Strange Behaviours!

I have seen many comments stipulating that there is no evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead. After 10 years, reportedly ‘missing’, and Madeleine being well below the age, statistically speaking, of children being kidnapped and held hostage in basements for years, I think it’s safe to say, in my opinion, that the poor girl is unfortunately dead. To that end, this should unequivocally be investigated. Is there evidence that the McCanns were already privy to this in formation back in 2007, when this sorry story broke?

Let’s look at the early hours of May 4th and the phone calls received by the McCann’s friends and family. Some from Kate some Gerry (Courtesy of Laid Bare).

Philomena McCann, Gerry’s sister, said on 4th May:

‘Some people may ask why they left the children alone in the apartment, but it was locked and they had a full view of the front door and they were checking every half hour.’

Ok, so the apartment was locked then.

Jill Renwick, a family friend, told GMTV on 4th May:

‘She’s obviously been taken as she couldn’t have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open.’

Still locked.

Jon Corner, a friend of the McCanns, and one of the many people who was told the lie of an ‘abductor’ smashing the shutters, said:

‘She (Kate) just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, ‘They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.’

‘They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage.’

It was these people, along with others, who were also told tales of ‘smashed’, ‘jemmied’ and ‘broken’ shutters. Before we move on, let’s have a look at some of the statements from people who the McCanns lied to when they said there had been a break-in.

Instead of searching for Madeleine, the McCanns were busy lying to all and sundry.

Brian Healy (Kate’s father) said:

‘Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone.’

Trish Cameron (Gerry’s sister) said:

‘The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had been jemmied open. She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, ‘They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.’

Philomena McCann (Gerry’s big sister) said:

‘The shutters were jemmied, the window opened.’

Jill Renwick (Kate’s friend) said:

‘Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn’t have gone out on her own and the shutters were forced. They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour and the shutters had been broken open and they had gone into the room and taken Madeleine.’

Jon Corner (family friend) said:

‘Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed. She just told me that Maddy (sic) had been abducted, that the shutters of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her.’

The Daily Mail reported that:

‘When Mrs McCann checked on the children, she found the apartment door wide open, the window shutters jemmied wide and her daughter’s bed empty.

‘So as things on the night of the 3rd, we have reports of a locked apartment, parents out, smashed shutters, and a missing child.’

These, unlike what the ‘Pro’s’ will try to convince you, are individual calls from people in different locations to each other. NOT CHINESE WHISPERS.

These were soon discovered to be false statements. No damage to shutters and no forced entry. Later, forensics found only Kate’s fingerprints on the window. It also shows a locked apartment, which became unlocked after these facts were revealed. This gives you the first glimpse at the parent’s behaviour on finding their baby missing.

Immediately, you have parents planting a story to friends and family, along with the story of the Portuguese doing nothing. These friends gave interviews to Media, via the press and GMTV, sharing what the McCann’s had told them.

All this information provided on 4th May, 2007. The jemmied shutters were not mentioned again, but funnily enough, Graham Hill (foreign office) and others still spout that the Portuguese botched the investigation from that time, and lie that no one was around searching, whilst he was there –  echoing transcripts from Kate’s novel.

The next move by the parents, that’s significant and certainly worth more investigation, was the use of the poster that depicted a much younger Madeleine, which most certainly, in my opinion, greatly hindered the search and the likelihood of her being found and reunited with her family, since the image used was visibly and arguably a much younger version of Madeleine (see images provided), that could easily slow down the process of the immediate search, given how quickly children grow and how much the features of their faces alter in such a short period of time. An up-to-date image would have surely given the authorities, the public and all involved a far greater chance of finding her, following the so-called ‘abduction.’

Also, serious questions need to be asked about the pool photo that the McCanns claim was the last photo taken of Madeleine on the lunchtime of Thursday 3rd May. The weather report that day was cloudy and over-cast, but as can be seen in the photograph above, Gerry is wearing sunglasses and the children are both in sunhats and summer-tops. There was no sun that day and it was very cold. However, Sunday 29th April, the weather was indeed warm and sunny and much more in-keeping with the photograph being taken that day. It took the McCanns three weeks to produce this photograph.

Sightings: Hugely advertised, was the McCann’s friend Jane Tanner, who reported seeing, a man crossing the top of the street carrying a child.  The Portuguese police were highly sceptical of this sighting and were not willing to release Jane Tanner’s flimsy description of this man, which appeared to become more definitive and detailed with the passage of time. After the intervention by UK Prime Minister-in-waiting Gordon Brown, the Portuguese investigation reluctantly released Jane Tanner’s description. Later, in a bizarre twist, the Scotland Yard investigation conveniently removed her sighting, stating that after six years of one of the most famous missing child cases, the man came forward as a father who had collected his child from the Ocean Club crèche. Apparently, not only did he identify himself to the investigation, six years later, he not only had the clothes that he was wearing that night, but also the pyjamas worn by his daughter.

