend of Kate McCann’s mother, was responsible for instigating the first chain e-mail that asked for help to find Madeleine. The e-mail, which clearly stated that Madeleine had been abducted, was first sent out on Monday 07 May 2007.
For some reason the photograph was released after it was ‘flipped’. That is: the description given to the police mentions ‘a small brown mark on Left Leg Calf’. When Madeleine faces towards the left, the mark is on the left leg.
However, this ‘important’ photo was taken on the 1st of May according to Kate McCann, Rachael Mampilly states it was taken on the 3rd of May and not by Kate but by Jane Tanner. This is from the book ‘madeleine’by Kate McCann:
‘She looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera. ‘ [..] I went to meet Gerry, whose lesson had started at ten-fifteen ‘ [.] ‘During Gerry’s tennis lesson, Madeleine and Ella came to the adjoining court with their Mini Club for a mini-tennis session [..] One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls. ‘
Questions:
The Lobster schedule of events for that morning was: Happy handprint stars (none of the artwork produced in the crèche was ever exhibited by the McCanns), Pool, Salt dough rockets. Mini tennis was between 10 – 11 on Monday the 30th of April.
The tennis court booking sheet for Tuesday the 1st gives us some information but Gerry McCann does not appear on the list until 3.30 to 4.30 for Court 2. So as for Gerry’s tennis lesson starting at ten, or indeed once again that very precise time: 10.15, there is no corroboration.
The girl in the tennis photo is most definitely not a mere 90 cm in height. Allowing for the angle and taking into account that the diameter of a tennis ball is about 6.35 cm, her height can be calculated as the tennis balls are in the same plane as her body. She would then be a normal height for a 4 year old, 110 cm to 114 cm.
As for the detailed description of her clothes, these are hardly of the quality and ‘newness’ of the ‘last photo’ outfit and the sandals certainly don’t look new, apart from being entirely the wrong shoes for tennis. One would expect her to have worn trainers such as can be seen in the photograph below.
Another guest, Bridget O’Donnell wrote: It was Thursday, May 3.Earlier that day there had been tennis lessons for the children, with some of the parents watching proudly as their girls ran across the court chasing tennis balls. They took photos. Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others. They all looked the same - all blonde, all pink and pretty. 2)
Notes: Madeleine’s uneven teeth are clear to see, the photo has been flipped, was used in chain mail letter and date and time of taking the photo is unclear. Hair is longer than in either the first photo and the red dress photo, colour light brown.
The playground photo:
If any photograph should have been favourite, I would have expected it to be the happy and relaxed little girl in the playground. This is one of the photos from the CD compiled by Gerry McCann and David Payne and handed to the PJ on the 9th of May 2007.
Here she is wearing an outfit similar to that seen in the video taken in the airport bus. She is also wearing very nice little trainers, which were described by the cleaner who thinks she saw the twins and Madeleine on Sunday morning. All were wearing trainers with little lights on the side. In the many photographs of the twins in the early days, no such trainers can be seen, indeed, have never been seen. Sean does wear trainers in some photos, but not the ones described by the clear. Neither is Madeleine wearing them on the tennis court.
Notes: This girl is approximately 100 cm in length and could be anything from 3 to 4 years old, although on the short side for 4 years. Her height was estimated by the known height of the plastic playhouse door in other photos taken at the time.
Her teeth do not appear to have any gaps and her hair deserves some attention as she is clearly growing out last summer’s lightened hair, but the last five/six month’s growth is darker, which makes it about right for the time of year. No doubt this would lighten in the sun during the coming summer.
But the description as given to the PJ at the time of disappearance states: ‘Blond hair with chestnut tips touching the shoulders.’
The football shirt photos:
These are very strange. One of these girls is definitely Madeleine, the other girl has quite a different smile, a broader face and her hair is very blond. It is almost inevitable that one is reminded of the iconic and tragic last photo of the two Soham girls of 2002. Just five years before Madeleine disappeared. Was it the intention to have one photograph of two girls in Everton shirts together? Could it possibly be the case that it was thought too obvious? It could explain why both photos were released, it makes no sense however to release both and may well have been an accident.
