Re: Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

by **Tony Bennett** 07.08.16 18:21

DENNISSALLY wrote:I have never heard or seen in the files that Jane Tanner had cadaver scent found on her clothing, if am wrong on that and she did have then I most certainly will review my own thinking again.

@ DENNISSALLY

There was a report in the Daily Mail of 26 September 2007 that 'dogs from South Yorkshire' had alerted to cadaver scent on one of the McCanns' friends:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483881/Madeleine-Sniffer-dogs-scent-death-McCanns-friends.html

I am pretty sure this was covered in the Daily Telegraph as well, which is where I originally read about it.

Unfortunately all links to the articles are inaccessible to me for some reason, maybe someone else can provide them?

IIRC the arricle stated that SY police had travelled to Devon. So as Jane Tanner and Russell O'Brien lived in Exeter, suspicion naturally fell on them.

Jane Tanner made a strange remark on the BBC Panorama documentary of November 2007 when she said 'I carried her' (again, if memory serves).

I think that is the basis for anyone suggesting that the smell of death was found on Jane Tanner's clothes.

P.S. After you've faced questions from Verdi, I hesitate to ask you another one. I noticed you are from Donegal. Out of curiosity, do you know anyone from the McCanns' extended family over there? No problem if you don't wish to answer

by Doug D 07.08.16 18:45

It's still there today, but in case it's whooshed by tomorrow here it is for posterity:

Madeleine: Sniffer dogs 'found scent of death' on one of the McCanns' friends

Last updated at 09:29 26 September 2007

Friends of the McCanns faced fresh allegations yesterday after it was claimed that sniffer dogs had found the "scent of death" on one of them.

The same police dog which reacted to Mrs McCann's clothes - first causing suspicion to fall on her - was alleged to have smelled "death" on one of the friends who had dinner with the couple the night Madeleine vanished.

Police sources briefed a Portuguese newspaper that two police dogs from South Yorkshire, trained to detect corpses, human remains and microscopic traces of blood, had reacted to some items of clothing.

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell denied categorically that any such procedure had happened.

The newspaper did not reveal which of the friends' clothing was meant to have triggered the reaction. Police in South Yorkshire refused to comment.

Detectives are writing to British police asking them to re-interview the seven friends the McCanns dined with on the night Madeleine vanished.

Madeleine's parents were dining in a tapas restaurant just yards from the apartment in the Mark Warner Resort in the Algarve, Portugal, when their daughter disappeared.

She had been sleeping inside the apartment with her brother and sister, twins Sean and Amelie.

According to reports from Portugal, all of those dining with the McCanns that night face further police questioning because their accounts of the night's events allegedly clashed.

Leicestershire police have consistently refused to comment on its role in the investigation and directed all questions to Portugal.

A spokeswoman said: "As the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is a Portuguese police investigation it is not appropriate for us to comment on it. Our role is to assist the Portuguese authorities, when and if they request it, with UK based inquiries.

"But because it is a Portuguese investigation, and because of the judicial system there, we are not able to disclose the nature of those inquires."

The seven friends - who, with the McCanns, make up the Tapas Nine - have been steadfast in their loyalty to Madeleine's family.
The group - most of them doctors and professionals - was made up of:

Dr Russell O'Brien, 36
A consultant in acute medicine at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, he knew Gerry McCann from Leicester.
He was on holiday with his partner Jane Tanner and their two young daughters.
At 9.25pm he left the restaurant for around 25 minutes to check on one of the girls, who was ill.
He has been subject to a vicious Portuguese press campaign alleging he was absent for over an hour when Madeleine went missing. He has threatened to sue, insisting: "These reports are completely untrue and extremely hurtful."

Jane Tanner, 37
Dr O'Brien's partner. She arrived late at the tapas bar after treating their sick daughter.
On the way, she passed the McCanns' apartment and saw a man carrying a child. Crucially, her description of the child's clothes matched Madeleine's pink pyjamas.

Dr Matthew Oldfield, 37
Dr Oldfield, an endocrinologist at Kingston Hospital in South-West London, went to check the McCann children at 9 25pm.
But he did not look inside the flat - simply listened from outside to ensure Madeleine and the twins were not crying.