The McCanns still advertise this man on their website, although he has now been exonerated from all police inquiries. The Smith sighting, however, an Irish family returning from a pub that same night, saw a man carrying a sleeping child towards the beach and the McCanns exhibited no reaction or interest to this possible sighting. The McCanns were accused of burying this E-fit for five years. They actually hid it for eleven months, before passing it on to Leicestershire police who also sat on it for a further four years and was only brought to light by the Scotland Yard investigation as a break-through piece of evidence on Crime Watch in 2013. As shown, this was not a break-through. The McCanns were fully aware of these E-fits and so were the LP for five years. Again, strange behaviour for the parents of a genuinely ‘missing child’.

Now, let us move forward to the ‘Ward of Court’ application and the funding. As of May 17th, 2007 (approved April 2nd, 2008), young Madeleine had been ‘missing’ for only two weeks, when the McCanns submitted an application to make her a ward of the court. I must admit, that I have never fully understood what exactly the legalities of a ‘ward of court’ or what the rights of that entail. That being said, it soon became apparent that making a child a ward of court gives the parent’s access to certain rights. The biggest of which being, that the McCann’s rights to apply for access to pertinent police files, even those that might have held evidence against them in relation to Madeleine’s disappearance.

Later, the McCanns proved the benefits of making Madeleine a ward of court by taking Leicestershire Police to court for information held within the investigation, which they later dropped after LP agreed to pass on 81 files, out of 1100, quoting (Source: The Guardian):

‘The legal challenge was withdrawn after a hearing, in which LP said they would share 81 pieces of information with Kate and Gerry Mccann, relating to calls received from the public shortly after Madeleine ‘disappeared’ on May 3 last year.’

Head over and read the article published in The Guardian by clicking here.

Also, something that I feel is of note, during that court case, Stuart Prior of the LP stated:

‘Although one or both may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that clears them from the investigation.’

A quote that has been conveniently omitted in reports from mainstream media.

The filing date for the fund was May 18th, 2007 and was officially registered on February 22nd, 2008.

In the early days of Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’, the fund was referred to, in mainstream media, as a ‘fighting fund’. What I personally perceived to be extremely odd terminology, by Gerry’s mother, is that she described him as being:

‘less anguished and very uplifted by the setting up of the fund.’

Also, Brian kennedy, great uncle to Madeleine, was interviewed on May 17th, 2007 and stated that the fund would mainly be for:

‘legal expenditure’.

(YouTube link to Brian Kennedy Interview).

What I and the general public find questionable about that statement, is why the McCanns felt the need to put aside money for ‘legal expenditure’, when the investigation was not being steered towards including them as possible suspects in their daughter’s ‘disappearance’ and didn’t, until the end of August, 2007, after the highly-trained dogs (Eddie and Keela) were brought in.

In balance of fairness, if people were genuinely offering monetary support to search for Madeleine, then it makes perfect sense that a fund should indeed be set up that is both legal and can be scrutinized and accounted for if need be. However, these donations from a generous public were given on the understanding that their donations would be used to help the McCanns in the search for their daughter. Over the past ten years, we can clearly see that this has in fact not been the case at all, and many are still unaware that the fund is actually a private limited company, owned and run by the McCanns and friends, whose accounts, can be argued, have been less than transparent, in conflict to what the McCanns have previously promised (full transparency).

Summing up, I feel that there are serious questions that need to be answered in regards to money generously given by an empathic public to aid in the search of a ‘missing’ three-year-old, when it is justifiably arguable that the majority of this money has been spent on anything but.

Now, something else that concerns me, as a mother, is that this couple who want us to believe that their child was ‘abducted’, hired, who could be described as the worst missing children investigators, money could buy, with no actual proven experience in missing child cases. These include:

• Control Risks Group. We are all aware that the representatives of this company flew out to Portugal and met with the McCanns. However, what is not clear to me is why this company were called in. Advertising on their website, this is what Control Risks advertise themselves as: ‘Control Risks is an independent, global risk consultancy specialising in helping organisations manage political, integrity and security risks in complex and hostile environments. We support clients by providing strategic consultancy, expert analysis and in-depth investigations, handling sensitive political issues and providing practical on-the-ground protection and support. Our unique combination of services, geographical reach and the trust our clients place in us ensure we can help them to effectively solve their problems and realise new opportunities across the world’. So, I am at a bit of a loss, although clearly the are not dedicated investigators in the cases of missing children. It has also been speculated, by other sources, that this company were brought in to clinically cleanse the McCann’s apartment. However, I have found no evidence of this and it is something that is certainly not advertised on their website, but we can clearly see another political agenda. This company was not around for long and we have since heard no more about them.