The blonde girl seems very confident and relaxed, Madeleine doesn’t look at all confident. An unnatural smile not showing her teeth. ( Compare to pool photo, tennis photo). The adult gesture of touching her hair, mainly seen in women aware of their appearance, but not a natural gesture for a child. Both faces could be pasted on bodies of teenagers and it would not make them look strange. Neither of the two look like four year olds in my opinion, but this is due to the impression of make-up on one child - the blonde girl looks like she's wearing eye make-up and lipstick and the one (in my opinion definitely photo-shopped, blurring on left cheek, head positioned slightly too far to the left) image of Maddie has the adult gesture and somewhat sad smile.
Notes: It may not be relevant, but Clarence Mitchell had reported on the Soham murders and told the press at one stage that he’d thought at the start that the Madeleine case would be much the same as the Soham tragedy. It would be relevant if the Everton photos emerged after Mitchell became their spokesman.
Photo’s taken in a playground: 3)
These were released by the family and are somewhat of a puzzle. I seems to me:
a) That Madeleine is about three years old there.
b) That she is or has been ill.
Notes: There is something wrong with her hair, both photographs can only be explained if she was wearing a wig at the time. These are my observations only, but I wanted to add my opinion here. In the close up, tufts of hair and a bald area can clearly be seen. In the black and white photo a badly fitting wig would explain the strange shape of the head.
The following clips illustrate the difference of the teeth:
This photograph is one of several listed as being of Madeleine. This girl's teeth have no gaps and are very different from those seen in e.g. the last photo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Following on from the Everton/Soham photo 'link', it is of interest to note that the first website was called: ‘bringmadeleinehome.com’. Very reminiscent of the well-known song from ‘Les Miserables’ of which the lyrics ran:
He is young
He's afraid
Let him rest
Heaven blessed.
Bring him home
Bring him home.
Leaving no stone unturned: from mccannfiles.com 3)
11th May 2007: Extract from Diario de Noticias:
Gerry McCann reads a short prepared statement to the waiting press [..] He specifically emphasises that they will 'leave no stone unturned' in the seaarch for Madeleine. [..] It would appear from this statement that the name of the company had already been decided and that this was a form of public preparation for the launch of Madeleine's Fund.
The lawyers who arrived on the 11th of May issued the following media release:
13th May 2007 : Last week, Gerry and Kate McCann instructed The International Family Law Group, London specialist lawyers in child abduction and international family law, together with Michael Nicholls QC of 1 Hare Court, to help them in the search for Madeleine. They have been visiting the family in Portugal.
Gerry and Kate are very grateful for all the support and generous offers of help that they are receiving. Details of how contributions can be made to help get Madeleine back to the safety of her own family will be made available in the next couple of days. unquote
For further information on IFLG: see 5)
Soon after this announcement, the Fund was launched, four websites (two for Cuddlecat)
The Madeleine Fund - Leaving no stone unturned - www. findmadeleine.com
New website enables donations to be made online
The newly named website is officially announced, when visitors to the site are met by the following message:
'From this morning, Thursday 17 May 2007:
Members of the public will be able to make donations to 'Madeleine's Fund : Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited' over the counter in any branch of NatWest and The Royal Bank of Scotland'.
McCann family friend, Michael Wright, reads a prepared statement outside the couple's apartment on the 18th of May 2007: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyZMF7RFScs
So we have:
First photo of a toddler which will not help identification at all.
Tennis photo taken on the 1st or the 3rd,- published wrong way round.
In the playhouse photo taken on the 29th April, the girl is wearing the trainers which Maddie should have been wearing on the 1st or the 3rd to play tennis.
The description of her hair as blond having chestnut tips down to the shoulder is more of less the case with the red dress photo, but not the tennis photo or the pool photo (which I have studiously avoided in this post..) .However, hair tends to colour naturally the other way round, Bleached in summer, darker in winter, this rarely results in chestnut tips.
The point is that this description was given on the night to the GNR officer and none of the photos, the tennis, pool or playground photo show anything like this hair colouring.
What is also strange that only the small mark on her leg is mentioned as an individual marking.
The colour of the eyes and the brown spot (there is indeed a tiny brown spot in the iris, as can been seen in photographs published here in 'The logic gates') but no mention of a veritable thunderbolt in her eye which was THE identifiable feature of her face.
What's more, her different colour eyes are all but undetectable.
It would have been helpful to find exactly what the description in the passport is, but this is not at all clear from the files. As the GNR had Maddie's passport however, any description given by the parents would have to be close to that given in the passport. Therefore we have the small spot in the eye, the different coloured eyes and the mark on the leg. But to give her height on the night s as 90 cm, is off the chart for a four-year old and she is clearly much taller in the tennis photo. Obviously the 90cm cannot have come from the passport as that was issued a mere three months after Maddie was born.