Rachael Oldfield, 36
Dr Oldfield's wife, a former lawyer who is now a recruitment consultant.
She is one of four witnesses who claim to have seen the first suspect, British expat Robert Murat, near the McCanns' flat.
Last month she angrily dismissed reports that police had intercepted phone calls and emails between the McCanns and their friends which contradicted the group's earlier statements.
Mrs Oldfield accused Portuguese police of "throwing mud when we are not able to defend oursleves"

David Payne, 41
Mr Payne is a senior research fellow in cardiovascular sciences at Leicester University
He and his wife and mother-in-law joined the group at 8.55pm.
They are believed to have been the only ones using a baby monitor to check on their two children.
Mr Payne has said: "All these smears and rumours are overshadowing the important thing, which is to get Madeleine back."

Dr Fiona Payne, 34
Mr Payne's wife, she is understood to have told police she saw Mr Murat shortly after Madeleine vanished.
Dr Payne and her husband stayed on in the Algarve to support the McCanns. When the couple were made official suspects, she said: "It's an outrage - a preposterous accusation."

Dianne Webster
Dr Payne's mother. She has given no public interviews.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483881/Madeleine-Sniffer-dogs-scent-death-McCanns-friends.html

by Doug D 07.08.16 19:01

And the Telegraph report naming the PJ spokesman. This report is dated 15th August, which is pre-arguido date and 'confirms the parents are not suspects'.

The Mail article has obviously been updated post-arguido as it's dated 26th September and obviously includes no such claims.

Madeleine sniffer dogs detect scent of body

By Richard Edwards in Praia da Luz
6:38PM BST 15 Aug 2007

A British sniffer dog detected the scent of a body inside the apartment of Madeleine McCann, according to Portuguese police.

Olegario Sousa, a spokesman for the Policia Judiciaria, said they are now working on the assumption that the four year old is dead.

Police have played down the significance of the blood traces, saying they were not the “decisive” evidence in the case and that they remained convinced that Madeleine died on the night she disappeared.

Mr Sousa's comments came as Kate and Gerry McCann admitted for the first time that they have discussed returning home to Britain without their daughter.

The four-year-old went missing from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz 105 days ago and the couple have insisted they could not face leaving Portugal while the search continued.

But in an interview Mrs McCann said: "We know we will be going back and I guess one day we will wake up and it will be right.

"We never thought that we would go before she came back. Now we just don't know. We have the twins to consider.

"I can't imagine how we came out as a family of five and going back as a four."
After exhausting all leads suggesting Madeleine was abducted, police are now working on the theory she suffered an accident or was killed inside the flat.

They have confirmed that the parents are not suspects. Two specialist British sniffer dogs, one with the ability to find small traces of blood and the other a "victim" dog who can detect human remains, were brought in a fortnight ago.

Speaking to a Portuguese TV station, Mr Sousa said that they had traced the scent of a body inside the family apartment where Madeleine disappeared and found specks of blood.

Tests are still ongoing on spots of blood and the inside of the bedroom of the apartment and the McCann family have been told that results will only be confirmed next week.

However, a four-page interim report received by Portuguese police has concluded that the blood is not Madeleine’s. Forensic analysis suggests that there is a 72 per cent chance the sample is that of a white man of “northeast European” origin. The condition of the sample is poor because the wall had been cleaned with detergent.
Mr Sousa also tentatively suggested there could new suspects in the case depending on the results.

He said: "Naturally we could have new arguidos, depending on the result [of DNA tests] there could be a change in the procedural position of those involved in the case or, eventually, there could arise other people, others involved who until now are not known".

Mr Sousa insisted the results would not be "decisive" in the case and there were other signs "giving strength" to the theory that the child is dead.

However the evidence of the sniffer dogs, which were only used three months into the search for Madeleine, has thrown up more questions than answers.

Expert handlers said that dogs can only pick up the scent of a body which has been in situ for more than two hours.

The springer spaniels used can also detect small traces of blood up to seven years old, in which time hundreds of people have used the holiday apartment where they were found.