(Link to Control Risks).

• The highly controversial Spanish Detective Agency, Metodo 3 (Headed by Francisco Marco). ‘Metodo 3 are the team of private investigators hired by the McCanns when they returned to the UK, after the Policia Judiciaria had made them ‘arguidos’. It is reported that the final bill for Metodo 3’s work could be anywhere between £300,000 and £750,000 – but what were they doing for nearly two months before the McCanns announced that they had been hired? And why was the decision to hire them, and release £300,000 of Madeleine’s Funds’ money, not taken by the board of directors but by Gerry McCann and the family’s lawyers and financial backers?’ – Source: Gerry McCann’s Blogs. Marco was later charged for fraud in Spain.
• Kevin Halogen of Oakley International, who was hired by the McCann’s rich benefactor Brian Kennedy (not to be confused with Madeleine’s great uncle). Halogen allegedly conned the fund out of £500,000. Strangely enough, the litigious pair never sued him. Unrelated to Madeleine McCann, Halogen was later arrested for a £1.3m fraud case, brought against him by the United States for which he received a prison sentence.

(Links for further reading: portugalresident.com, dailymail.co.uk & miscarriageofjustice.co )

So, now we have the falsely advertised Alpha Investigation Group, which was actually Alphaig Ltd. A company set up by Brian Kennedy on behalf of the Mccanns. This company, for want of a better word, were instrumental in releasing questionable sightings, which incidentally came to nothing.

(Link: Jill Haven Forum).

Now let us tackle the McCann’s lawyers.

• One of the lawyers hired by the McCanns was Michael Caplan QC, one of the few solicitors in the country that specializes in criminal law. He is perhaps best known for representing General Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator, in his attempt to avoid extradition from Britain to Spain on torture charges. Caplan has been a partner of the law firm Kingsley Napley for almost twenty-five years and will advise the McCanns on Portuguese legal procedures.
• Angus McBride, another solicitor at KN, who is known for representing several celebrities, is described by the company website as a ‘specialist in dealing with the media’.
• Edward Smethurst is a successful lawyer and entrepreneur based in the north-west of England. He specializes in litigations. In March 2012, Edward won the Outstanding Lifetime Achievement Award at the Manchester Legal Awards 2012, which recognised his contribution to the legal industry in addition to his charitable work that includes being Chairman of the Madeleine McCann Fund and a trustee of Cancer Research UK.
• Adam Tudor has extensive experience of securing apologies and damages for clients as well as having material removed from or amended on the internet. Adam has extensive trial experience, having secured some of the most notable awards of the past 15 years. In libel circles, Adam is perhaps best known for representing Kate and Gerry McCann, for whom he has acted since 2008. This work has included securing unprecedented front page apologies from the Daily Express, Daily Star and their sister Sunday titles as well as £550,000 in libel damages. Adam also obtained apologies and £375,000 in damages from the Express group for the seven friends who were dining with the McCanns on the night Madeleine was abducted. All the damages in these and related cases have been applied to the search for Madeleine. Adam also advised Mr and Mrs McCann in relation to their evidence before the Leveson Inquiry.

So, what can clearly be seen is that, when it came to protecting themselves, the McCanns hired the best legal representation money could buy, whilst scraping the barrel when it came to hiring ‘professionals’ to help locate and bring their ‘missing’ daughter home. I think we can all agree that this seems to be the wrong way around, and should have at the very least been on par with one another.

To the dogs, then. In August, 2007, Mark Harrison, national search advisor (homicide, missing persons and mass-fatality disasters) recommended to the Portuguese investigation that they bring in Martin Grime and his dogs Eddie (cadaver) and Keela (blood), who arrived in Portugal at the end of August, 2007. These highly trained dogs (in over 200 case searches) had never given a false positive alert and were hired out to the FBI, who Grime now works full-time for. During their investigation, Eddie will always enter first and if an alert is made Keela is then sent in after to search for any blood evidence that may have been left behind. Many describe Eddie as finding the haystack and Keela the needle.

The dogs, independently of each other, after searching all other apartments and cars, only alerted to those belonging to the McCanns. This included behind the sofa of the apartment and the wardrobe area of the McCann’s bedroom. Blood was also alerted to by Keela and collected from behind the sofa, but no alert for blood was given in the vicinity of the wardrobe or anywhere else in the apartment. Again, both dogs alerted to the car, hired by the McCanns, three weeks after Madeleine went ‘missing’. Bodily fluids were found in the car. Although John Lowe, of the government run Forensic Science Lab, stated that he could not attribute it to a particular bodily fluid, but as Keela is trained only to alert to blood one would naturally acknowledge that whatever the bodily fluid, it did indeed contain traces of blood. John Lowe continues to muddy the waters by saying that fifteen markers of Madeleine’s DNA were found, but of thirty-seven components.