As Bridget O'Donnell wrote: Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others, they looked all the same....'.
Eumenides
Blackwatch
On 5th May 2007 at 19:30, two days after Madeleine McCann went missing from Apartment 5A of the Ocean Club, a team from the Sector's Local Crime Laboratory of Forensic Science at the request of the Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão Criminal Police searched apartment C of the Hotel Sol e Mar in Burgau (see image above). The apartment consisted of a kitchen, a living room, one bathroom and one double room. According to Mark Harrison's report for the National Police Improvements Agency (attached to the British Home Office), the methods and searches undertaken by the authorities were 'extensive and professional' and commensurate with a search and rescue operation. As a result of these searches of apartment c several hair samples were collected on the kitchen floor of the apartment, and packed in paper envelope, according to the instructions issued by the Division of Biology. Hair fibres were also collected on the floor of the hallway in the apartment and the master bedroom. Detailed examinations of a couch and the kitchen were also made, the latter yielding a blood specimen.
However, it wasn't until Inspector Amaral had been removed from the investigation and Paolo Rebelo took over the case that forensics were on the fibres were undertaken by Police Scientific Lab from the INML. In a request dated 31st October 2007 Rebelo writes:
"As it is necessary for the investigation of the abovementioned crime and being of a VERY URGENT nature, I request that the appropriate analyses be carried out as quickly as possible on the human blood samples collected by officers from the Local Crime Scene Unit (examination 200707356-CR IL of delivery guide 196/2007 ? CRL on 5th May 2007 in apartment c, 2? of aparthotel Sol e Mar in Burgau. These samples are in the Biology Area (200707143-B6). We require the determination of the DNA profile and a comparison with the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann and the DNA profiles sent to the Police Scientific Lab from the INML ... "
Whilst Inspector Amaral had made similar VERY URGENT requests on the blood samples found on the walls of Apartment 5A and from the wall of Quinta dos Figos in Praia da Luz he had made no such 'urgent requests' for those found in Burgau, even though a process demand had been made to the Director of the Scientific Police Laboratory by Chief Inspector Tavares Alemeida as early as May 15th 2007 (05-Processo Vol V page 1196/05_VOLUME_Va_Page_1196)
The results of the forensics tests performed on the hair fibres by the Forensics Services are perplexing to say the least. Results showed that the samples matched the haplotypes of Jane Tanner and Robert Murat (Processo n' 2007/000565/PT-B). The reports in question were served by the Servicos de Genetica e Biologia Forense based in Lisbon at the request of Paulo Rebelo in a fax dated October 2007. When we talk about hair samples and hair haplotypes we are talking about mtDNA profiles and a system (called haplogroups) that illustrate how these profiles relate to common ancestry groups. One human cell contains two types of DNA - nuclear and mitochondrial. mtDNA is inherited from a mother to a child. Surprisingly, mtDNA analysis is more sensitive than nuclear DNA profiling. The samples found in the Solimar Apartments were identical haplotype matches to Tanner and Murat.
This means that the samples were either from them or two people having the same maternal bloodline.
Little more than one week later, after suspicions had been raised by reporters and concerns had been aroused by officers fielding a slew of probing questions about the case, Robert Murat was made a formal suspect in the case.
However, the results of the finds are not unproblematic. The forensic tests could only conclude that the fibres matching those of Tanner could indeed have come from any one of her maternal bloodline - including that of her 3 year old daughter who had accompanied her and her partner on the trip (or indeed more distant cousins or relatives). Much has been made of the physical resemblance of Tanner's daughter, Ella to Madeleine and the similarity in features and stature has led some internet sleuths to speculate that the actual target of the abductor may have been this child and not Madeleine (three of the Tapas children had been born within days of each other: Grace, Madeleine and Ella).
That Murat had spent a month in Exeter prior to returning to Portugal on May 1st appears to have only deepened speculation - Exeter being the home town of Tanner and O Brien. However no evidence has been unearthed that Murat knew either Tanner or O Brien prior to May 3rd and Police cleared Murat of any involvement in the case. Was Tanner's daughter Ella ever let out of parent's sight during the course of the holiday? Who knows. In her rogatory interviews Tanner admits to having visited Lagos some years before (where Murat has several business interests) but stresses she had never stayed in Lagos. Where she did stay isn't recorded.