Earlier this week, Portugal's most senior police officer played down developments. Alípio Ribeiro, national director of the PJ, said that detectives were "far from throwing light on the case".

He added: "Despite the fact that new elements have appeared in the investigation we still do not know where they will lead us."

Mr Sousa said the case "is complex" and "extremely difficult to investigate".
He defended Portuguese police for missing the evidence found by the British sniffer dogs and added that police teams had found a lot of forensics.

"Never has there been collected so much evidence in a crime scene by specialised teams as in this situation," he said.

Police have not ruled out that Madeleine was abducted but have exhausted all leads suggesting so. All 490 guests staying on the same Ocean Club resort have been traced and spoken to.

No one, with the exception of one of the friends holidaying with the McCanns, saw anything suspicious in the area.

Meanwhile, Mr and Mrs McCann have been kept in the dark by police of recent developments and the apparent "shift" in the investigation.

Last week the couple were upset and set back when detectives took a cold, "formal" tone with them at their regular update meeting. Mr McCann said he felt the investigation has gone "back to square one".

In the past 10 days the couple have faced the hardest period since Madeleine disappeared, as Portuguese press turned suspicions on them.

Mrs McCann attacked the local journalists as being "aggressive and intrusive" but said she would not be hounded out of Portugal. Mr McCann said dealing with the intense scrutiny had come as a shock after a quiet period in the case in July.

He said: "The frenzy that built up last week, with the resumed searches and a clear shift in the investigation - if that had happened in the first week or two we would have been prepared for it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560443/Madeleine-sniffer-dogs-detect-scent-of-body.html

by Verdi 07.08.16 20:30

DENNISSALLY wrote:I will say again! I do not believe every member of the T group willingly and knowingly covered up the either accidental death of Madeleine Mccann.

Okay so I'll follow your example and I will say again, only this time hopefully in simple terms.

If, as you think, all the Tapas gang were not complicit with a ploy to cover-up Madeleine's alleged disappearance and as you think, Madeleine met her fate prior to the night of 3rd May 2007 - where do you think the friends thought Madeleine was between being abducted and the alert raised by Kate McCann at approx. 10:00 pm. Surely, as they were party to the fabricated time-line written on Madeleine's sticker book cover on the night of 3rd May, they would be curious to know why the time-line for that night was necessary when Madeleine had previously been abducted?

Are you reading me?

Can you also please explain why you think the group needed to protect their future through fear of neglect charges, when it would be so much easier to invent a different story for their night child care arrangements rather than openly admit they left their children alone every night? Before replying, bear in mind that there were no reliable independent witnesses to contradict their version of events.

by DENNISSALLY 08.08.16 1:05

I absolutely believe Madeleine WAS NOT ABDUCTED! I have never stated that, sorry if my posts are coming across wrong Tony.

by DENNISSALLY 08.08.16 1:29

Hi Verdi, I feel like am on trial for a crime I did not commit. Please don't imply am simple because am not, and I will reply to your questions when you ask me nicely.

by JRP 08.08.16 12:11

Matthew Oldfield says, between 6pm and 7pm on Thursday 3rd, he was playing tennis with Russell O'Brien, David Payne and Gerry McCann. Kate McCann and her children were watching; the other women and children joined them later.

Matthew Oldfield also says, he and his wife Rachael left for the Tapas at 7.45pm, and Gerry and Kate were already there.

David Payne, however, contradicts Oldfield's statement, by stating he visited Kate McCann at the McCann's apartment within this time period and saw Kate with the children, including Madeleine.

So, whichever event you prefer to believe, or maybe a blend of both... Madeleine, according to Oldfield and Payne, was alive at 7pm. Gerry and Kate were at the Tapas, according to Oldfield, before he and his wife Rachael arrived around 7.45pm.

That is a window of less than 45 minutes for Madeleine to die, the parents to rush through Tony's list, and be sat in the Tapas before the Oldfield's arrival.