(Link to John Lowe Report).

Portuguese police, especially that of Goncalo Amaral, have always maintained that they were told by the FSS (Forensic Science Lab) that a full match to Madeleine’s DNA had been found in the car hired by her parents. This later changed when the Portuguese received Lowe’s official report.

Setting aside the controversy surrounding the now defunked FSS and it being a government owned lab, (government) having played a major role in the case of Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’, I would like to draw your attention to the unusual behaviour of that of her parents. On being shown video evidence of the dogs at work and the first results received by the Portuguese investigation (full match DNA), I find it unbelievable that questions were not raised by the McCanns to Martin Grime himself regarding his dog’s findings. Instead, this couple used money from the fund to contact lawyers in America who had defended Eugene Zapata, a man who was accused of murdering his wife in 1976.

In a shocking interview with Portuguese journalist Sandra Felgueiras, Gerry McCann is quoted as saying:

Gerry: I can tell you that we have also looked at evidence about cadaver dogs and they are incredibly unreliable.

Sandra: Unreliable?

Gerry: Cadaver dogs, yes. That’s what the evidence shows, if they are tested scientifically.

The judge presiding over the Zapata case at the time would not allow the cadaver dog evidence to be included. Unfortunately For Gerry McCann, Zapata confessed to the murder in 2008, proving the dogs to be absolutely correct.

(Link: Zapata Admits Killing Wife).

Other excuses that the McCanns and their family and friends have given to try and discredit the dog’s findings was the transportation of dirty nappies, spilt shopping containing blood from produce meat (that Keela is trained to ignore) and rubbish transported to the tip.

Why would the parents, family and friends of a genuinely missing child go to these lengths to try and discredit not only the dogs themselves, but their handler too? Isn’t it more conceivable that they would want to know what fate had befallen Madeleine and what these alerts mean. Yet these questions have never been asked by those allegedly searching for the truth of what happened and purporting to supposedly leave ‘no stone unturned’?

When Eddie alerts and Keela does not, these are signs of where a cadaver has been in contact, but no DNA evidence has been left. These areas were the wardrobe in the McCann’s apartment, Kate’s clothing, Madeleine’s toy (cuddle cat), a t-shirt belonging to one of the twins and an area of garden outside the McCann’s apartment.

So, let us now conclude. From the information gathered through various sources, I think we can clearly see that the McCanns seemed, right from the start, to be feeding false information, not only to friends and family, but to the Portuguese investigation itself. There is a lot more that can be touched upon such as Gerry wanting a one-year anniversary. A quote from the Daily Express (no longer available online), dated June 3rd, 2007 stated:

‘Gerry McCann, 38, said: ‘One of the ideas is maybe getting all the people who have publicly supported us to come together. I don’t just mean from the UK but from different parts of the world. We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing.

We would look at high-profile people who have already pledged support. It will be some sort of focus around an anniversary, to tell people that Madeleine’s still missing. I think it would be later this year, once media attention has dropped, to bring it back up, hopefully, for a short period.

It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that. What we’re doing at the minute has its role but doing that down the line in a few months won’t have anything like the same impact. We might have a sporting event, something arts, something music.’

(Link: Gerry McCann’s Blogs).

So, already we have the father of a daughter missing for only one month (to this point), planning a one-year anniversary or sooner to raise awareness she is still missing.I think that speaks for itself. The McCanns have never shown any concern for Madeleine’s well-being. They have often spoken of her in the past-tense and have referred to her, on many occasions, as ‘this child’ and ‘that child’. Another thing that has not gone unnoticed is that the McCanns have never in all television interviews – and there have been many – spoken directly to Madeleine or pleaded with her so-called abductor/s.

People say that there is insufficient evidence to formerly bring a case against the parents of Madeleine McCann and charge them. That being said, it is my view that if a judge were to allow Martin Grime to give evidence on behalf of his dogs (as was seen in the Bianca Jones trial), that would most certainly bring evidence against the McCanns and the prosecution would assuredly be able to also capitalize on the McCann’s strange behaviour.

All information contained within this article is truthful to the best of my knowledge. I would like to thank those that I have sourced certain information from and who, like myself, only wish to uncover the truth behind this sad case:

Ben Thompson – Justice for Madeleine

Jill Haven – Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann

Pamalam – Gerry McCann’s Blogs

Joy Savage Ballentine

Val Mulraney

Lastly, but by no means least, I wish to give special thanks to a dear friend who would like to remain anonymous.