What led to the forensic examination of the Apartment of the Hotel Sol e Mar in Burgau, has thus far remained a mystery, but one explanation seems more plausible than all the rest.
According to both Amaral's book and the released Police Files, shortly after news of Madeleine's disappearance broke a man came forwarded alleging that he had confronted a man taking pictures of his four year old daughter on a beach in Sagres. The man's name was Nuno Manuel Lourenzo de Jesus. Whether or not he bore any kinship to Gaynor de Jesus (friend of Robert Murat and translator for SKY News) is not recorded in any of the diligences the Police made. Although he had been born in the nearby municipality of Aljezur to parents José de Jesus and Maria Inês Lourenço, he had lived some 14 years in Germany with his German wife, Birgit Erdmann and was visiting his mother in Sagres at the time of the alleged incident. Between 16H00 and 17H00, he cannot be more precise, he noticed a male individual holding a small silver-coloured camera who, in a disguised fashion, was taking pictures of his children. After several bungled attempts to photograph the man's face, he eventually took a shot of the car in which the man was driving. The statement he gave to Police was made on May 5th.
The car was eventually traced to a Polish couple. Anetta Malgorzata and Wojciech Krokowski. According to further diligences carried out by Interpol, it was learned that the couple arrived at Faro airport on April 28th 2007 on flight Al32744 from Berlin.
Confronted later with photographs of Malgorzata and Krokowski, Lourenco de Jesus identified the male as having been the man that day on the beach. The very clear CCTV images (see image below) had been captured at The Beach Bar restaurant in Burgau and volunteered by the owner of the Restaurant, Ralph Eveleigh - Uncle of Robert Murat and brother of Robert's mother Jennifer. The beach bar owner was also able to give a detailed witness account of a conversation he had with the couple that confirmed they were from Poland. Amazingly, the name of the witness and the man who volunteered the CCTV images was not recorded in the files by Police. The officer appears not to have taken his name. Strangely, this is only occasion I've come across when a statement is recorded without the name of the witness being recorded also. And in the early stages at least, this was one of the most significant leads that they had. The names of other witnesses who had encountered the couple were duly recorded and formal statements made - but not this one. Make of this what you will.
Information collected by the German authorities from Air Berlin indicated that Wojciech and Krokowski had used the Berlin route because there were no direct cheap flights to or from Faro.
Interpol also relayed the information that Anetta Malgorzata had convictions for drugs and drinks offences and for 'obtaining property by deception' - more commonly known as fraud. Naturally, the Police were keen to know a little more about their activities in Burgau and during the course of their investigation they spoke to Jorge Alberto Bandarra Rocha, owner of the Burgau restaurant, Refugio. Rocha tells the police of an unusual Polish couple who had reserved a table for dinner at the restaurant. He alleges that they had been brought to the restaurant as a result of picking up business cards that had been left in rooms at the Sol e Mar apartments. He goes on to allege that the Poles talked and mingled with some German diners:
"Almost immediately, the women began to photograph the interior of the restaurant without asking for permission. This situation captured the attention of the witness because his clients, tend to be of a 'posher class' and are more discreet in their conduct. This couples clothing was of a vulgar fashion ..."
Whilst it's tempting to draw a parallel between this story and the story of the Polish couple visiting Eef Hoos's Starlight Pet Crematorium, some have rightly questioned whether the entire incident provided a means of redirecting attention away from the real activities going on at the Sol e Mar apartments onto some believable Polish scapegoats. The Hoos anecdote does not, afterall, appear in the actual files themselves and is likely to have been a story dreamt up by the press.
What's apparent though is that the search of the Sol e Mar apartments appears to have arisen in response to statements made by either Jorge Rocha of the Bargau restaurant at which the Polish couple dined or Lourenco de Jesus.
Rocha only makes his formal Police statement about all this on May 6th and the Police forensic team had completed their search of the Sol e Mar apartments a day earlier on May 5th (although we might be able to conclude that Rocha had made similar informal statements some 24 hours earlier). It's also a mystery why Jorge Rocha says the couple dining at his restaurant arose as a result of business cards he left at the Sol e Mar apartments. According to other records in the file the Police record that the Polish couple are staying at the Solimar apartments in Burgau - owned by Peter and Margaret Owen from Cardiff. Had the Poles arranged to meet someone at the Sol e Mar apartments and picked up the card during one of their possible visits or are the Sol e Mar and Solimar apartments one and the same property?