Conflicts between accounts are rife, the whole week is a bizarre series of uuugghh and eeerms. If one says something happened on Wednesday, another will say Tuesday. That seems to be the point of the whole exercise, to never be precise, always to be as vague as Mr. Vague on one of his more vague days, and cause as much confusion as is humanly possible.

I believe something happened to Madeleine earlier in the week, Monday perhaps, evidence suggests that after Sunday, Madeleine was not seen by anyone other than our small group of happy holiday makers. Oh! and a nanny or two.
I would suggest that within a small group, such as we have, Madeleine's absence would have soon been noticed. Some may have been told directly, some may have guessed, but in my opinion, the whole group must have known the full story.

I guess then, the question turns to why a group of people all decide to sing conflicting words from a hymn sheet, to back up an abduction theory.
I have no idea, but my guess would be, they do it for various reasons... Not one binding reason like swinging, but each has a little personal "something".

There is one point which has been on my mind. If Madeleine did die during the early days of the holiday, who was there at the time?

by kaz 08.08.16 13:16

I notice that true to form Matthew Oldfield is vague about the McCann children after the first couple of days of the holiday . He sort of erm erm yeah, saw Kate and the children blah blah blah . He doesn't specify that he actually physically saw Madeleine on Thursday. He's guilty of omission rather than actually telling porkies. I suspect he's not too keen on lying. Why oh why didn't the interviewing Leicester police ask him categorically if he was referring to ALL THE CHILDREN ? A more practical use of interviewing time one would have thought than the interviewer apologising for the way he spoke ( accent? ) In the event the interviewer needn't have concerned himself since Matthew replies that the interviewer spoke better than he did!! Group hug anybody?
Of all the tapas crew Matthew seems to me to be the most vulnerable and a few incisive direct questions just might have led to a better understanding of what actually did happen on that 'holiday.' Leicester Police treated them with kid gloves and with no intention of getting anywhere near the truth IMO.

by Doug D 08.08.16 13:48

7.45 or 8.45? What’s an hour between friends?

If you read the 10^th May statement in isolation, ‘later, about 20.50’ does seem to suggest a time period of rather more than 5 minutes after he arrived, as does the ‘were still not present’ , but the 4^th’s statement does throw in the times as well as the time gaps, so is probably the correct one.

4^th May 2007

‘The interviewee says that the day yesterday was identical to the previous ones and that, as on all other nights, at around 8.45pm, he and his wife left their daughter asleep in the apartment and went to the "Tapas" restaurant.

That the couple Kate and Gerry, Madeleine's parents were already at the restaurant. That they had arrived at the restaurant five minutes before them. The rest of the adults arrived at the restaurant around five minutes after the interviewee and his wife. That the last to arrive at the restaurant was the couple David and Fiona. That the latter arrived at the restaurant at around 9pm.’

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm

10^th May 2007

'The deponent said he stayed in his apartment until 19h45 at which time, together with his wife, he went to the Tapas restaurant where GM and KM were already and, from what was said afterwards, Jane. Later, about 20h50, ROB arrived.

The deponent added that DP, FP and DW were still not present - and as he could see their apartment lights burning - he resolved to go to them, clarifying that he did not reach that apartment as those people were already on their way to the restaurant. He clarifies [further] that he met them near the living quarters, at the corner next to the main door of the McCann apartment.'

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm

Rogatory 5^th April 2008

'because the original table was booked for eight thirty, erm, we were a bit later that night and it was about quarter to and we saw Gerry and Kate down there and so we locked up, went round and joined them at the table………

......and so I decided that I'd go back and short of chivvy them along, because I felt a bit bad that, you know, there's just us in this restaurant, as there had been most of the week, there weren't often, erm, on one night they had a quiz and there were a few sort of more tables, erm, around that were occupied, but most of the time it was just us and I felt a bit bad that we said we'd be there at half eight and, you know, it was getting later and later and it was now coming to nine……….'

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

……………………………………………………………………

Always pick up something new from re-reading the statements and the bolded bit in the rogatory just jumped out at me.

He is talking about the Tapas which was allegedly always so busy you could only normally book on the day.

by kaz 08.08.16 16:14

You're not wrong there Doug D BUT OH THE AGONY ..............................between the ,' Don't remembers' and the 'sort ofs , erms and yeahs ' I lose the will to live!

Matthew David Oldfield's statements

04/05/07 @ 11.30am

In answer to a question from the inspector, the interviewee says that Gerry will have gone to check at that time because he will not have heard the witness say that he had been there.

10 th may 2007

The question asked, he ( Matthew) relates that he thinks he returned to Tapas between 21h25 and 21h30, telling the others in the group that he found everything within normality in the residential block

09/04/2008 (1)

4078 'Okay. And you attended the Tapas Bar. And what was happening there at that stage when you got back''

Reply 'Erm, well everybody, apart from Russell and I were back, so I arrived back before Russell, erm, I think I said, all quiet, or something to, erm, to, you know, Kate and Gerry and just sort of sat back down and we carried on …………….

09/04/2008 (2)

4078 'Okay. So take me through from there then, what happened after that''

Reply 'So, erm, back to the table, erm, we have, oh, back to the table, Gerry got up to go and, to go and check on his kids, I mean, and I'd come back and said, you know, I didn't hear any noise when I listened outside your room, so I thought it was a little bit odd that, you know, not kind of a wounded pride that he sort of didn't trust me, but, erm, I just thought, oh, you know, I've just checked you don't really need to check and sort of, you know, sort of go back, but, erm, he sort of got up and went back to check on, erm, on his kids. But, you know, you don't, you know, we're all sort of responsible for our own children and you wouldn't sort of say, you know, you don't need to do that, I just sort of felt, oh I've listened, you don't need to do that because I've kind of just done it, but I hadn't gone into the apartment, so, erm'

So why did Gerry feel the need to leave the table and do a check just a few minutes after?

by Searcher 08.08.16 16:19

Richard D. Hall's documentary on Youtube is a fine piece of detailed research, placing the last photo by the pool on the Sunday or Monday (by my memory), in relation to the weather being warm and sunny at that point in the holiday, but not later in the week. He then also raises further questions as to whether Maddie was actually seen by anyone after this time.

by Verdi 08.08.16 19:40

DENNISSALLY wrote:Hi Verdi, I feel like am on trial for a crime I did not commit. Please don't imply am simple because am not, and I will reply to your questions when you ask me nicely.

These are your words DENNISSALLY in reply to HiDeHo..

"You cover so many facts in the case in such a easy and simple way for anyone to take in."

By repetition of the word simple, I wasn't meaning to imply that you are simple - I was referring to my own inability to always make myself clear. I've failed again it would appear.

by JRP 08.08.16 20:06

@Doug D
Yes it's probably 8.45 rather than 19.45, a slip of the tongue no doubt.

It does seem strange that almost as Oldfield returns, Gerry sets off to check what Oldfield has just told him he's checked. One minute he's there, next minute woosh, he's gone.

by Liz Eagles 08.08.16 20:13

JRP wrote:@Doug D
Yes it's probably 8.45 rather than 19.45, a slip of the tongue no doubt.

It does seem strange that almost as Oldfield returns, Gerry sets off to check what Oldfield has just told him he's checked. One minute he's there, next minute woosh, he's gone.

That missing hour....even the McCann's camera had a missing hour apparently - that hour that doesn't exist on a timeline with Portugal and UK as there is no time difference.

When holidaying in Portugal there is no need to adjust your watch.

Clarence Mitchell was directly quoted as saying there were no phones or watches at the Tapas table (something along those lines) which if it weren't so serious would be bloody laughable.

These people (the Tapas 9) lived by their watches. Look at their bloody statements. Look at their holiday where they had to drop off their kids and pick them up from a creche, look at their tennis lessons, look at the fact I've yet to see either of Madeleine's parents photographed without a wrist watch. Time was very important to the Tapas 9 on that holiday. Gerry's blogs were full of nonsense about what time everyone awoke, ate, dressed etc.

by Verdi 08.08.16 20:27

kaz wrote:
So why did Gerry feel the need to leave the table and do a check just a few minutes after?