Clearly, it occurs to me now that the Sol e Mar and Solimar apartments are one and the same building. One has only to compare and contrast the respective photos of the properties to see they are a perfect match (see facade image below). Why the Police Files record them under such radically different spellings is not clear but may be explained by inadequate procedural efforts. However, a more deliberate attempt by someone within the department to confuse the issue cannot be ruled out.
The Solimar Apartments where the Polish couple stayed were designed and built by Jacinto and Murat, the property development company in Lagos once co-owned by Murat's father and now under the directorship of his old partner and architect, Joao Jacinto. Jacinto. Jacinto, however, claims not to have spoken to Robert in years. He had fallen out with his father some years before and the two had severed their partnership. The apartments are now managed by Actividades Turisticas do Burgau (ATM Holidays). It's director is Nuno Felisberto - their website designed and maintained by the Webgami - a design and property agency owned and staffed by Josa Barbosa in Burgau.
According to his website, Joao Jacinto and his son Joao Pedro, like James Gorrod, are also enthusiastic and experienced yachtsman, regularly entering their boat, O Pedrosa - moored in Lagos Marina - in the Lagos-Palos regatta. Matthew Oldfield and Russell O Brien tell of their own sailing activities on the afternoon of May 3rd in their rogatory interviews, in a series of sessions arranged and coordinated by the Ocean Club. For all those amrchair sleuths pouring over the details of a witness account of a man seen dragging a girl toward the Marina in Lagos the pursuit is inevitably pointless. Having an interest in sailing is shared by the vast majority of those visiting and those local to Lagos.
Had Robert ever been introduced to Jacinto's son, Joao Pedro? Not to the best of our knowledge, no. But we do know that Robert and Jacinto & Murat share a liberal interest in sex, Jacinto & Murat promoting the fact in the keywords of their website. Nothing wrong with that though. Maybe the company were looking to persuade broadminded adults to book broadminded stays at the apartments.
Everyone needs a room to rent at sometime or other. Priests. Even prostitutes.
Whatever the case, given that the Sagres incident was itself only reported on May 5th (that's the day de Jesus gave his statement) it seems remarkable that the Police were able to respond within hours with a search warrant and a team to search the building (the search of the Sol e Mar apartments was conducted on the evening of May 5th).
Were the Poles a genuine lead or a plausible cover story for undertaking a search of the Sol e Mar Apartments or at the very least an attempt by parties either within or without the Police to implicate Tanner and Murat?
What may or may not be significant is that Jane Tanner did not take part in the confrontation organised by the Police between Murat and the Tapas party. O Brien was there. Rachel Oldfield was there. Fiona Payne was there - but Tanner was absent. As was Matthew Oldfield and David Payne.
Will Burgau yield any further clues? Who knows. It's not the first time either the village or German Nationals are mentioned in the files. The Murat family used to have a home in the district, Murat's father had another business project in the district called Burgau Investimentos Turisticos Lda (with an unspecified Englishman) and a search of Murat's cousin, Sally Eveleigh's Salsalito guest house was also undertaken by Police. And then we have another German man - 69 year old Karl Kleine Brocknoff disappearing and then being found dead in mysterious circumstances in June 2007 - not far from where any of this took place.
Russell O Brien even admits to receiving a text message from a friend in Germany just as they arrived at the Ocean Club on April 28th (the Polish couple flew from Berlin Airport to Faro on April 28th, arriving at the Solimar apartments on the same day) and there's even a record of Robert Murat making to trips to Germany with his Remax friend, Rui Cristino for the sale of a car. Sagres photographer Nuno de Jesus and his German wife, Birgit Erdmann - born locally - but living in Germany at the time of the event. The list goes on ...
If it transpires that the empty property near the Almadena Windmill and Trig Point in Praia da Luz which was destroyed within weeks of Madeleine's disappearence (and mentioned in Mark Harrison's search report for the NPIA) had links to any of the property managers here, then the possibility of solving the mystery is likely to remain buried within its rubble (which was taken away incidentally).
But before leaping to any conclusions it might be worth remembering that there's plenty more herrings in the sea. Maybe former head of The Division Against Organized Crime and Drug Trafficking Inspector Amaral could throw some light upon the case. Or something not so bright.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)