I've always been mystified as to why the group adopted this unorthodox method of child care for the nights whilst they were dining. I know they were so into each other but if their story is true, it seems an awful lot of trouble for a couple of hours at the Tapas restaurant every night.

They had the option of a) the inclusive night creche and b) a baby sitting service for an additional cost - why opt for such a needless troublesome alternative? How can you enjoy a relaxed evening meal if you're up and down every so many minutes to check on your children? I'm aware of the reasons the McCanns gave for making the decision but I don't buy it. Why not use Warners facilities or better still, eat at the apartment and spend the nights enjoying the company of your precious children - it was their holiday too!

In my opinion, the whole nightly child checking story was nothing but another ruse to disguise Madeleine's non-appearance during the week. The checking system detail was confined to the night of Thursday 3rd May, seemingly in preparation for Kate McCann's abduction alert at around 10:00 pm. I imagine Gerry McCann went off to lay a few ground rules and organize Jane Tanner's abductor sighting.

by kaz 08.08.16 20:30

I'm totally confused now but I guess that's the general idea. IF Matthew Oldfield checked on the McCann children (but only had actual sight of the twins ) at approximately 9.30 as per the activity book timeline no. 1 and as per his inconsistent jumbled statements and was quickly followed a few minutes later by Gerry doing a re check ( see statements 'kaz' above ) how did he manage to do this ? According to the timeline ( activity book ) at approximately 9.20 Jane Tanner saw Gerry talking to Jez. Did Gerry then arrive back at the Tapas bar , sit down and immediately get up again after Matt's listening in exercise to do another recheck?
I'm totally befuddled now . I think I need help!

by Liz Eagles 08.08.16 20:35

kaz wrote:I'm totally confused now but I guess that's the general idea. IF Matthew Oldfield checked on the McCann children (but only had actual sight of the twins ) at approximately 9.30 as per the activity book timeline no. 1 and as per his inconsistent jumbled statements and was quickly followed a few minutes later by Gerry doing a re check ( see statements 'kaz' above ) how did he manage to do this ? According to the timeline ( activity book ) at approximately 9.20 Jane Tanner saw Gerry talking to Jez. Did Gerry then arrive back at the Tapas bar , sit down and immediately get up again after Matt's listening in exercise to do another recheck?
I'm totally befuddled now . I think I need help!

Madeleine McCann needs help kaz, not you - you understand things perfectly.

by Doug D 08.08.16 20:58

Kaz:

‘I'm totally confused now but I guess that's the general idea’

MO’s ‘pre-GM’ check was allegedly at about 9.00 when he went to jolly up the Paynes. He says he bumped into the Paynes at the corner of the Mc’s apartment and so decided to check on his daughter and then listened at Maddies window at the same time.

He then returned to the Tapas and GM almost immediately went to check again, on the ‘Jez Wilkins & Jane Tanner’ run.

The 9.30 check was when he helped KM out and looked/didn't look, saw/didn't see, through the open/half open bedroom door.

Kaz, if you want to really understand it, you need to watch the “Benny Hill” style video of the Tapas comings & goings. Not an ‘errr’ or ‘ummm’ in sight.

by **Jill Havern** 08.08.16 21:17

Doug D wrote:
Kaz, if you want to really understand it, you need to watch the “Benny Hill” style video of the Tapas comings & goings. Not an ‘errr’ or ‘ummm’ in sight.

by JRP 08.08.16 21:45

Why did Kate say that the window had been "gemmied"? Clearly it wasn't, but should it have been?

by **Tony Bennett** 08.08.16 22:13

Carrry On Doctor wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Carrry On Doctor wrote: ...I would like to vote in the poll but my answer would be;

4. He already has.
@ Carrry On Doctor

I am perplexed.

The poll question is: "Should Goncalo Amaral now abandon the PJ theory that Madeleine died AFTER 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007?"

Could you please point me to any link at all where Amaral has gone on the record and explicitly abandoned the claim that Madeleine died AFTER 5.30pm on 3 May 2007?

I'd be most grateful. I've never read anywhere that he has
Hi Tony

I agree that he has never publicly said this, but he perhaps he couldn't due to ongoing legals.

My point is that I think he privately thinks this, and hopefully his next book will reveal his current and updated thoughts.

A lot has changed between him first penning his book and now.

Just my opinion.

@ Carrry On Doctor

Thank you very much for the prompt reply.

I take a very great interest in all that Goncalo Amaral says about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, which he has done on many occasions since his book was published. I was 100% certain in my own mind that he had never resiled from his view (and his investigation's view) that Madeleine died after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007.

He has however made some references to certain things which interest him. IIRC he once mused about the significance of Kate McCann going down to the beach at dawn on her numerous visits to the Hubbards. More recently he has spoken about the possibility of Madeleine's corpse being placed in a widow's coffin and both being incinerated at a crematorium.

To be honest these seemingly rather random statements do not give me the level of confidence that you clearly have that his new book will reveal his 'updated thoughts'.

I don't know if any of his Portuguese advisers read the brilliant analyses produced e.g. by Dr Martin Roberts and HideHo and of course on CMOMMM as well.

There are 'golden nuggets' of research and analysis for him amongst these.

I hope someone is passing them on to him

by kaz 09.08.16 12:23

Thanks for the help GGC and DD in making THAT evening more understandable. Must admit reading through those statements is excruciatingly painful so I'll leave trying to make sense of the whole thing to those much more informed on the subject than myself. My only observation then is to say what a busy busy night it was and I hope they remembered to take the Gaviscon with them. .........................maybe they get it free on the NHS.................perks of the job. It does sound like a load of nonsense but I'm still convinced that even if the checking charade didn't really take place, there are clues there in the scenario presented to the investigation. Inadvertently of course.
I have watched Richard Hall's latest video on the Didcot affair and it is interesting that in his opinion MI5 control the media. Would sort of ( oh no, it's contagious! ) explain certain aspects of the Madeleine McCann case.

by Richard IV 09.08.16 13:55

IMO MI5 control, not only the media but, the government - it`s a sad day for them if someone rises through the political ranks who is not corruptible. I would even go so far as to say they have a hand in child abuse rings.

The thing is, who controls MI5?

Bridget O`Donnell`s book, to my mind, is a clear account of what is still going on, although she bases it on the corrupt goings on in the 1880s. It could almost be a mirror image of the Maddie affair and the decent inspector who is trying to get justice but is ruined - by the establishment and of course the royals. BOD`s writing of it made me wonder if she actually knew more than she described in her peaches and cream portrayal in the Observer.

by Carrry On Doctor 09.08.16 15:01

Tony Bennett wrote:
Carrry On Doctor wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Carrry On Doctor wrote: ...I would like to vote in the poll but my answer would be;

4. He already has.
@ Carrry On Doctor

I am perplexed.

The poll question is: "Should Goncalo Amaral now abandon the PJ theory that Madeleine died AFTER 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007?"

Could you please point me to any link at all where Amaral has gone on the record and explicitly abandoned the claim that Madeleine died AFTER 5.30pm on 3 May 2007?

I'd be most grateful. I've never read anywhere that he has
Hi Tony

I agree that he has never publicly said this, but he perhaps he couldn't due to ongoing legals.

My point is that I think he privately thinks this, and hopefully his next book will reveal his current and updated thoughts.

A lot has changed between him first penning his book and now.

Just my opinion.
@ Carrry On Doctor

Thank you very much for the prompt reply.

I take a very great interest in all that Goncalo Amaral says about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, which he has done on many occasions since his book was published. I was 100% certain in my own mind that he had never resiled from his view (and his investigation's view) that Madeleine died after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007.

He has however made some references to certain things which interest him. IIRC he once mused about the significance of Kate McCann going down to the beach at dawn on her numerous visits to the Hubbards. More recently he has spoken about the possibility of Madeleine's corpse being placed in a widow's coffin and both being incinerated at a crematorium.

To be honest these seemingly rather random statements do not give me the level of confidence that you clearly have that his new book will reveal his 'updated thoughts'.

I don't know if any of his Portuguese advisers read the brilliant analyses produced e.g. by Dr Martin Roberts and HideHo and of course on CMOMMM as well.

There are 'golden nuggets' of research and analysis for him amongst these.

I hope someone is passing them on to him

Hello Tony

As you will recall from our previous exchanges on this forum, GA now thinking differently is a belief I have held for some time.

GA is a very astute man, and in his original book he hypothesised death on the 3rd, based purely on the information available at the time. The point you make (above in red) is indeed why I GA may now think differently. The more recent arguments put forward by many, yourself included, are both comprehensive and compelling, and GA will be very aware of the new information available, as well as being still close (closer than us) to what the authorities know.

Throughout the legal proceedings with TM's though, GA may have been advised that any fundamental deviation from the original book whilst defending an action due to its content may have adversely affected his, or the books credibility, which may have weakened his claimed reasons for writing it i.e. GA wants the truth, and not, as his pursuers argue, to make money out of sensationalising a genuine tragedy. In other words, he cant say anything else until after any final appeal hearing.

Perhaps GA's new book will elaborate further on the ongoing political interference or maybe new forensics ? We don't know at the moment and I don't think he has given anything away regarding its content ??? However, I do think the new book is likely to contain some new significant development to make it worthwhile, which I think may be a fundamental change of thinking on when death occurred.

by Verdi 09.08.16 15:46

Carrry On Doctor wrote:
Hello Tony

As you will recall from our previous exchanges on this forum, GA now thinking differently is a belief I have held for some time.

GA is a very astute man, and in his original book he hypothesised death on the 3rd, based purely on the information available at the time. The point you make (above in red) is indeed why I GA may now think differently. The more recent arguments put forward by many, yourself included, are both comprehensive and compelling, and GA will be very aware of the new information available, as well as being still close (closer than us) to what the authorities know.

Throughout the legal proceedings with TM's though, GA may have been advised that any fundamental deviation from the original book whilst defending an action due to its content may have adversely affected his, or the books credibility, which may have weakened his claimed reasons for writing it i.e. GA wants the truth, and not, as his pursuers argue, to make money out of sensationalising a genuine tragedy. In other words, he cant say anything else until after any final appeal hearing.

Perhaps GA's new book will elaborate further on the ongoing political interference or maybe new forensics ? We don't know at the moment and I don't think he has given anything away regarding its content ??? However, I do think the new book is likely to contain some new significant development to make it worthwhile, which I think may be a fundamental change of thinking on when death occurred.

I can't see evidence of any new significant developments that could dramatically sway Goncalo Amaral's informed opinion whilst engaged as PJ investigation co-ordinator. I don't believe any new information has come to light since the McCanns fled Portugal and various persons were interviewed or re-interviewed by the rogatory process in april 2008 - even that wasn't new, just a re-hash and/or embellishment of prior statements. Indeed I don't think anything fundemental has changed since the investigation started to blossom during the summer of 2007 and swiftly halted in it's tracks by a higher authority - the McCanns escaped and the rest, as they say, is history.

Analysis and detail uncovered and/or exposed over the past nine + years has been achieved through the diligence of those who have devoted so much time and energy in quest of justice in the name of Madeleine McCann, this forum by way of example. If Dr. Amaral has changed his opinion, it can only be by perhaps being more honest with himself, more temerarious in his approach and by viewing the McCanns and their friends through a more critical eye, or because he is being guided by the aforementioned justice seekers.

Apropos of your concluding paragraph, I doubt if Dr. Amaral is aware of any detail concerning ongoing political interference, particularly in the UK, nor do I believe there is likely to be any new forensics. Dr. Amaral was removed from the case for a reason, that in my opinion is where it begins and ends for any hope of officialdom ligitimately investigating the case of missing Madeleine McCann. That is I believe the reason for the likes of this forum and the only hope Goncalo Amaral has of re-thinking his previous stance on the case.

I don't for a second think Dr. Amaral is a fool but there is little he can do as regards the future towards a case solution. That privilege was swept from under the hypothetical Portuguese feet when the McCanns were authorised to leave Portugal in September 2007.

Hope I'm wrong!

Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Should Goncalo Amaral now abandon the PJ theory that Madeleine died AFTER 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007?